Blog Prompt #5

In the last part of the semester, we’ll be looking at plays that question many of the foundational assumptions of drama. From the late 19th century on, many writers sought to question or even dismantle our expected methods of reading and viewing. For your final blog post, I want you to focus on one of the ways in which the play under consideration defies our expectations of what a play should be or do. Why did the author make this choice? What is your reaction as a reader? Do you think the author achieves his or her goal? Why or why not?

Endgame - Blog Post 4

Samuel Beckett’s Endgame is a frustrating and difficult read. Deriving a “so what?” answer from it required deep analysis and insight. At the surface the audience views the lives of the four characters as bleak and meaningless, waiting on their impending deaths. Within the characters existed a preoccupation with death and the idea of a cyclical existence. I believe that the point of this play is to undermine the search for a meaning of life by arguing that life is meaningless and is merely a repeating cycle that we live through. Clov and Hamm seem to be living there lives monotonously, repeating a daily cycle of tasks that merely get them through the day as they wait for their lives to end.

Hamm: I’ll give you nothing more to eat

Clov: Then we’ll die.

Hamm: I’ll give you just enough to keep you from dying. You’ll be hungry all the time.

Clov: Then we won’t die.

Lines 75-79

This conversation depicts the preoccupation with death that Hamm and Clov display throughout the play. Clov expresses his conflicting feelings on death as he seemingly complains about both living and dying. Audiences in the 21^st century most likely read this play as it challenges the idea that life has meaning. The question of the meaning of life has been around since the beginning of time and will be a question may never be answered as we are living on this Earth. From this play we can learn that we should become less preoccupied with the thought of death. The characters in the play live a bleak and gloomy life partly due to the fact they are constantly thinking about death and how their lives are meaningless. The audience should take away from this play that in order to live a better life you should have goals that enhance you as a person and live a life worth living. One should do what they love to do even if it is a monotonous task performed daily. 

Endgame Part 2

1. Meaningless is a theme that permeates Endgame; though the characters in the play are clearly suffering, it’s not clear precisely why they’re suffering or how the characters might bring a sense of purpose to their meaningless lives. What do you think is Beckett’s attitude toward this meaninglessness? Why can’t the characters overcome it? Is either Clov’s or Hamm’s plight something that we might apply to our own lives? If so, then how? And what might it tell us about our lives?

2. We might think of the characters in Endgame as grotesques. For a little more information about the grotesque in literature, you can consult this Wikipedia article:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grotesque#In_literature

First, I want to know: is it appropriate to classify Beckett’s characters as grotesque? The Wikipedia article talks a little bit about other works that feature grotesques… if you’ve read any of those works, what is our typical reaction to grotesques? Why do you think that authors include them? If the characters in Endgame are, indeed, grotesque, then why does Beckett rely so heavily on this trope of the grotesque? What might he be trying to say?

3. I heard a few different groups on Tuesday speak of Hamm and Clov’s relationship as codependent. The word codependent means, literally, that two people depend on one another, but that seems to imply a relationship of relative equals, whereas there is obviously a vast difference in power between Hamm and Clov. If, indeed, we might describe their relationship as a kind of codependence, then what might Beckett be saying about the nature of codependence, or perhaps even about the nature of power in general?

4. Beckett said, famously, “Beware of symbols!,” yet Endgame seems to be rich with things that have potential symbolic value, from the painting turned backwards on the room’s wall to the numerous references to Christ-like death and rebirth, to the obvious chess motif that runs throughout the play. Do you think that Beckett is leading the reader / viewer on a kind of wild goose chase? Why or why not? If the symbols don’t have the apparent value that we think they should, why would Beckett do such a thing?

5. There are numerous references to art throughout the play. Choose one of them and examine the passage and its context. What do you think the passage implies about the relationship between art and life? Is this the same or different from the relationship between Endgame and real life? Why or why not?

