Absurd Drama

Absurd Drama with ‘Waiting for Godot’ What roles do Intelligence, Emotions and Feelings play in drama? - R.Subasinghe 19th June 2019.
Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ ‘Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth’ books on buddhist philosophy page 1 of 20

with ‘Waiting for Godot

What roles do Intelligence, Emotions and Feelings play in a drama ?

Facebook: Rathnapala Subsinghe 19 June 2019

This is a discussion on ‘absurd drama’ focussing on Samuel Beckett’s play ‘Waiting

for Godot’. It discusses what ‘absurd drama’ is and explains why a need was there for
such a trend in the historical development of western drama.
According to the writer, ‘absurd drama’ is a manifestation in drama form of the
tendency to ‘deconstruct’ what had been ‘constructed’ as knowledge as modernism,
knowledge of which was developed with the beginning of renaissance and continued
until the middle of the 20th century. When ‘realistic plays’ in the 19th century were
adding to the established knowledge of modernism by drawing attention to topics like
personal identity, femininism and other social and political problems, absurd drama
began to attempt doing the opposite of it in the 20th century as ‘deconstructing’ of
such established ‘constructed’ knowledge, taking an existentialist approach towards
perceiving the world. Pertaining to the discussion, the writer also draws attention to
the roles intelligence, feelings and emotions play in drama appreciation.
Rathnapala Subasinghe is a Sri Lankan writer with BA, PGDE and MEd UK)
diploma and degrees. Most of his writing remains unpublished because of his
financial difficulties. He has published one book in English titled 'Unification and
Disintegration' (2011)which is on Buddhist philosophy published by Godage
Publishers, Colombo [www.godage.com] and some self 20 page document size A 4
publications as ‘Stress Free Learning’. Font size 12 space 13
Any interested publisher?

Rathnapala Subasinghe

Absurd Drama with ‘Waiting for Godot’Page 1 of 20

Absurd Drama with ‘Waiting for Godot’ What roles do Intelligence, Emotions and Feelings play in drama? - R.Subasinghe 19th June 2019.
Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ ‘Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth’ books on buddhist philosophy page 2 of 20

How are Intelligence, Emotions and Feelings involved in drama?

ABSURD DRAMA WITH WAITING FOR GODOT

- Rathnapala Subasinghe
1. THINKING BACKGROUND
Samuel Beckett’s Waiting for Godot is a controversial play staged first in Paris in 1953. Bryden
(2010.vii) mentions of it, ‘...acclaimed by many as the greatest play of the twentieth century’.
Critics include it in the genre ‘Absurd Drama’, ‘absurdity’ of which notion is an impact of the
philosophical background at the time. Esslin mentions of ‘Absurd Drama’;

‘...These plays flout all the standards by which drama has been adjudged for
many centuries; ...appear as a provocation to people who have come into the
theatre expecting to find ... a well made play.’

‘And yet, ...these plays have worked ... they have exercised a fascination of
their own in the theatre’ - Esslin (1965. 7-8)

At the times they first appeared, some of the questions pertaining to the philosophical scene in
Europe were;

 What meaning is in human existence if no Creator God is there to determine what the
universe is, and what role man plays in it?
 What particular value is in human existence if it is the same process of evolution all life
forms share as one including micro-organisms and plants ?
 What value is in scientific discoveries if they are found as chance outcomes in the
attempts to gain power by the powerful nations; findings of which they used to exploit
the rest of the world to their advantages?

First question arose because the previously prevalent view a Creator God created the universe
and rules over it began to be questioned heavily, which view gained prominence especially after
Nietzche’s announcement, ‘God is dead’. The second was a result of more and more people
accepting the Theory of Evolution wherein Charles Darwin proposed all human, animal and plant
life is one and the same process of evolution. The third arose because, despite for the fact
scientific discoveries are of help for people to live better and comfortable lives, they arose from
the rivalries among powerful nations in competing with one another for supremacy and
dominance of one over other; which rivalries led to global colonialism, two world wars and what
is now in existence as neo-colonialism. Thus scientific discoveries were not the results of man’s
inquisitiveness but powerful nations needed powerful positions, therefore they wanted powerful
weapons which they used to gain more and more wealth for their communities to enjoy luxuries.
Technology discovered thus made first aeroplanes and first rockets, but they were first used to
make war on others, not as explorations leading to well being of all.

By this time, seemingly stable and well established domains of knowledge characterizing
modernism that appeared as structured on axioms fitting on well with one another according to

Page 2 of 20
Absurd Drama with ‘Waiting for Godot’ What roles do Intelligence, Emotions and Feelings play in drama? - R.Subasinghe 19th June 2019.
Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ ‘Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth’ books on buddhist philosophy page 3 of 20

the epistemologically acceptable rules pertaining to the use of reasoning, logic and language,
were begun to be seen as they were not effective as representing reality. Thus knowledge at the
time was found not having stable foundations. Philosophers were pondering on the doubtful
nature of knowledge as representing reality that have been constructed through the words of
language. Starting with Emmanuel Kant, then Schopenhauer, Nietzsche, Kierkegaard, Albert
Camus, all entertained nihilistic philosophies as regards human existence, that made the people
to view a world of absurdities pertaining to ‘deconstruction’ of all that is constructed. Jacques
Derrida began to ‘deconstruct’ the language suggesting, meanings created by language have a
shaky existence; thus, too, values given to knowledge through language were affected. While
construction of knowledge was to absurdities like that, first splitting of atoms in the field of
science was made by Rutherford as real ‘deconstruction’ in the field of physics. Before that,
atoms were considered ‘non- splittable’, definite entities that contained ‘mass’, and they went to
structure the world of matter. However that material world too was begun to be seen as having a
shaky foundation. Discoveries in physics like ‘Uncertainty Principle’ of Heisenberg, too, have
contributed in leading to think of a non-deterministic, non-material universe. Those
‘deconstruction’ activities, one in the world of physics and the other in the conceptual worlds of
philosophies, both were ‘deconstructing’ what was seen as ‘constructed’. Some of those
‘deconstructions’ were those once ‘deconstructed’, what is so deconstructed can never be re-
constructed’. For example, once an atom is ‘de constructed’ (practically), it cannot be re-
constructed as that atom again.

These activities of ‘deconstruction’ were opposite also to ‘structuralism’ shown by Ferdinand

de Sausseau in the field of linguistics and Lev Vygostky’s and Albert Bandura’s models of
constructing knowledge of ‘social constructivism’. In fact, all activities as gathering and
constructing knowledge as modernism can be included as activities of ‘constructionism’ which
were fundamentally structural in their approach towards establishing reality; the world to which,
any activity of ‘deconstruction’ of them can be considered an activity of doing the opposite.

