This is because Godot is meant to remain a mystery. If Godot were to actually come himself that would weaken one of the biggest themes of the play...waiting. A big aspect of the play is the two characters are waiting for something that they do not know what it is and if it is actually coming. And a child is most likely sent so that responses such as "no sir, yes sir, I don't know sir" would be acceptable. If it was an adult Vladimir would expect clearer answers and get more frustrated that the messenger is not giving a straight answer. But since it is a child, him being naive is seen as acceptable and expected to Vladimir.
I think that Beckett was using him as a means to give Didi and Gogo a semblance of hope. It gives the audience a clue that Godot has no plans in coming while still allowing the two characters to keep alive the idea that he's still coming. We need hope to go on, and a reason to continue.
That's the tragedy--- the fact that the child is presented as opposed to Godot himself. This reveals the constant wait Vladimir and Estragon must endure. During a time when Vladimir and Estragon were on the verge of losing all hope, this child comes and provides reassurance that Godot is surely to come. With regards to religion, one can equate this situation with the fact that religion assures one to maintain faith and surely something good will happen.
As I mentioned in a previous post, my perspective is that Godot, an unseen character, is a metaphor for hope or hope that SOMETHING (possibly good) will come for these two characters. The character of the young lad is their reality--- a kind reminder to maintain hope and to be patient (perhaps existential optimism?). Just a thought.
This is because Godot is meant to remain a mystery. If Godot were to actually come himself that would weaken one of the biggest themes of the play...waiting. A big aspect of the play is the two characters are waiting for something that they do not know what it is and if it is actually coming. And a child is most likely sent so that responses such as "no sir, yes sir, I don't know sir" would be acceptable. If it was an adult Vladimir would expect clearer answers and get more frustrated that the messenger is not giving a straight answer. But since it is a child, him being naive is seen as acceptable and expected to Vladimir.
ReplyDeleteI think that Beckett was using him as a means to give Didi and Gogo a semblance of hope. It gives the audience a clue that Godot has no plans in coming while still allowing the two characters to keep alive the idea that he's still coming. We need hope to go on, and a reason to continue.
ReplyDeleteThat's the tragedy--- the fact that the child is presented as opposed to Godot himself. This reveals the constant wait Vladimir and Estragon must endure. During a time when Vladimir and Estragon were on the verge of losing all hope, this child comes and provides reassurance that Godot is surely to come. With regards to religion, one can equate this situation with the fact that religion assures one to maintain faith and surely something good will happen.
ReplyDeleteAs I mentioned in a previous post, my perspective is that Godot, an unseen character, is a metaphor for hope or hope that SOMETHING (possibly good) will come for these two characters. The character of the young lad is their reality--- a kind reminder to maintain hope and to be patient (perhaps existential optimism?). Just a thought.