Blog Post #4 -- Endgame

From the onset of the play, it does not take the reader long to realize that Endgame by Samuel Beckett deviates from the structure of most plays. Most plays move towards a single defining action, the climax, and then experience some form of resolution. Endgame, however, is different. This play does not consist of the characters working towards a goal or a specific point, nor is there resolution upon the plays conclusion. In the end, it appears as if there was no point to the play at all, but rather four characters waiting to reach their “endgame.” Nevertheless, Beckett uses these elements to place emphasis on his point. He argues that often times we get caught up in the hustle and bustle of everyday life, fall into a routine, and fail to accomplish anything at all. When it gets to this point, all we can do is wait for death to complete our life’s events. With this in mind, I believe that Beckett was trying to teach readers today that although the final phase of our lives may be nothing more than a routine as we wait for our endgame, we need to live our lives in such a way that death does not serve as the defining moment, but rather highlights the many accomplishments that we have achieved.

            When reading the play, a reader quickly gains a sense that the characters are stuck in a monotonous routine. For Clov, Hamm, Nagg, and Nell, life does not have purpose anymore. And when you think of their situation, there is nothing really to live for. Hamm is confined to a wheel chair, Nagg and Nell do not have legs and are stuck in bins, and Clov has an unnamed physical disability. The joys in their lives come from sweets and telling the same stories over and over again. They simply perform the same monotonous routine and wait for the end to draw closer. Clov’s initial lines set the stage for the remainder of the events to come.

CLOV (fixed gaze, tonelessly)


Finished, it's finished, nearly finished, it must be nearly finished.


(Pause.)


Grain upon grain, one by one, suddenly there's a heap, a little heap, the impossible heap.


(Pause.)


I can't be punished any more.

When applying this quote to the context of the play as a whole, the character’s lives are devoid of meaning. They are stuck in the same cycle of events every day and until something breaks this cycle, otherwise known as death, their lives will not have meaning. Death will then define the lives of the characters. However, I believe that Beckett attempts to draw attention to this so that current readers will not fall into this cycle. Instead, they will give meaning to their lives in the present, so when the end draws near, death will not be the defining moment, but rather a series of events and accomplishments that occurred while the individual was still alive. No matter what way you look at it, death will be a defining moment because it represents an abrupt shift from one form to another. However, if one has lived their life in such a way that they accomplished many things, then death will not serve as the defining moment as it does for the characters, but rather highlight these achievements. When this is done, a reader will then escape the unpleasant fate of Hamm, Clov, Nagg, and Nell.

            After the conclusion of the play, a reader may wonder what was the point of reading it in the first place. Very little action occurs and there does not seem to be a lesson to be learned. However, when you take a step back and think about the monotonous routine of the characters and how they were not living for anything, you can see the point that Beckett was trying to make. Beckett uses the characters to show the reader what happens in the final phase of life when the characters did not accomplish anything, but rather got caught up in their routines. This leads one to speculate over whether they will look back and be satisfied with what they accomplished or will they see that they got caught up in the hustle and bustle of life, fell into a routine, and failed to accomplish anything at all. With this in mind, Beckett uses the play Endgame to urge present day readers to not get caught up in the same day-to-day routine and accomplish something remarkable. If an individual does this, then when the end does come, death will not be the only defining moment. 

Blog Post 4

                Endgame, written in 1957 by Samuel Beckett, is a unique and painfully difficult play to decipher. Beckett, who adhered to the philosophies of Theatre of the Absurd, utilizes a unique composition style, applying constant pauses and extended soliloquies to enforce his vision of the cyclical nature of life. In his implementation of these dramatic techniques, Beckett is able to reach multiple generations of audiences.

                To begin, the constant pauses in the dialogue of the play are repetitive but significant in conveying the frustration of life in the play. The deliberations have two main purposes. First, they create an ambiguity because of the lack of words. Often times throughout Endgame, the pauses leave room for thoughts, yet the audience has no knowledge of what each character believes. For example, from lines 645-654, Hamm and Clov discuss their relationship in the past while frustratingly not elaborating in detail.

HAMM: Do you remember your father.

CLOV: (Wearily.) Same answer.

(Pause.)

You’ve asked me these questions millions of times

HAMM: I love the old questions.

(With fervor.)

Ah the old questions, the old answers, there’s nothing like them!

(Pause.)

It was I was a father to you.

CLOV: Yes.

(He looks at Hamm fixedly.)

You were that to me.