The world constructed as physics at the beginning of the 20th century had a mechanistic
background in the making of it, according to which, the material world was firmly structured and
it can be explained through the patterns of behaviour of indivisible ‘atoms’ functioning as basic
blocks of matter. ‘Particles’ that go to make atoms, too, ought to have their orderly motions and
arrangements and strongly structured combinations of which atoms going to make molecules,
macro molecules and large objects made from them. Thus particles, atoms, molecules and their
motions are thought of as governed by definite rules or laws; purpose of scientific search was to
discover them. Scientific rules and laws thus established would finally discover ‘the firmly
structured physical universe’ which is not explicit now. Hence the search for rules and laws and
one basic material entity that goes to make the universe is continued even now in the form of
searching for the ‘unified principle’ or ‘singularity in the universe’.

Isaac Newton constructed his ‘laws of gravity’ in the 17th century, and succeeding scientists built
further constructions on them to discover the physical universe believed to be structured on a
multitude of laws like them. Albert Einstein deconstructed those laws of gravity to an extent,
but reconstructed on it by taking a different approach. Despite for such constructionism on
gravity, dissatisfied thinkers still ask, ‘What really is gravity?’, unable to get definite answers.
Will what is constructed as gravity be fully ‘deconstructed’ one day so that it cannot be
reconstructed again? It could happen so at anytime similar to such changes inherent in the
processes of building knowledge.

Page 3 of 20
Absurd Drama with ‘Waiting for Godot’ What roles do Intelligence, Emotions and Feelings play in drama? - R.Subasinghe 19th June 2019.
Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ ‘Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth’ books on buddhist philosophy page 4 of 20

Similar to that in science, language, too, was considered structured on smallest, indivisible,
individual units known as ‘morphemes’ ‘phonemes’ or ‘graphemes’, with rules discovered on
them by which they were supposed to be governed. Such rules are explicit through ‘traditional
grammar’ ‘structural grammar’ and ‘transformational grammar’. In the field of psychology, too,
it was considered it should consist of facts discovered by studying patterns, rules and laws
pertaining to normal or abnormal behaviour of humans. Human mind was thought of as it, too,
worked on rules that have to be discovered. Freudian psychology laid the foundation in this
regard by the end of 19th century. One school of psychology at the beginning of the 20th century
wanted it to consist of scientifically proven facts made on ‘observable and measurable’ data
discovered through laboratory experiments, most of which were carried out on animal behaviour.
This rationalist mode known as behaviourists’ psychology was counteracted later with human
centeredness of Humanistic Psychology, and still later as rethinking on Freudian psychology, as
Lacanian, some of which findings are yet to be established. Other areas of psychology as Gestalt
psychology, Cognitive Psychology and so on, too, have been there as constructionism in the field
of psychology.

Darwinism was another constructionist model of knowledge created on the premise, all animal
species including human beings and the universe evolve as one in an orderly pattern, which
theory was created by deconstructing the previous worldview the universe was constructed on a
stable Divine Plan. Using the same methods that went to construct it as a theory, Darwinism too
may be subjected to a phase of deconstruction at a future time. A follow up of Darwinism
proceeded to construct a ‘scientific evolution’ for society too as Marxism. It was labelled
‘scientific materialism’ that gave hopes for humans to establish well planned, properly structured
societies for future in which people do not exploit one by other. Ruling classes enjoying
privileges and exploiting others were expected to cease according to them in which all citizens
had to be respected on equal terms; thus addressing to ethical values too were in them. The
dramatists Bernard Shaw and Bertolt Brecht used drama to propagate the teachings of Marxism.

First attempt to create a Marxist society was made as the Russian Revolution in 1917. However,
when Stalin ascended power in Russia after sometime, ideals in Marxism were dishonoured
(Esslin 1965.13), situation of which was similar to Napoleon’s gaining power after the French
Revolution in 1789. So were the ideals of American Revolution in 1776. They were not followed
by following Presidents in USA, point of which was especially evident to day when seeing their
involvement in international affairs as neo-colonialists intervening in the international scene for
their advantages Thus, ideals of social revolutions have been always overtaken or subdued by
individuals in all instances as ‘de-constructing’ of whatever that was structured. Reason for this
has to be, societies are not formed or structured on, or evolve on, predictable or non-predictable
foundations of axioms, theories and laws that fit one on other.

Thus, idealistic expectations always fail, ending with unexpected results. They do not fit on with
‘real reality’ or ‘surrealism’. Thinking minds have to wonder then, how can ‘real reality’ be
perceived? It has to be, no theory, no axiom and no law can be there that can be used to perceive
real ways things happen; what is finally left at all times is something called a universe which is
in a seemingly deconstructed state all the time. What is seen as ‘constructionism’ can be seen as
creations of mind only, limited to seeing and thinking activities only. The suggestion the universe
is in a ‘deconstructed state all the time’ need not be taken to mean such ‘deconstructing’ is of
what exists as ‘constructions’, but ‘deconstruction’ is there as itself at all times and everywhere,

Page 4 of 20
Absurd Drama with ‘Waiting for Godot’ What roles do Intelligence, Emotions and Feelings play in drama? - R.Subasinghe 19th June 2019.
Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ ‘Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth’ books on buddhist philosophy page 5 of 20

in a background ‘constructions’ are nowhere.* Thus, the term ‘deconstruction’ there need not be
taken as the opposite word of ‘construction’. In an ultimate seeing, even the term
‘deconstruction’, too, conveys nothing.

It would appear from this background, man exists for existence’s sake alone, contrary to views
entailed in modernism as greater or higher realities are ‘out there’ in an ‘external world’ that
have to be discovered by using reasoning logic and language. However, it is seen now, such
views pertaining to external realities denote only illusions or delusions. What is believed as the
‘external world’ which was earlier believed to be in possession of a Divine Will or many such
divine wills is now seen as having no validity even without divinities in them. Values given to
knowledge are of no worth in perceiving reality, constructions made on which paved way only
for western European countries to dominate the world as colonists. Competitions among those
colonists led to two world wars and their activities became neo-colonialism as it is seen so now.
What is advocated through them is ‘might is right’; not ‘truth’ or ‘beauty’ or any philosophy that
create values for life forms.

+ + + + +

2. ART FORMS
Thus, knowledge built as modernism is found having a shaky existence. The world is begun to be
viewed more and more as phenomena that cannot be constructed on identifiable, stable
structures. Knowledge of modernism was of no importance in perceiving reality. What came into
view later as ‘post modernist thinking’, too, began to be based on premises like, truth of reality
cannot be perceived by human thinking, type of philosophy built on which began to be known as
existentialism. This philosophy began to appear in art forms as ‘abstract art’ or ‘dadaism’ or
‘cubism’ etc., appearing in paintings, stories, cartoons and films. It appeared first in drama in
Italy in traces as ‘Teatro del Grottesco’ (Browne 1969.7), and in France it developed as ‘absurd
drama’. As Esslin (1960) calls the latter, they are the ‘Theatre of the Absurd’.

