Category: Uncategorized

Mary Beth says:
“The indefinite arrival of Godot is the largest evidence of the play's purposeful absence of measured time.”

Very valid argument. Time is normally conceived by hours and minutes which seem irrelevant in this play.
But it doesn’t mean time doesn’t pass. Every day there is a new day, the twilight indicates a shift from day to night, the tree is alive then dead, meaning that time passes. It passes because there are changes, and different actions. These actions, might not be perceived as meaningful.

We, for I include myself, question the “existing (or non-existing) action of the play”, when it is clear that things do happen.

When Pozzo’s watch suddenly disappears during twilight, for example, something happens –an action. The fact that it directly contributes to ‘distort’ the perception of time, while generating a sense of confusion, speaks of an action but not of an actor!

“but behind this veil of gentleness and peace, night is charging (vibrantly) and will burst upon us (he snaps his fingers) pop! Like that! …just when we less expect it.

That’s how it is on this bitch of an earth.”

Nobody to blame!

This is definitely different from reality, and it is so because things don’t just disappear.

The moon from twilight and its function. WHY

Twilight is different because of its exaggerated effect on the characters. The way in which it conditions the actions of the characters makes the difference. This natural phenomenon may be perceived as the natural manifestation of change in time, from day to night, which casts a mystical ambiance altering the, thus far, normal/typical behavior of the characters.

Towards the end of Act I, the end of twilight:

” The light suddenly fails. In a moment it is night. The moon rises at the back, mounts in the sky, stands still, shedding a pale light on the scene

Vladimir: At last!”

The appearance of the moon, as perceived by Didi, signifies something concrete… it reassures the character’s confidence. This happens because transition stops, waiting stops, blurred boundaries get clear, as if waiting for Godot would have been translated into waiting for the moon. When the boy exits, the moon appeared and there is no more exasperation. There is an apparent Order in the universe.

Estragon, before the appearance of the moon, behaves as if he were before a being. The character’s characterization of the celestial presence, is another example of how they assign qualities to inanimate objects. Even though the light from the moon is feeble, pale, it is strong enough to affect Estragon’s melancholy.

Through props of spectacle, lighting, Becket anticipates the action. Specific ambiguity strikes again! We have the road but not which road, we have Godot’s messenger but no Godot; only the moon and it’s pale light.

WHY IS THIS DIFFERENT FROM REALITY? THE MOON HAS NO LIGHT OF ITS OWN. It is a pale reflection of something else, namely the sun, but it is enough for Gogo to cling to this illusion.

“Estragon Pale of weariness.

Vladimir Eh?

Estragon Of climbing heaven and gazing on the like of us.”

The way in which he speaks of the moon resembles the way a person would speak of another one. This denotes the kind of loneliness that is representative of one thematic in this play. Characteristically resulting in the depiction of Estragon’s depression. Gogo puts his existence down through an illusory third party, delegating the responsibility of a claim of dissatisfaction about himself to the moon.

Towards the end of Act II, the end of twilight:

” The Boy avoids him and exits running

Silence. The sun sets, the moon rises. As in act I. Vladimir stands motionless and bowed. Estragon wakes, takes off his boots, gets up with one in each hand and goes and puts them down front, then goes towards Vladimir”

It is valid to remark how somnolence plays an important role here. If boundaries are blurred, dream-world and reality can be confused. For example:

Did the Boy actually appear? The Boy is on the script so he is a character BUT I WOULD DARE TO SAY HIS ACTUAL PRESENCE IS AMBIGUOUS, given that both of the times he appears during twilight. (twilight to be CONSIDERED AS MAXIMUM GRAPHICAL EXPONENT OF BLURRED BOUNDARIES).

Space and Time with specific ambiguity.

BY ALEJANDRO

Space and time, conjunctively misperceived by Didi and Gogo, are warped and blurred,while functioning detrimentally towards the perception of meaningful action.

The structure of this play works marvelously as it evokes a sense of confusion and hopelessness which not only belongs to the characters but also manages to interpolate its way to the audience. Particularly, this is made more powerful due to its applicability and universality –given the ambiguous specificity and generality of the dramaturgical context.

How does this speak of why it is different from reality if I’m referring to applicability and universality? Given the ambiguous nature of its composition. The play occurs in a place (a road with a tree), this location is specific in its construction but vague in its location; that’s specific ambiguity.

More Conflicts Acts III-V

Geoggrey McQuilkin.

Conflicts and Obstacles: Act III:

Isabella goes to Claudius in order to get his approval of her decision.  Claudius thinks that his sister is being selfish at first, but then agrees with her decision and feels guilty about trying to persuade her to sacrifice her beliefs for him.

The Duke tries to get a good sense of how his people feel about him as a ruler, yet it is difficult for him to do this without giving away his identity.

Isabelle is an increasingly prudish and rigid character as she believes that Claudius' punishment is not entirely unjust despite the fact that his crime is the least offensive of all his fellow prisoners.

Conflicts and Obstacles: Act IV:

In one of the Duke's schemes, he proposes that Mariana sacrifice her sexuality with Angelo in order to gain some sort of redemption as a woman.  Yet this is deceptive as Mariana believes that she is partaking in the scheme with the friar's blessings.

We see the meaning of the play's title expand as the Duke reveals the nature of his schemes.  Many of the conflicts that occur during the play involve measuring the relevant value of two things (such as Isabelle's virtue verses Claudius' life or the Duke's wanting to know how good of a leader he is verses Angelo having free reign in Vienna).  In this scene, the Duke judges the value of Claudius' life to be greater than that of Barnadine as he is willing to sacrifice her life for his in one of his schemes.