                This conversation perfectly depicts the role of pauses pertaining to ambiguity. The pauses seem as if there is some sort of thought that will eventually lead into a conversation of greater depth. Yet, both characters simply state facts, rather than reveal themselves to the audience. Beckett hopes the pauses have such an effect. It creates uncertainty, which leads to the conversation ending without great meaning. The play is full of such uncertain conversations, so that the audience can only grasp the repetitiveness of the painful existence in such a life. These slow, ambiguous conversations result in little actual actions and movement in play, boring audiences. 

                Secondly, these pauses are often placed in soliloquies, disrupting the flow of the play adding to the tedium of the play. For example, at the beginning of Hamm’s second soliloquy on lines 655-680 is a perfect example of the pause’s awkwardness of the play’s rhythm. In total, there were 17 pauses over that whole passage in only 25 lines. Such a long, extensive rambling makes the audience uncomfortable with the life, which seems dull and continuous.

                So, what was Beckett’s intention in creating the play? Despite the repetitive nature of the play, the play contains a message for all generations. The play warns against inactivity or constant repetitive actions. Beckett wants the audiences to understand the perils of a cyclical, boring life without new experiences. Of course, Endgame has other meanings in its text but in illustrating life as so monotonous, Beckett makes a statement on how a man must avoid living.

                In conclusion, Beckett’s pauses are important facets of Endgame since they can create ambiguity and become intrusive in Hamm’s long soliloquies. These features of the play make the audience’s perception of that life bored and inspirited, which is Beckett’s intention. Beckett’s ability to create such a world allows the audience to learn how not to live, inactively and never-changing. In that way, Endgame has resonated with all audiences since 1957. 

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.

Blog Post #4 - Endgame

Beckett uses Endgame to provide his opinion on the meaning of life, except he illustrates that there is no meaning to life. Instead he suggests  that desiring things in life is ludicrous and it done merely for entertainment.

Why do 21st-century readers still read this play? Well, once the audience understands that the play heavily, but abstractly, discusses the topic of life and death, we are intrigued. The meaning of life is such a complex topic where professionals, philosophers, and laymen can all have diverse and valuable input to contribute to discussions. Everyone experiences life, thus the meaning of life makes it a topic that everyone can relate to, has though about, and can form an opinion about. Endgame is just Beckett's opinion of life and since it's just an intriguing and complicated topic, it is still relevant in the 21st century.

Beckett shows to the audience that everything in life is meaningless. Everything we want in life is absurd, and that we (humans) create value. Clov and Hamm demonstrate this by their mundane, cyclic, and routine actions. They play games with one another to pass time.

Lines 1340-1341

CLOV: Let's stop playing!

HAMM: Never.

There cyclic and routine behavior of inquiring about painkillers, leaving one another, and wondering when "this will be finished" keep them in a routine that takes the focus off of death.

CLOV: Is it not time for my pain killer? (Lines 186, 412, 822, 1243)

HAMM: No

CLOV: I'll leave you. (Lines 643, 704, 824, 1372, 1179)

Hamm's responses vary but he generally ignores the declaration.

HAMM: Will this never finish (Line 390)

HAMM: Why won't you finish us (Line 637)

HAMM: It is finished, we're finished. Nearly finished (Lines 854-855)

They break up this repeated acts with stories, stories what could be about the past. The plot of the play is Clov and Hamm trying to occupying themselves while they wait for death. This exhibits that life is meaningless. They acknowledge this, yet they don't try to make meaning of it. They portray the reality of human kind: we are just killing time until we are done. We are born, and from that moment on we are just a ticking time bomb; we are dying from the moment we are born.

What do we have to learn from it? Well the characters demand that the audience realize that life is meaningless but that individuals create value. The plot is all about just surviving in the current predicament, and that is why this play is still relevant to audiences today. The storyline shows us that humans use routine to suppress thoughts of and concern for death. In addition, the events of the story show that everything we want in life is absurd because we are going to die anyway and we won't remember any of it and none of it will matter.

Why does it still matter? Well the play still matters because death is still inevitable and it is always in the back of our mind. With this new phenomenon of "FOMO", or fear of missing out, Endgame definitely matters. With death dominating our thoughts and life having an unknown expiration date, we have started to make hasty demand for things be done as soon as possible for the sake of doing. Hamm does this when he asks Clov to take him the window, to bring him the dog, and if it's time to take his pills or not. This notion suggests that life is a sequence of moments. But in the 21st century, we believe the moments create one big picture (like the "Facebook Year in Review") when death comes. At this time, it is decided whether your life had meaning or not. Endgame suggests that this isn't the case, and that life, after death, does not matter. Instead, it suggests that everything in life is meaningless because we can't take anything out of this life with us.