Common themes absurd drama deal with expose the audiences to experience the futility in
searching for a meaning in life or the reason for the appearance of universe, making the
audiences focus on human existence with a ‘detached’ attitude, so that they would feel for
themselves ‘real existence’, undisturbed by ‘knowledge’ that was evident as modernism. The
term ‘detached’ used here need not be taken as equivalent to ‘reject’ because ‘deconstructed’
minds are so deconstructed they cannot even ‘reject’. The same point can be told in another way
as to ‘reject’ too there have to be attachments. When one realizes the importance of such ‘neither
attached nor detached’ states, one’s feelings or emotions ought to be of realizing ‘real reality’, or
‘surrealistic’ levels of experiencing the true state of existence. Such experiences have nothing to
do with knowledge.

Esslin tells us that absurd drama artistically shows how human beings are affected in their failure
to create a meaning for their existence. In a background of failure to grasp ‘real reality’ through
realistic plays then prevalent in Europe, absurd drama began to display an ability to make the
audiences experience surrealistic levels of reality by providing the audiences opportunities to
transcend reasoning, logic and language, and thereby feel ‘real realism; or ‘surrealism’. In
*
My book Unification and Disintegration (2011) In a final seeing, ‘unifications’ are only seeing through the processes of ‘disintegration’.

Page 5 of 20
Absurd Drama with ‘Waiting for Godot’ What roles do Intelligence, Emotions and Feelings play in drama? - R.Subasinghe 19th June 2019.
Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ ‘Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth’ books on buddhist philosophy page 6 of 20

illustrating the point of inability in identifying human identities Browne (1969.9) quotes a saying
of Laudisi, a character in Luigi Pirandello’s play, Right You Are! ; ‘I am just whoever you think I
am’, showing, the ability to identify people differ from person to person; point of which also
suggests, there cannot be one definite way to tell the identity of a person, or perception of reality
differ from person to person. As regards the philosophical approach of Pirandello, Browne
mentions;

‘…reflection upon the mystery of life, which is in perpetual flux, the nature of
which we no sooner we think we have grasped than it slips away from us,
…we really prefer to hide from ourselves by illusions… (8)

It may be so considered, language absurd drama deals with is what is left out as fragmented
lingual thinking of ‘deconstructed’ states of constructed knowledge. Experiencing them makes
the audiences feel human existence as experiencing only, that does not allow the intervention of
lingual thinking* in feel so. Such experiences enable them to penetrate beyond them, at the same
time as getting aesthetic experiences entailed in them. Because of the aesthetic effects entailed,
they cannot arouse pessimistic feelings as it could happen so when participating in academic
discussions on the same topics absurd drama deals with. This makes us see a division in the
thinking processes of ‘deconstruction’ of reality as, ‘experiencing deconstruction’ and ‘knowing
only of deconstruction’; former of which is gained as aesthetic experiences and the latter as
intellectual discussions. In ‘experiencing deconstruction’, audiences feel relaxed with feelings of
redemption from being reduced to the attachments with the world of change, instead of boredom
and confusion felt when exposed to realities by seeing through rational thinking.

Images and lingual thinking expressed in absurd drama are absurd because they show feelings of
dissatisfaction of the humans with the world created through the use of reasoning, logic and
language. Concern of the dramatist there is not providing reasonable and logical answers to
questions on existence, but showing the states of those who are in the processes of
‘deconstructing’ what they have constructed as worlds, while energies pertaining to emotions
and feelings are active with them. Thus experiences in absurd drama enable human thinking to
open up a newer dimension in perceiving the world by leaving the world created through
reasoning, logic and language.

Failure in the use of ‘reasoning’ ‘logic’ and ‘language’ in establishing reality as knowledge is
evident in scientific thinking too. For example, when reasoning, logic and language are used to
arrive at the position gravity is the ability of material objects to attract one another; premises of
logic and language used to arrive at that conclusion when used further on the same position
arrived at, it would begin to be deconstruct it. In such prolific use of reasoning logic and
language in probing gravity, one could, perhaps, see finally, it is not gravity he sees, but thinking
activity itself that makes him see so. It is possible such a search ends in the position gravity
cannot have an existence ‘out there’. This point can be extended further to consider nothing is to
be seen as matter in the universe. When one probes into the smallest states of matter as
‘particles’ by seeing them at smaller and still smaller levels, nothing would be seen finally to call
‘the smallest’. Thus nothing can left out to call matter in a final seeing.†

*
lingual thinking = thinking that surfaces as use of language
†
Or, are we to assume, however small particles are, they must always retain the material characteristics in them as ‘having mass’, ‘possessing
volume’, ‘existence limited to a period of time’ ‘can be seen provided proper microscope is available to see so’, and so on?’ The writer has
referred to this unknowable state of matter as ‘matter x' in his book Unification and Disintegration’. ‘Matter x’ does not have material properties
as having ‘mass’ ‘ having volume’ ‘ exists in a time scale’ and so on -R.Subasinghe (2011.30)

Page 6 of 20
Absurd Drama with ‘Waiting for Godot’ What roles do Intelligence, Emotions and Feelings play in drama? - R.Subasinghe 19th June 2019.
Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ ‘Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth’ books on buddhist philosophy page 7 of 20

The point why reasoning, logic and language fail

or incomplete in the perception of reality can be
explained through findings of three divisions in
brain activities as put forward by Daniel
Goleman*(1996). (illustration- Jubo Rocha do
Amaral, MD & Jorge Martinns de Oliveira, MD,
PhD p.7) Goleman shows three areas in brain
according to the nature of functioning of it as
1.the neocortex 2.the limbic system and 3.the
primordial brain. It is through neocortex
reasoning, logic and language manifest, while
emotions as energy manifestations are active in
the limbic system which is the second. The third is the storehouse of memories contained as
primordial experiences, some of which experiences come from the beginning of life form.
According to Goleman, it is ‘emotional intelligence’ centred on ‘limbic system’ that has to be
focused on, while ‘intelligence’ limited to neocortex are inadequate in depicting reality. Thus, in
their lessons with children, teachers ought to concentrate on the emotional involvement of
students as dealing with their E.Q.s, not with their I.Qs which are centred on the area of
neocortex. When Edward de Bono† (1987) mentions of ‘slogan thinking’ in his book ‘Teach
Thinking’, reference there probably is to the ‘slogan thinking’ limited to ‘neocortex area.

Activities of ‘life force’, the phrase of which as used by some Gestalt psychologists and later by
humanistic psychologists, may be thought of as centred on the limbic system that works along
with memories stored in the primordial brain containing data stored from unknown beginnings;
thus neocortex is of least importance in the realization of the world. Activities in neocortex are
the product of thinking, while emotional involvement as releasing energies working with
memories as primordial thinking flowing from an ‘infinite past’‡ appear as the process. It is
experiencing reality using this limbic system and primordial brain that has to be focussed in the
perception of the world. When such findings are applied to absurd drama, it can be seen, we
reach closer towards reality while experiencing an absurd drama because least attention is paid to
the activities in neocortex. Such experiencing involve with emotions, original nature of thinking
and earliest memories coming from an infinite past that still manifest in us, causing unknown,
mysterious feelings to arise within us. As Esslin was quoted previously, such experiencing create
‘...a fascination of their own in the theatre’ (p.2)

The absurd dramatist wants his audiences to EXPERIENCE his work as transcending reasoning,
logic and language, by avoiding rationally seeing; analysing, synthesising or seeing in holistic or
fragmented views. If symbolism is seen as a technique used in an absurd drama, it does not
require an explanation using reasoning logic and language because such symbolical value is
supposed to be felt only when in an absurd drama. The tree on the stage, or bowler hats the
characters wear in Waiting for Godot, or the corpse in Amedee or How to Get Rid of it of Eugene
Ionesco, appear as symbolic representations in absurd drama, however, it is not required to
interpret them using a language. Even when an attempt is made to do so, it is seen as it does not
fit in with the plot of the play. If the ‘corpse’ in ‘Amedee...’ is taken as symbolically representing
the memories of the dead fiancé of Madeline, to kill whom both husband and wife could have
planned at one time in the past, it cannot fit on properly with the rest of the play.

