Blog Post #4

The 21st century, a time which could best be described as either being ruled by social media or as the age of irony, is undoubtedly an era of disillusionment. Society’s hope in politicians has been dashed to pieces, our most popular television shows have the word “reality” in the titles but, honestly, are used as ways for people who are disappointed with their own lives to live vicariously through others, and there is no need to quote divorce rates to drive the point home. But when were our illusions shattered? The existentialist movement in the late 19th and 20th centuries may not have done the shattering, but it certainly was the first to point it out and discuss the implications. Samuel Beckett, author of Endgame exposes this disillusionment through the use of conversational patterns, setting, and the tools of the theatre of the absurd. Although Beckett wrote the play in 1957, the relationship between Hamm and Clov and their dissatisfaction with life is still fiercely relevant, as the existentialist movement permanently shaped society and opened its eyes to its own dissatisfaction.

Absurdist theatre was a major tool in the existentialist movement and focused on highlighting the absurdity (or futility) of life and, more importantly, the world. Anything could happen to anyone at anytime and by no means does it have to be fair. Hamm and Clov are mid-conversation in Endgame when Clov realizes that there is a flea on him. Underscoring the absurdist disillusionment with society and the world, Hamm tells Clov that he must kill the flea as, “...humanity might start from there all over again! Catch him, for the love of God!” (line 565). It strikes one as odd how, in a desolate and (quite literally) monochromatic post-apocalyptic world, that even after complaining about being stuck with Clov, Hamm would practically shudder at the rebirth of humanity. However, it is simply quintessentially existential and a fundamental part of the theatre of the absurd. Another illustration of disillusionment can be found in the relationship between Nell and Nagg. Nell uses the word “farce” to describe their relationship, which is both a sign of when this was written, but is still something which resonates with modern audiences as divorce rates and overall detachment via technology skyrocket.

The themes discussed within the play (the cyclical nature of life, the futility of relationships and living, and the absurdity of the world) are ones which have always been, and will always be, relevant. The universality of these struggles and doubts are what make plays like Endgame so popular, and what allows them to stand the test of time. The question is not why or how this play is still read and relates to 21st century audiences, it should rather be, when will this play - or ones like it - cease to be able to speak to us? I don’t think that the time will ever come.