Existential Crises in Endgame

Throughout a ridiculous play such as Endgame by Samuel Beckett, it's difficult sometimes to find exactly what the point of everything is.  The dialogue and action of the play can sometimes be hard to parse and usually seems completely inconsequential, but after looking very closely the point shines through the nebulousness of this play.  Samuel Beckett simply uses Endgame as a medium to vent his existential thoughts about the meaningless of life, something that we all struggle with from time to time.  Although many people believe that this play is garbage and a waste of time to read, ultimately the play makes the reader consider the afterlife and what they believe about eternity.

Unlike most conventional literature, Endgame throws us right into the middle of the plot with no backstory, no introduction to characters, nothing.  The audience is denied any expectation of a linear plotline or any of the other elements of a story they've been trained to recognize.  Instead they now have to make something for themselves out of a story mostly consisting of two lovers living in separate trash cans and a man moving a ladder back and forth.

However, there's no point to this random action for a reason.  All of the characters are just waiting to die, wasting their time with trivial actions.  Even the characters feel as if they're living for nothing, as multiple characters in the play question why they continue living.

CLOV:

Why this farce, day after day?

HAMM:

Routine. One never knows.

(Pause.)

Last night I saw inside my breast. There was a big sore.

CLOV:

Pah! You saw your heart.

HAMM:

No, it was living.

(Pause. Anguished.)

Clov!

CLOV:

Yes.

HAMM:

What's happening?

CLOV:

Something is taking its course.

(Pause.)

HAMM:

Clov!

CLOV (impatiently):

What is it?

HAMM:

We're not beginning to... to... mean something?

CLOV:

Mean something! You and I, mean something!

(Brief laugh.)

Ah that's a good one!

The quotation above shows that the characters have little hope about what their point in life is.  They sit around with nothing to occupy their time, and we, as readers, get upset with this.  We start to feel uneasy because this breaks the social construct that everything should have a point to it.

But to Beckett, everything is meaningless.  Throughout the entire play, even evident in the quotation above, there's just inconsequential action. The heart Hamm sees is completely irrelevant to the play, but it's included to show us how little things in life contain no meaning, and that by extension, life has no meaning.

This play challenges the traditional beliefs about afterlife because Beckett's entire point of the play is to show that life doesn't have any meaning.  Although his point is obvious, many readers struggle to allow a play to prove to them that life has no point and try to deny it.  Since a fact as heavy as that can't necessarily be proven to anybody and nobody wants to believe this, the play raises questions like this to the audience and makes us consider these possibilities regardless of whether we want to or not.

Blog Post #4 | Endgame

            It does not take the reader long to realize that Endgame is not your typical play. Although one may find this play easier to understand in terms of its rather modern language use, the ever necessary "point" is still very much confounding at first glance. What does seem rather obvious, however, is that one of the central themes that Beckett was trying to get across was that of the misery that life so often brings as it approaches a final "endgame". We see this everyday in the world around us; as life goes on, people get older, weaker, their friends and family begin to die around them, and eventually all that seems to be left to do is to die themselves. As somber and twisted as that may sound, I believe Beckett intended for it to be that way so that the audience would then be able to come to the conclusion of what he was ultimately trying to teach us about the way life goes these days, which I believe is that we get so caught up in everything around us that we forget to sit back and enjoy it, until one day there is seemingly nothing left to live for and we begin to question the purpose of why we were here to begin with. Beckett was trying to teach us that although misery seems to be the last logical step before an endgame, if we live our lives to be fulfilling enough, then it doesn't have to be.

            When reading the play, one gets the sense that all four characters, Hamm, Clov, Nagg, and Nell have essentially given up on life and essentially dread every day that comes. We have no sense of understanding for what they have done in their lives up until the point of the play, but we do know some details such as Hamm and Clov both being disabled -- Hamm is blind and Clov has some unknown physical disability -- and that Nagg and Nell are Hamm's parents. One thing that Beckett manages to make very clear within this play is the sense of uniformity. Every day is the same for every one of these characters -- no meaning, no purpose, no liveliness. Just misery, day in and day out.

|Lines 210-215|

HAMM: This is not much fun. (Pause.) But that's always the way at the end of the day, isn't it, Clov?