*
Goleman, Daniel: Emotional Intelligence (1996) Bantam books
†
Bono Edward De (1987) Teaching Thinking
‡
Infinite Past - It is ‘Infinite’ because all thinking is seemingly ‘matter’ itself, that exists as in a ‘timeless’ background; so it cannot have a history
as past or future. Such real state of matter is not what is seen as matter in ordinary seeing.

Page 7 of 20
Absurd Drama with ‘Waiting for Godot’ What roles do Intelligence, Emotions and Feelings play in drama? - R.Subasinghe 19th June 2019.
Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ ‘Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth’ books on buddhist philosophy page 8 of 20

It has to be considered so when references to religious views or traditional usages of language

too are in absurd drama. It is the meaninglessness in those phrases the dramatist wants us to
experience, as they are clichés or ‘tit-bits’ left in language. So should it be, when expressions or
phrases like ‘singularity in the universe’ ‘unified principle’ ‘every action has a reaction’ ‘liberal
economy’ ‘liberty, equality and fraternity’ ‘exploitation of labour’ ‘classless struggle’ etc. etc.
are used in the dialogues in an absurd drama; they ought to suggest the futility in the use of them;
as they are devoid of meaning aspects in them.

* * *

3. EMOTIONS, FEELINGS AND REASONING

In the latter part of the 19th century and the first half of 20th century, realistic drama was the
mainstay in Europe after Henrik Ibsen, Bernard Shaw and Anton Chekhov laid foundations for
them. In appreciating realistic drama, it is the activities of neocortex in brain which is actively
involved (illustration p.7 ) that would make audiences exposed to logically arranged language as
dialogues and contemplate further on them, in which, emotions and feelings too play their
particular roles in them. Deviating a little from such ‘realism’ in theatre the Italian dramatist
Luigi Pirandello touched upon ‘absurdities’ in his plays as an attempt to surpass the impacts of
reasoning, logic and language. At the same time of doing this, he has also expressed the need for
involvement of both intelligence and emotions in drama. Browne cites a statement in this regard
from Pirandello; ‘One of the novelties I have given to drama consists in converting the intellect
into passion’. Pirandello refers there to the type of audiences he expects as, ‘…those who are
willing to use their brains in the theatre…’ (Browne 1969.7) Thus Pirandello is a dramatist who,
though still a realist, was inclined towards the tendencies of surrealism too.

Theorising on his concept of ‘alienation’ (verfremdung), Bertolt Brecht went so far as to suggest,
not only audiences but even actors and actresses have to be ‘alienated from emotions’ when it is
his plays. As regards the German term verfremdung for ‘alienation’ he used, Gray R. (1961)
considers the English term ‘estrange’ as preferable. Thus, Brecht’s ‘epic drama’ appeared
didactic than entertaining, recreational or sentimental, point of which can be applied especially to
his early plays. (Gray 1961). Contrary to that emphasis on intelligence using reasoning logic and
language in drama as advocated by Brecht, absurd drama shows no concern at all with them.
With more and more philosophical thinking that went on the inefficacy in logical thinking and
language in constructing reality, art forms like ‘abstract art’ and ‘Dadaism’ appeared with
surrealistic appearances in them, in which, absurd drama too began to gain a ground.

Page 8 of 20
Absurd Drama with ‘Waiting for Godot’ What roles do Intelligence, Emotions and Feelings play in drama? - R.Subasinghe 19th June 2019.
Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ ‘Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth’ books on buddhist philosophy page 9 of 20

Thus, three divisions can be made

as regards the involvement of
intelligence, emotions and feelings
in drama as follows: 1. Realism in
drama 2.Brechtian drama
3.Surrealism in drama. (illustration
p.9) First approach emphasises on
the use of logic and language,
however, emotional manifestations
as actors and actresses have to
display in such drama, too, are
involved with them. Second one (2)
Brechtian view suggests, emotions
need not be central, not even
secondary. Brecht wanted not only
spectators but even actors and
actresses not to involve in drama as
displaying of emotions. Actors and actresses were expected to perform their roles as
demonstrating themselves, not as imitating imaginary roles. The third one (3) shows the
surrealist’s or absurdist’s approach; the dramatist there wants the audiences to transcend reality
seen through reasoning logic and language in order to experience different realities. Spectators
in them can be concerned with emotions and feelings as they are particular to themselves; some
of which emotions and feelings may not be expressible in a language.

At the height of realism, some dramatists began to experiment with newer realities; thus, their
work began to contain absurdities. Some of them went so far as to show nothing is there to
consider ‘reality’. Pirandello portrayed some characters with ‘deconstructed’ states of thinking.
In his play Henry IV, audiences are made to waver between reality and delusion, exposing the
possibility even of time travel the spectator could extend their thinking, as delving into the
thoughts of the historical character Henry IV the ancient German king. They suggest the
possibilities of sane people being insane while insane people being sane. Such ‘realism’
developed later to ‘surrealism’. Similar thinking leading sometimes to probe into dual realities is
suggested in buddhist thinking too as a person can select one of the two paths as ‘path everyone
goes’ (anuso:thaga:mi) and ‘path in the opposite direction to every other goes’
(patiso:thaga:mi), the method of the latter path of which is ‘deconstructing’ of the worlds of
thinking created as ‘my worlds’.

Traces of absurdities were seen in old theatre and old literature too as the scenes of three witches
or future generations of Banquo are shown in Shakespeare’s Macbeth. The theme of
Midsummer Night’s Dream shows a transition between a world of fantasy and the world of
reality. In Lewis Caroll’s story Alice in Wonderland, a world of fantasy is shown wherein unreal
states occur, but the readers love to experience them as experiencing yet another type of ‘real
world’ that has to be enjoyed by seeing in an illogical, different dimension than in normal seeing.
Question arises remains asto why people appreciate them if they do not see them as related to
reality. How does a ‘real world’ one envisions like that differ from what is generally accepted as
‘the real world’? No valid explanation can be given to such questions because thinking is made
as ‘constructions’ in language that may not represent another phenomenon known as ‘reality’.

