Scene Play

Above we can see one of the representations of the play Waiting for Godot. In it the setting is arid and the sense of emptiness is obvious, but the most important of the setting is how it could be any place. Adding the relatable feeling that Beckett tries to convey throughout the play, the constant search for a meaningful life.

Were you to add a subtle change in scenery it would not be the same. A simple change such as an owl perking on the tree could mean so much more and so much less at the same time. An owl could symbolize God or Godot looking over Vladimir and Estragon always being present and them waiting for something that has always been there judging them. That would degrade the actors’ value, make them less because of the presence of more. Or even the clothing if they were to be dressed as filthy rich, one may interpret Beckett’s play as a mock towards the rich and how at the end you are left empty and insane.

Everything is human. Insisting it is our error and nothing else’s. The point is reinforced with Lucky. When reading it was hard to comprehend that Lucky was serving and animal job yet being a human (I had to see the video to be certain it was a human). Lucky and Pozzo both exemplify the relationship people have with God: Lucky is constantly trying to show Pozzo his strength and dedication when he only receives punishments and insults. If it were to be a dog or a horse guiding Pozzo, the humiliation towards the animal would be more fitting to the eye than that of a human.

Other elements of the scenery can be altered to change drastically the meaning of the play, another simple thing such as adding flowers to the tree, or few more trees and bushes around the scenario would give it a psychedelic feel, such as in Alice In Wonderland. Were the characters are blabbering about the world in non-coherent ways, yet we see the setting and find no problem in agreeing that the characters are sane in that habitat.   

Overall

The main theme of a Stranger’s discussion will always be existentialism, and the one we had in class was not an exception. As the main theme of existentialism kept arising, various aspects of this movement were clearly linkable to the story. From class discussion I was able to conclude:

-Mersault did care about his mother. However his personality blinds him from feelings of dependence on others. Therefore he defies the parameters of how life should be lived.

- The book begins with his mother’s death, then there is life in the middle in which not much is told, to finally end with death. Death, life, death. You end with what you began with: nothing.

- The sun plays a vital role. Unable to express his feelings, the sun and its heat appears when situations are uncomfortable: mother’s funeral, killing the Arab, his trail. Darkness as well makes him uncomfortable.

-Killing somebody is not a crime. Mersault states death will happen regardless it doesn’t matter if it is know or later. Society sees it as a crime, he only felt like killing someone at the moment “the sun was to bright”.

-Both Mersault and his mother suffer from bed side conversion because there is no true existentialist. As animals fighting for survival of the fittest we will fear death and evade it as much as possible.

-When Mersault is going to the guillotine, he just wants it to be over as soon as possible. His existentialism just crumbled, “the day you die you can see how much of an existentialist you are.”

-The trial at the end is a metaphor of society. Mersault for the first time feels judged, he believes everybody hates him. It shows that society will always judge you for your actions and points of view.