CLOV: Always.

HAMM: It's the end of the day like any other day, isn't it, Clov?

CLOV: Looks like it.  

           I picked this passage because it so clearly showcases the uniformity that I just mentioned. It is almost as if Hamm is realizing this for the first time, since Hamm is essentially asking Clov to verify what he just realized to see if how he is seeing things is really the way that things have come to be. As stated before, I believe that was one of the things Beckett was trying to teach us, that life goes by so quickly and we reach the endgame without ever really realizing it until it's here and hits us in the face. It also clearly signifies the central theme I mentioned of misery so often accompanying the "endgame" of life.

          Here is another line that highlights a different part of what I think Beckett was trying to teach us, which is the fact that we can live a meaningful life only to have it disappear in the end because we forgot to slow down and enjoy it while it was here.

            |Lines 13-15|

HAMM: …Can there be misery---(He yawns.)--loftier than mine? No doubt. Formerly. But now?

            Hamm touches on the fact that he is so utterly miserable in his life now that he doubts there is anyone who could be more miserable, but that formerly there could have been, hinting that his life, like most, was not always as miserable as it is now that he's reached the endgame having not thoroughly appreciated his life beforehand. There is one last line, spoken by Clov, that I feel emphasizes the struggle of getting caught up in life and not enjoying it until the time has come and gone and it's too late.

|Lines 1095-1096|

HAMM: …Did you ever have an instant of happiness?

CLOV: Not to my knowledge.

           As stated before, Beckett gives us no real insight into the lives of the characters up until the point of the play and I believe this was intentional, as it allows for us, the audience, to openly speculate about things such as why Clov never recalls having an instant of happiness in his life.

            Endgame is one of those plays that leaves you feeling a bit strange after you've read it because though it is seems so far-fetched in some aspects, when you begin to think deeper about it and analyze it, you see that it really is not so far-fetched and that it touches on real issues, such as the misery accompanying the end of life and what one needs to do to potentially avoid it -- by learning that life ends quicker than you may think and although it's easy to get caught up in it, you should enjoy it while you can.

            

Blog Post #4 Endgame

  In Endgame Samuel Beckett places the reader in a bizarre world that seemingly has no meaning. Additionally, there appears to be very little structure in the events of the play, and the ending does not give any definitive answers as to what happens afterward. Although these qualities may frustrate the reader at first, with a deeper analysis Beckett's purpose can be identified. The characters and setting reflect Beckett's cynical outlook on life and are intended to mock human existence. Ultimately, Beckett focuses on the endgame of human life because he wants to share why he believes human life is folly. 21st century readers need to read this piece due to its indirect manner of storytelling. No definitive ideas are apparent unless the student analyzes the play. Also, this play gives keen insight concerning the depressing state of humanity, and throughout it Beckett fleshes out his own worldview.

 The primary way Beckett tries to legitimize his view is through insanity since insanity (trying the same thing repeatedly and expecting a different result or a change) infests the minds of each character. Insanity also plays a part in the overlying theme of the cyclic nature of life. On the surface insanity can be seen in the abrupt pauses between lines and the meaningless banter in the dialogue at times. For example, when Nell refuses to go inside her trashcan, I couldn't help but think they were both a tad insane.

Nagg: On the road to Sedan. Are you cold?
Nell: Yes, perished. And you?
Nagg: (Pause) I'm freezing. (Pause) Do you want to go in?
Nell: Yes
Nagg: Then go in. (Nell doesn't go in) Why don't you go in?
Nell: I don't know

Here, BOTH of them are freezing mind you, yet neither will go inside their trashcan. Nagg even has the gall to question Nell's reason for staying outside while he himself is doing the same thing. I think this is the toll constant cycles or the same routine have had on their mental faculties. Their minds are growing numb and unresponsive to the outside world. In real life we age and undergo a similar process. We each go through a routine each day. We work. We play. And the cycle continues until the endgame where our ability to work and play fade. The senses fail while we steadily fade out of existence. As others around us fade as well, the question arises of whether or not the cycle of life meant anything at all?