Page 9 of 20
Absurd Drama with ‘Waiting for Godot’ What roles do Intelligence, Emotions and Feelings play in drama? - R.Subasinghe 19th June 2019.
Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ ‘Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth’ books on buddhist philosophy page 10 of 20

To those who suggest absurdities shown in absurd drama denote ‘distorted states of minds’, they
have also to see, those who see a world through reasoning, logic and language themselves do so
because they haven’t realised the true state of reality. Thus, ‘Absurd Drama’ can be taken as an
outcome of opening up new dimensions in the search for realism.

+ + + +

4. ABSURD DRAMA

The term ‘absurd’ can be approached with the notion of reductio ad absurdum (arguments
leading to conclusions as absurdities) as discussed in logic. Related questions are, do discussions
pertaining to reductio ad absurdum lead to fallacious thinking? Can other levels of realities be
discovered in the attempts of reducing to absurdities by logical thinking?

The term ‘absurd’ (ab + surd) in this background can be taken as one of ‘transcending reality’ or
‘away from reality’ or ‘coming to terms with reality’, the term ‘reality’ of which is used in its
general meaning. First phrase may be more suitable because what is established as reality is not
rejected in the use of it, but extended the scope of it as ‘transcending’ it. In extending the
meaning of ‘reality’ this way, it has to be considered, such meaning ought to also involve roles
of feelings, emotions and established memories common to all life forms, while emphasising the
importance of the last of them. Although no absurd drama as at present takes us to such extents
as transcending reality, they are nevertheless successful attempts of displaying situations of
people in various stages of ‘deconstruction’ who are on the path to such states. At the same time,
they also make us experience aesthetic beauties pertaining to theatrical performances. No
‘cathartic effects’ are produced from them as the spectator is experiencing them as releasing of
repressed mental energies. This expression ‘transcending reality’ here has to be regarded as it
has to be a real human experience possible to be achieved, as some spiritual teachings too have
suggested to the effect. (p.17)

Famous dramatists of the genre of absurd drama are Eugene Ionesco, Edward Albee, Fernando
Arabaal, Arthur Adamov and Luigi Pirandello. Exposure to their work may create uneasiness
among the novices to them because of the difficulty in applying the traditional approach of using
reasoning, logic and language in the appreciation of them. Spectators have to think of new
approaches to appreciate them, and critics have to think of new ways of evaluating them.
Characters in them appear as they are at the end of their thinking processes of ‘deconstructing’
the worlds created as lingual worlds of thoughts*. ‘Realism’ they deal with is ‘surrealism’ that
appear as elevated states of what is generally considered ‘realism’; underlying idea behind which
position is, it is possible to ‘transcend reality’ to experience elevated states of the same which is
seen as realism. Esslin (1965.14) leads us to consider absurd drama as attempts of representing
real ‘realism’.

‘...if the real conversation of human beings is in fact absurd and nonsensical,
then it is the well-made play with its polished logical dialogue that is unrealistic,

... the Theatre of the Absurd is the most realistic to comment on, the most

*
‘lingual thoughts’ = thoughts that occur as language

Page 10 of 20
Absurd Drama with ‘Waiting for Godot’ What roles do Intelligence, Emotions and Feelings play in drama? - R.Subasinghe 19th June 2019.
Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ ‘Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth’ books on buddhist philosophy page 11 of 20

accurate reproduction of, reality.’ (14)

Thus, what is generally considered as ‘realism’ in realistic plays become consciously formulated
abstractions of such real realism; it is possible to transcend such realism to reach at higher levels
of the same.

Esslin (1960) coined the phrase ‘Theatre of the Absurd’ in his essay Theatre of the Absurd;
hence the term ‘absurd’ to this type of drama. Albert Camus used the term in 1942 in his
existentialist philosophy presented in the essay ‘The Myth of Sisyphus’. Such thinkers seem to
have been influenced by the paradoxical nature of what is seen as reality. When reasoning, logic
and language are applied to construct knowledge as denoting reality, profuse application of
same reasoning, logic and language on same conclusions arrived at makes them begin to
deconstruct them; showing, nothing can be seen as reality in an ultimate seeing. In other words,
what is seen as constructions of knowledge denote nothing in a final seeing. This writer has
presented an aphorism on what matter is as; ‘Matter becomes nothing by which it is made of.’ in
his book ‘Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth* that can be used to illustrate this point. It is such
paradoxical nature in reality that can be seen even in the field of science leading us to see
absurdities, feelings caused in which make us probe for other dimensions as realities.

A problem one might think of at this point is, how can one share an experience of appreciating
an absurd drama with others if she is discouraged to use reasoning, logic and language. The very
basis of the absurd dramatist’s approach towards the use of them appear as rejected in themes,
structures, techniques and the presentations themselves in them. However, critics are compelled
to use a language along with the use of some dramatic and literary techniques to appreciate an
absurd drama, whether or not what he says is in agreement with the dramatist’s purpose.
Whatever the criticisms of absurd drama or other art forms related to surrealism are, they have to
be presented in a language; therefore, what is presented in them may appear as contradictory or
paradoxical, when a language is used to do so. However, in the practical situations of doing so
such paradoxical nature seems to disappear. When it is said, ‘where there is ‘life’, there is
‘death’,’ it is not paradoxical when seen in a practical situation. So is it in the instance, ‘each
moment we live, we die’. All that is constructed as knowledge of modernism or constructionism
can be used for the purpose of deconstruction of the same too as ‘using language to reject
language’.

+ + + + +

5. WAITING FOR GODOT

Similar to that one talks of its plot when one talks of Shakespeare’s Othello, a discussion of
Waiting for Godot can be conducted by talking of its plot first. Not only its plot, its development,
climax, denouement and so on, too, can be talked of in Waiting for Godot in similar manner.

Two people, Gogo and Didi, are on the stage. They are also named Estragon and Vladimir, two
names of which appear only in written script. They are not happy; they look like they are bored
of existence, or they are unhappy with some mysterious nature pertaining to existence. To cover
up for the seemingly vacant states of mind caused by being unhappy, they engage in diverse talk
like telling stories, jokes, creating expectations for future, arguing or accusing one another and so
*
Subasinghe R. Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth (unpublished as at 2018)

Page 11 of 20
Absurd Drama with ‘Waiting for Godot’ What roles do Intelligence, Emotions and Feelings play in drama? - R.Subasinghe 19th June 2019.
Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ ‘Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth’ books on buddhist philosophy page 12 of 20

on; but each such attempt ends just as it has its beginning. Thus they fall back to same routine
states of discontent again and again. Once Estragon tells a story;

Vladimir: Calm yourself.

Estragon: ...Calm...calm...The English say cawm...
................
Estragon: An Englishman having drunk a little more than usual goes to a brothel.
The bawd asks him if he wants a fair one, a dark one, or a red haired
one. Go on.’ [p. 12]

Sometimes, they expect things to happen, or people to come.