Barnadine refuses to be executed which shows that he recognizes the value of life where the Duke might not.  This shows that perhaps the Duke is too far separated and not connected enough with the lives of his citizens.  The duke begins to appear manipulative and deceptive as he uses both of his identities to make Isabella go along with his plans as she refuses Angelo's proposal.  Although his scheme with Mariana does work and the ability to put plans into action successfully is a quality of a good leader.

Conflicts Act V:

Isabelle's marriage to the Duke does conflict with her previous beliefs in chastity so in a way she is surrendering her sexuality to the will of a man.  However, she does not partake in premarital sex, which is her main objection in the play.

In the end, the Duke uses marriage as a punishment for Lucio and Angelo, and a reward for Claudio and Mariana (and himself).  It is ironic how the institution of marriage is used in this absurd sense at the end of the play after it was built up as the main staple of Angelo's laws in the previous acts.

But do it Backwards- Act IV scenes 4, 5, 6

Alex Nicolson

End of Scene 6

-Mariana and Isabella worry about speaking out against Angelo, and Friar Peter comes and tells them he has a place for them to stand near the duke

End of Scene 5

-Varrius meets the Duke and they go to meet their friends and make their entrance back into Vienna

-The Duke sends Friar Peter to round up his friends and Friar Peter leaves to do so

End of Scene 4

-Escalus leaves to alert people who want to make grievances, and Angelo worries about what will happen when the Duke returns, and regrets killing Claudio

-Escalus and Angelo are confused by the Duke's orders, and wonder why he has set up for people to bring forward grievances and injustices against them

End of Scene 3

Obstacle, Conflict

  • GlennMary Carroll.  
  • Duke; wants a well governed state without being looked upon as a tyrant.
  •  Obstacles; state overrun with vice (especially sex), he hasn’t enforced laws in the past, therefore there is little precedent, the laws leave little room for interpretation making it difficult to  let some off the hook while others are punished.
  • Angelo; wants to have power over people (power over the people in the state, power over Isabella, power of his decision over the law, ect…)
  •  Obstacles; he’s too cruel, which creates fear in the state but not trust or love. To have more substantial power, like the Duke, your people must want to follow you instead of being coerced.  Also, he will not be inheriting a state, he has to work his way up. Lastly, his own fallible character which leads him to speak of the righteousness of law while leaving his fiancee and seducing Isabella.  
  • Claudio; wants everything to always be in his favor. For most of the play, we see him in some sort of requesting position. He begs not to go to jail, he wants his sister to sleep with Angelo, ect…
  • Obstacles; his arrest makes him unable to actually go or do anything, because he’s stuck in jail. This could be a reason for all of his “wanting via asking” because there’s not a lot else he can do in his position. Also, wanting everything to be in his favor tends to lead to unethical choices i.e. getting his girlfriend pregnant. 

Some Conflicts and Obstacles ActI-II

Geoffrey McQuilkin 

Conflicts and Obstacles: Act I

Claudio, who is well intentioned and virtuous, gives into his lust for Juliet and ends up impregnating her and getting sentenced to death for it.

Angelo seeks to right the city's wrongs by strictly enforcing punishment on violations of premarital sex, yet when he sentences Claudio to death, he is seen as unjust and unmerciful. 

The Duke does not want Angelo to have free reign because he knows that he is too strict although he does want his city to become a virtuous place.

Isabelle seeks shelter from the wicked ways of Vienna as a nun, however, Lucio brings her back into her discomfort zone where she must confront the sins that surround her.  She is repulsed in Act II, when Lucio encourages her to seduce Angelo (who feels drawn to her).

Isabelle makes the decision that family is more important than her religious virtues when she stands up for her brother because she believes that his punishment is too severe.

Conflicts and Obstacles: Act II: 

Characters such as Escalus and the provost believe that Angelo is narrow minded and that Claudius' punishment is too harsh.  However, they seem to fear Angelo and it takes the Duke's intervention in order to motivate them to act.

During their meeting, Angelo begins to have lustful thoughts for Isabelle, and he has an inner conflict in maintaining control over the sexual impulses that he has outlawed.

Isabelle is furious at the idea of having sex with Angelo, yet his attraction to her does give her some power in saving her brother's life.  Oddly enough, Angelo does not want to have sex with any other woman in Vienna.

Angelo says that he loves Isabelle, but would not marry her.  This lust turns Angelo into a hypocrite for enforcing the law that he would so easily break with Isabelle.  Yet, Isabelle decides that death is better than shame, and refuses to have sex with Angelo to save her brother's life.

The paradox and importance of the title. How the metaphore relates to the idea.

The paradox and importance of the title
Willy, the salesman, kills himself in the name of what he perceives; that is capitalism. This is the critique Miller puts forward. He does so by exposing the paradoxical nature of a system. This paradox is exposed by their constant appearances and recurrence.

“Killing in the name of” by Rage Against the Machine, has death as first word and name as for salesman.  Willy kills in the name of capitalism. This metaphorical analogy is crucial because Willy kills himself, so he kills. And the in the name of, can be applied to the different plausible reasons for why he committed suicide. he killed himself in the name of money, for 20 thousand. he killed himself in the name of family, although he misperceives the value of his life, as put forward by the constant paradox behind the idea. The world is meant to be paradoxical, but it is not meant! (QUOTING MYSELF in terms of existentialism in extension to what i have said in my other post)