Beckett does not only focus on the insanity of old age but also addresses the folly of the human experience during the cycle. Beckett does not see human progress; instead he sees humans running in circles repeatedly. In the dialogue we get a clear example of this sentiment.

Hamm: Nature has forgotten us.
Clov: There's no more nature.
Hamm: No more nature! You exaggerate.
Clov: In the vicinity
Hamm: But we breathe, we change! We lose our hair, our teeth! Our bloom! Our ideals!
Clov: Then she hasn't forgotten us.
Hamm: But you say there is none
Clov: No one that has ever lived ever thought so crooked as we.
Hamm: We do what we can.
Clov: We shouldn't
(Pause)
Hamm: Your're a bit of all right, aren't you?
Clov: A smithereen

When I read this passage at first, I paid it no heed. But it has profound information about Beckett's worldview. When Clove says, "No one that has ever lived ever thought as crooked as we," Beckett is claiming that at the end of the cycle we are worse off than at the start. Also, Clov says that we shouldn't do what we can. Here, Beckett is asking why? Why try? Why take part in the futility of human existence? Afterward, Clov says he is a "smithereen" which is a shattered piece. I interpret that to mean that Clov is a fragment of what he once was. According to this passage, the cycle is futile and retrogressive, and Beckett may even be claiming that humanity is gradually wearing down into nothingness as the meaningless cycles reiterate themselves.

With all these questions raised, what do they mean to the reader? I, personally, see a great deal of truth in the Endgame, but I refuse to embrace its downtrodden attitude. If I was asked, does the cycle of life mean anything at all? I would say that although in the grand scheme of things I may have little significance, I cannot rebuke the precious amount of time given. Will I chase illusions of happiness? Will I fade as I age? Yes, but these so called "follies" define the human experience that I must take part in or give up altogether. What motivates me is the next cycle. I will not bow out when I can have a positive impact on the next cycle. Even though this cycle does not include my existence, it can and will be affected by my decisions. I will live to the end keeping in mind that something new will rise in my place after my own endgame.

Blog Post 4 -- Endgame

     Although this play is unlike many of the others we have read, it has its own purpose. Samuel Beckett uses this play to symbolize the cycle of life, to emphasize that death is inevitable, and to delve into the boring routine that we become accustomed to. While this play has no exposition, no rising action, and no real climax, this is all for a purpose: to focus on the end of the game. If you really study the way Beckett presents the play and the context he chooses, you will see what it is that he's trying to teach, which I think was his main purpose for writing this play the way he did.

     One of the main ideas of the play is that life is like a cycle, a game, a routine. While Beckett's focus was not on the beginning or middle of the cycle, you can infer that the analogy being made is similar to one of those. There is an emphasis on the routine aspect of life with the monotonous conversations and speaking that occurs during the play. There is a lack of emotion and excitement, and there seems to be more of a boring blur of time wasting, simply waiting for the end to come. Not only is there an abundance of pauses between speaking which is another emphasis of the monotone conversations, but it is evident through the words the characters speak to each other. However, there is a sense of irony present, because in some instances, it seems as though the conversations are what keep the characters going from day to day.

Lines 1022-1033
Clov: I'll leave you.
Hamm: No!
Clov: What is there to keep me here?
Hamm: The dialogue. (Pause.)
             I've got on with my story. (Pause.)
             I've got on with it well. (Pause.)
             Ask me where I've got to.
Clov: Oh, by the way, your story?
Hamm: What story?
Clov: The one you've been telling yourself all your days.
Hamm: Ah you mean my chronicle?
Clov: That's the one. (Pause.)
This is an occurrence of the irony present. Although the conversations between the characters seem to be a bore of simply waiting for their lives to end, they make it known that those same conversations are what keep them going. This is important to the play because it serves as another symbol; friendship and relationships with others may be a sole reason for continuing to live, and they may sometimes be just enough to keep you pushing on day after day.

     There is another main point of the play that death is simply inevitable, and no matter what you do, it will come eventually. This is the main focus of Beckett's writing, hence the title. The characters in the play have experienced their glory days, the best days of their life, and they are now on a downhill glide towards the end of their time. It seems as though they are sitting around waiting for their clocks to take their final tick, knowing that they simply don't have much else to look forward to with no more bright light coming into their lives. They even reach a point when they are ready for death to take them away, and will do anything to get there.