Estragon: Nothing happens, nobody comes, nobody goes, it is awful [p.38]

The line above denotes the theme of the play too. Estragon seems to be worried there because he
sees a world through mental constructions made through language. The way he overcomes that
state is by making further similar constructions as waiting for things to happen and people to
come and go, or having similar expectations; but he is not sure of the realization of what is thus
created. He is unable to bear seeing the false as false. True nature of existence too can be seen as
similar as nothing is there to happen, nobody is there to come or to go and everything is there to
perceive which no one is really there. Although it is the true state, the constructed worlds of
thinking of man suggests, people are there to come and go, some of who come can be well
received while others have to be ignored or rejected. So do when they leave; either we are happy
or unhappy. Events too happen the same way with some of which we are attached with, and with
others we are detached with.

Gogo and Didi contemplate on suicide, but give up the idea for the reason they cannot find a
rope to do so. The biggest hope they cling to at the time is waiting for a person they call Godot,
whom they think they met earlier, even on which point their memories are not clear. This
suggests the inefficacy of memories in perceiving reality. A number of times they remind one
another they cannot leave the place where they are because they are supposed to be waiting for
that person Godot.

Estragon : ...Lets go
Vladimir : We can’t
Estragon : Why not?
Vladimir : We’re waiting for Godot.
[p.10,45,80... repeated throughout the play ]

This seemingly imaginary person of Godot can be taken as the cause that makes their lives
miserable because it is the bondages with him that make them imprisoned with the status quo; it
does not allow them to be free.

Two other people appear on stage after sometime, the well dressed person of whom could be
Godot as Didi and Gogo first think; but he is Pozzo and the other is Lucky. Lucky is the slave of
Pozzo. Lucky does not communicate with others and does nothing to defend himself assuming a
position of ‘I’ ‘Myself’. Maybe his mind is in a fully ‘deconstructed’ state or one who is
completely dejected. Estragon and Vladimir see him as he suffers because of the way Pozzo
treats him. Lucky is seen as a robot with no thinking of his own, acting as if he is on a pre-

Page 12 of 20
Absurd Drama with ‘Waiting for Godot’ What roles do Intelligence, Emotions and Feelings play in drama? - R.Subasinghe 19th June 2019.
Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ ‘Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth’ books on buddhist philosophy page 13 of 20

programmed motion. The only thing he does is obeying the rude and short commands of Pozzo,
except after the time when he makes a speech at the command of Pozzo, to ‘Think!’. The speech
he delivers is logical, grammatical and academic, but conveys no meaning; suggesting the
inefficacy of reasoning, logic and language in conveying meanings. It suggested us of a huge
constructed world of language which had meaning that was previously with him, but now that
world is deconstructed so that meaning aspect of the speech he makes is lost. Lucky can be
considered as he represents the generation of academics who later realized the futility of the
worlds they created as lingual thinking, through the thinking activity of ‘deconstruction’. Now he
has become a slave unable to form any worldview, though at one time he had created such a
huge meaningful world. His speech can be taken also as it suggests the idea a God was once
ruling the universe as it was so believed, but now that world is deconstructed; probably as an
impact after Nietzche’s proclamation ‘God is dead!’ At the end of scene one, a boy appears as a
messenger from Godot bringing the message, ‘Mr.Godot’ cannot come that day, but he would
come the following day.

In the second act of the play, too, same situations are repeated with some changes in them.
Estragon is still fumbling with his shoes similar to which Vladimir is fumbling with his hat.
Three or four leaves are on the tree one or two of which only are extra leaves, suggesting some
changes are there along with which most are non changes. Such changes and non changes make
us wonder whether changes, too, are creations of minds only; which are seen by being limited to
five senses and the brain activities working with them as thinking. No way is there to check
whether they take place in an ‘out there’ too as in ‘the real world’. Just as changes bring
dissatisfaction, non changes too bring us dissatisfaction; hence feelings of monotony dominate
all the time whether changes are there or not. Along with changes, Estragon and Vladimir have
forgotten things in the second scene, even their names sometimes. Estragon has forgotten what
he did the previous day. The world has become limited to some memories only, making us
sometimes experience states like ‘primordial thinking’ as thinking activities are differentiated
by Daniel Goleman in three divisions of mind (illustration p.7). Some of the memories they
could have had previously, could have been ‘lost to eternity’ by now. Pozzo and Lucky appear
again in the second scene too, but Pozzo is now blind and weak. The rope pulling which Pozzo
commands Lucky is shorter. None of them are sure whether they met the previous day; though
the audience is sure they met as they saw them in the first scene. Changes like Pozzo is blind and
weaker and the rope of Pozzo is shorter suggests the use of symbolism to convey subtle
meanings; however critics are unable to put such meanings in words by using reasoning logic
and language.

At the end of the play, too, the boy reappears as in the first scene. He tells that he wasn’t the
same boy who came the previous day; the previous one was his brother. He addresses Vladimr as
‘Mr.Albert’ same as previous boy addressed to Estragon, to which Estragon responds by
approving the name as correct. The boy conveys the same message as the previous boy, ‘Mr.
Godot’ cannot come that day but he would come the following day. This suggests, Godot could
be someone nonexistent similar to that Lucky’s academic speech conveyed nothing in existence,
though the sound of speech and the emotional impact caused by it appears tremendous. If one
feels Godot represents God the Creator, the title alluded as ‘Mr’ to Godot by the boy takes down
that God to the level of human. The play ends without Godot’s coming and both Estragon and
Vladimir, falling back to same dissatisfaction they were in. They say ‘Let’s go’ and agree to do
so; but they don’t go; because they are stuck to the place like all human beings are stuck to the
place of earth for unknown, mysterious reasons; if there can be such unknown, mysterious
reasons as regards human existence.

Page 13 of 20
Absurd Drama with ‘Waiting for Godot’ What roles do Intelligence, Emotions and Feelings play in drama? - R.Subasinghe 19th June 2019.
Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ ‘Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth’ books on buddhist philosophy page 14 of 20

Estragon and Vladimir are ‘pseudo couples’ like most other characters in absurd drama similar to
Amedee and Madeleine in Eugene Ionesco’s ‘Amedee or How to Ger Rid of it’. ‘Pseudo couples’
appear in twos and they deal with problems related to seemingly mysterious, unknown feelings
difficult to express in meaningful language. Pozzo and Lucky too are a ‘pseudo couple’. Since
they are not sure of their names or they forget them, they do not see values in names; they appear
as they have deconstructed states of minds in all ways. This background of absence of personal
identities of having names leads us to think of a world that does not consist of definite characters
having definite names or even having definite forms.

Pozzo: True. What is your name?

Estragon: Adam (34)

Boy: (off) Mister!

Estragon: Off we go again.
Boy: Albert...?
Vladimir: Yes. (46)

Thus, the audiences are made to feel the effects of uncertainties in human existence and the final
value of human beings as not even having names.

The problem Estragon has regarding one of his shoes is not solved even at the end. So is it with
Vladimir’s problem with his hat. The fact they have such trivial problems can be seen in a
universal perspective as, all humans have such trivial problems that cannot be solved to give
satisfaction to them. It seems those problems are there not because they need solutions, but they
are needed to continue with an existence. When a person does not have problems, he or she
welcomes new ones to keep occupied with, as ‘defence mechanisms’ as it can be seen in a
psycho-analytic approach. It also suggests, we do not live in a world of ideals but of problems
that deem ideal expectations as they are needed of solutions; ideal solutions to which are not
entertained by us because once they are accepted, that could affect the very nature of our
existence. Thus, our existences continue because of creating and nurturing problems, not by
discovering solutions to them.

The point that ‘Godot’ does not appear on stage symbolises ideal expectations of human kind;
which expectations need not be realized because they are not required to be realized. This can be
seen practically with the idealistic expectation of Marxists in creating societies where
exploitation of one by other is not seen. The fact that countries that were once communist
haven’t realized their ideals of forming ideal communist societies is an example to see the
validity of this point. Just as Estragon has a problem with a shoe and Vladimir with a hat and
they continue their thinking with them, human beings cling to their ideals to keep up with
thinking of their existences.

When Pozzo first appears he is like an exploiting capitalist and Lucky there appears being
mercilessly exploited by him; but such symbolic interpretation has to be withdrawn with the
second scene. In the second scene, both are seen as burdened with the unexplainable nature of
suffering; not one as the oppressor and the other the oppressed. It is so strong in the second scene
no communist theme could be developed from the drama. This shows us another characteristic in
absurd drama; you cannot apply a literary or dramatic technique consistently in an absurd drama
as you do so in traditional drama or literature.

Page 14 of 20
Absurd Drama with ‘Waiting for Godot’ What roles do Intelligence, Emotions and Feelings play in drama? - R.Subasinghe 19th June 2019.
Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ ‘Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth’ books on buddhist philosophy page 15 of 20

When the names of Abel and Cain are mentioned in ‘Waiting for Godot’, references to The Bible
to see a relationship with the story of creation in it cannot be made because there cannot be such
relationships of construction when it is absurd drama.

Vladimir: I tell you his name is Pozzo

Estragon: We’ll soon see.[He reflects.]:Abel! Abel!
..........
Estragon: Perhaps the other is called Cain. Cain! Cain! (80)

Attempts of searching for further meanings to words or phrases as allusions referring to

traditional literature is discouraged in absurd drama. When such references appear they are only
as overused words, phrases or clichés in language that have become weakened in their meaning
aspects may be because of overuse. This is contrary to when such references are made in
traditional drama or literature. One may compare such allusions in T.S. Eliot’s poem The
Wasteland, wherein many are there. T.S.Eliot’s need there was to strengthen the meanings in
what he conveys by referring to traditional literature as past, not simply to use them as
ornaments. The poet there is ‘constructing’ not ‘deconstructing’, latter intention of which only
Beckett is seemingly involved with. Samuel Beckett has once told Barney Rosset that if by
‘Godot’ he meant to represent God, then he would use it as ‘God’ not as ‘Godot’; suggesting, his
motive was to be detached with the established meanings or traditions.*

Other references to Christianity in Waiting for Godot:

Pozzo: What is your name?

Estragon: Adam (34)

The traditional way of asking questions and answering them as providing definite, conclusive
and correct answers is shown as futile when it is absurd drama because meanings of both
questions and answers are deconstructed in them as shown in the previous quotation. The
spectator is made to ponder there on the implicit question ‘what does a name mean?’

The messenger boy and Vladimir talk of ‘Godot’ like this;

Vladimr: Has he a beard, Mr.Godot?

Boy: Yes sir.
Vladimir: Fair or...[He hesitates]...black?
Boy: I think it’s white, sir.
[silence]
Vladimr: Christ have mercy on us! [p.89]

It maybe, primitive practices of representing with human figures for the unknown, mysterious
natures is re-created here through the non-appearing person ‘Godot’. The suggestion seems to be,
such imaginary persons cannot be experienced as real experience.

Further examples as references to religious thinking are;

Vladimr: Suppose we repented?

Estragon: Repented what?
*
Waiting for Godot (backcover) Faber and Faber edition 2010

Page 15 of 20
Absurd Drama with ‘Waiting for Godot’ What roles do Intelligence, Emotions and Feelings play in drama? - R.Subasinghe 19th June 2019.
Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ ‘Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth’ books on buddhist philosophy page 16 of 20

......
Estragon:Our being born. ? [p.7]

Vladimir: And yet...[pause] ... how is it – that of the four Evangelists only one speaks
of a thief being saved. The four of them were there ... Come on, Gogo,
return the ball, can’t you, once in a way?. [p.8-9]

Vladimir: But you cant go barefoot!

Estragon: Christ did. [p.50]

Except for pondering on them as ‘tit-bits’ left as clichés in the use of language from previous
religious thinking, nothing significant is suggested to promote or demote religious thinking
through Waiting for Godot; reminding us again Nietzsche’s proclamation, ‘God is dead ’. The
world of religious beliefs have become deconstructed by now.

Hats, too, play a unique role in Waiting for Godot. The four characters Estragon, Vladimir,
Pozzo and Lucky all wear bowler hats of same fashion. Lucky makes his speech only when he
wears his hat. His thinking ceases with the removal of the hat from him. It can be taken as his hat
symbolises memories to him, point of which leads us to think further; when roles we perform are
removed from us, we become nobodies similar to the removal of hats worn by characters in
Waiting for Godot. Thus, we who think we are ‘somebodies’ become nobodies with the removal
of the social or other roles we have. In an ultimate seeing, all ‘somebodies’ become ‘nobodies’
finally.

Hats being used as objects here can be viewed with T.S. Eliot’s point of ‘objective correlativity’
that suggests, success of a drama depends on objects or events seen on the stage as they pertain
to the particular emotions related to the plot. The dagger used by Macbeth to kill king Duncan,
the handkerchief in Othello causing unwarranted deaths to Desdemona and Othello, both, are
examples for objects related to emotions as used in Shakespearean drama. That also suggests
strong impacts cannot be created by dialogue alone or acting alone. However, when objects as
bowler hats or the tree are used in Waiting for Godot, they may not be seen with as related to
emotions. They create some effects but the audiences cannot symbolise on them, or use logic on
them. Therefore, those bowler hats and the tree in Waiting for Godot may be considered as
arousing feelings related to unexplainable, mysterious states that cannot be explained in a
language.

Two characters express emotions pertaining to mystery, suffering, expectations, attachments and
feelings that pervade the drama. Predominant feeling seems to be anxiety. They look for
solutions to their problems though the problems are not clear to themselves. Referring to ‘dead
people’s voices’ Vladimir and Estragon would say;

Vladimir: What do they say?