Lines 1341-1352
Clov: Let's stop playing!
Hamm: Never!
             Put me in my coffin.
Clov: There are no more coffins.
Hamm: Then let it end!
             With a bang!
             Of darkness! And me? Did anyone ever have pity on me?
Clov: What?
          Is it me you're referring to?
Hamm: An aside, ape! Did you never hear an aside before?
             I'm warming up for my last soliloquy.
These lines were a significant conversation between these two, because this is the point in which they were ready to accept death and let it take them away. They were ready for their cycle of life to end, their game to be over, and they were welcoming death the best way they knew how.

     Although this play had many differences from the plays we were accustomed to reading and studying, the differences were important and had a purpose. They helped to focus on the themes of the play and the ideas Samuel Beckett was trying to teach us. Symbolism was used most frequently throughout the play, and the title was the most significant symbol of the entire work.

Blog Post 4 | Endgame

In Samuel Beckett’s Endgame, we meet Hamm and Clov who are stuck in a room (with Hamm’s parents, Negg and Nell), presumably after a nuclear bomb. The characters, and the play, seem to be stuck in a purgatory where nothing happens and the characters wait for an inevitable end. Similar to the endgame of chess, it is assumed that the play goes on as a stalemate, until there is a checkmate (when the characters die). Furthermore, Endgame shows the interdependence of people when face an inevitable death, leading to self-consciousness.

However, while rereading this play, I found myself thinking that Beckett was trying to capture the nature of death. So, the questions I asked myself were: what is Beckett saying about time? What is he specifically saying bout death? Is it bleak rather that welcoming like in other works? What is saying about life in general? Through these questions, I gathered that Beckett was trying to say that life can’t be measured in time; rather it must be measured in moments, especially when faced with death as death is inevitable and cold.

Through Endgame, Beckett illustrates that we are stuck in purgatory called life, until we actively leave this oblivion and do something worthwhile in attempt to have a meaningful death rather than a bleak one.

Between Hamm and Clov, Clov is the only character that can walk and see, making Hamm dependent on him. However, Clov (presumably Hamm’s servant or aid) must do whatever Hamm says, even though he threatens to leave much of the play.

HAMM: Why do you stay with me?

CLOV: Why do you keep me?

HAMM: There's no one else.

CLOV: There's nowhere else.

           In this section, it is clear that the two are staying together because they literally have no one else, and nowhere else to go. They need each other to live. Throughout the rest of the play, all we hear is the two banter and talk nonsense because they have nothing else to do but pass time. They argue, they go though tedious processes and they seem so blasé; they do things because they have nothing better to do.

Beckett referenced time many times, mostly in reference to his painkillers. Although, when asked what time it was:

HAMM: What time is it?

CLOV: The same as usual.

HAMM (gesture towards window right): Have you looked?

CLOV: Yes.

HAMM: Well?

CLOV: Zero.

             It is clear that time does not exist for them. Further, in Hamm’s final monologue he states “Moments for nothing, now as always, time was never and time is over, reckoning closed and story ended” showing that time does not exist, especially in when death is lurking.

            There is no “I’m supposed to take a painkiller (which I thought was Hamm’s way of numbing life) at 5:30.” There is only “Remember the time it was time for your painkiller and there was none?” Only moments exist.

            Time is also shown through the alarm clock. Clov originally places the clock o the wall then Hamm moves it to the lid of Nagg’s bin, symbolizing that its just a matter of time until his death.

It is clear that Beckett was trying to say that death is inevitable, as seen trough putting the clock on the bin as well as when he covers his face with the handkerchief. Death, when stuck in this motionless and meaningless purgatory (that some could argue Beckett meant life), death is bleak. It is bitter, miserable, unwelcoming, and cold. It’s not what some Shakespearean works where it is honorable or tragic. No, it’s bleak and may sound depressing, but it is true.

Personally, I thought that Beckett was saying that we all lead a meaningless and motionless life until we leave our 10ft. room and actually do something, like Clov. That is the point of the play, from what I gathered. At the end, we see Clov is ready to leave and seek something else. He leaves his purgatory and now he can live and die in peace, rather than wait for death like Hamm.