Estragon: They talk about their lives.
Vladimir: To have lived is not enough for them.
Estragon: They have to talk about it.
Vladimir: To be dead is not enough for them. (58)

What Vladimir here says can be human beings are dissatisfied both with life and death; the point
of which implies by the nature of itself human expectations are beyond both being born and

Page 16 of 20
Absurd Drama with ‘Waiting for Godot’ What roles do Intelligence, Emotions and Feelings play in drama? - R.Subasinghe 19th June 2019.
Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ ‘Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth’ books on buddhist philosophy page 17 of 20

being dead. Nobody knows exactly what they look for. Existence of life forms appear as
mysterious, the point of which thinking minds including religious thinking have addressed to for
millennia. Age of science as originated with renaissance in Europe is still overwhelmed by those
mysterious feelings addressed previously by religions and as done by artists too.

Everybody has mysterious feelings but nobody knows what they really refer to, and what causes
them. The world constructed as constructionism through logic, language and reasoning imply
there cannot be such mysteries. All have to be finally scientific, ‘observable and measureable’,
and they have to be expressed as facts in a language. The two characters in Waiting for Godot
have hopes in Godot as people earlier had for millennia believing in mysterious states of strange
creatures of many gods or one God. Despite for creating and nurturing such hopes, the two
characters attempt to commit suicide, but they do not do so because they couldn’t find a rope.

At the end of a discussion on Waiting for Godot one could ask: Is this all meaning one can get
from it? Why should mankind deconstruct what they have built as knowledge, and perceive
what is built up as ‘constructionist’ as of no worth, and such building of knowledge using
reasoning logic and language as futile? What reason is there so that we ought to feel the activity
of ‘deconstruction’ as an aesthetic experience? What worldview would be left after complete
‘deconstruction’? How does man exist after complete ‘deconstruction’? What benefit does man
get by experiencing complete ‘deconstruction’?

Since it has not been brought to light in ordinary discussions, it may be useful to point out here,
there really had been ‘realistic’ and successful attempts to ‘deconstruct’ the worlds created as
‘my worlds’ or ‘our worlds’ for more than two and half millennia in history. Evolution of this
activity of ‘deconstruction’ shows, human beings do have an ability to transcend all that is
created as thinking including lingual thinking; and they have the ability to realize an ideal
experience as the ultimate; state of which is called ‘nirvana’ as originated in ancient India. To
attain this aim one has to meditate on what is taught by the advocates of them as three
unavoidable characteristics pertaining to existence, impermanence, suffering and absence of a
soul. In engaging in the meditation to the effect, a person is expected to transcend the state by
which one is trapped as suffering; and reache an experience as a birthless, decay less, dealthless
state. In the process of meditation to the effect, one develops one’s insight thinking as regards his
nature, making him finally see, nothing is left to be seen as ‘material’ or ‘non-material’; that
leads to state of life that has realized the state of ‘x'; which ‘x’ cannot be expressed using a term
in language - so it is a non-lingual state nor is it related to logical explanation. By experiencing
the stages in such meditation, one reaches the most successful process of ‘deconstruction’ of the
worlds created as constructed world.

Estragon and Vladimir symbolise the unexplainable nature of suffering human beings are in,
because of which they cling to fantasies using the mysterious feelings in nature. They appear as
they reached some stages on the path of ‘deconstruction’ of worlds created as ‘my world’ or ‘our
worlds’ though they still are in the path for completion in that. Hence, when they speak or
experience phenomena, they do not see any value in them; so they easily forget them. As they
see, there has to be something beyond both life and death which they want to experience.

Vladimir: To have lived is not enough for them.

...................................
Vladimir: To be dead is not enough for them. (58)

Page 17 of 20
Absurd Drama with ‘Waiting for Godot’ What roles do Intelligence, Emotions and Feelings play in drama? - R.Subasinghe 19th June 2019.
Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ ‘Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth’ books on buddhist philosophy page 18 of 20

According to the unique teaching mentioned here to the effect of ‘deconstruction’, no use is there
in the use of the terms of even ‘you’ and ‘I’ after experiencing complete ‘deconstruction’. One’s
name does not really denote a ‘person’ or a ‘soul’ as such a ‘one’ is entrapped within a physical
body. It is through constructions as thought forms in language man creates ‘persons’ or ‘souls’
that have ‘existences’. However, there are no such ‘ones’ to be entrapped within physical bodies
as ‘beings’. Such seeing as seeing ‘ones’ inside our bodies are seeing only through ignorant
seeing.

This buddhist view of ‘deconstruction’ suggests levels of mind development one can reach as
‘dhyanas’ which are achieved while in this process of complete ‘deconstruction’; after attaining
the nine of which, ‘completed state can be achieved as ‘the enlightened state’. The Buddha is
said to have announced in his joyous proclamation after attaining the state of buddhahood; he
managed to destroy the main beam of the house which house collapses every time it is built.
(‘gahakuutang wisankhathang’). Now he has seen the ‘the carpenter’ who was building it, so he
can make it not to build it by him again. What he says metaphorically there is, the ‘life form’
which is constantly subject to death and decay has to be deconstructed in order to realize a
‘birthless’ ‘decayless’ ‘deathless’ state which is beyond all. One has only to experience the first
level of those experiences to realise the possibility of others being right; but simply using
reasoning, logic and language takes nobody anywhere. Logic and language help to be on that
path, but no validity is in them after getting the initial experiences.

Tremendous potential of energy is released at the end of splitting of an atom, so could it be after
deconstructing of the mental constructions of language as ‘deconstructing’.

R.Subasinghe (BA, PGDE, MEd.UK)

Facebook: Rathnapala Subasinghe 6 June 2019

Acknowledgement
Illustration on page 4 is redrawn from Jubo Rocha do Amaral, MD & Jorge Martinns de Oliveira, MD, PhD
Neurobiology article on The Limbic System - The Healing Centre Online

References:
1. Beckett Samuel. Waiting for Godot Faber and Faber edition (2010)
2. Bono Edward De (1987) Teaching Thinking
3. Goleman, Daniel(1996): Emotional Intelligence Bantam books
4. Gray Ronald. (1961) Brecht Oliver and Boys
5. Pirandello Luigi (1969) In Penguin Plays Penguin Books
6. Martin Browne E. (1969) In Penguin Plays Luigi Pirandello Penguin Books
7. Martin Esslin (1965) Introduction In Penguin Plays Absurd Drama Penguin Books
8. Mary Bryden (2010) In Waiting for Godot – Samuel Beckett faber and faber
9. Subasinghe R. 2018 Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth - (unpublished) *
10. Subasinghe R. (2011)Unification and Disintegration Godage Publishers, Colombo
11. Wikipedia [internet source] on Theatre of the Absurd (2018)

* [ unpublished for want of a publisher ]

Page 18 of 20
Absurd Drama with ‘Waiting for Godot’ What roles do Intelligence, Emotions and Feelings play in drama? - R.Subasinghe 19th June 2019.
Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ ‘Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth’ books on buddhist philosophy page 19 of 20

Page 19 of 20
Absurd Drama with ‘Waiting for Godot’ What roles do Intelligence, Emotions and Feelings play in drama? - R.Subasinghe 19th June 2019.
Author of ‘Unification and Disintegration’ ‘Agreed Truth and Absolute Truth’ books on buddhist philosophy page 20 of 20

Page 20 of 20