Absurdity In Samuel Beckett's Theatre Of The Absurd

1107 Words5 Pages

Martin Esslin, the critic responsible for coining the term “Theatre of the Absurd,” defines absurdity as “that which has no purpose, goal, or objective” (Esslin 4). The abandonment of purposiveness and meaning in the Theatre of the Absurd constitutes the purest expression of modernist theatre (considered by many the beginning of postmodern theatre); it defies all preconceptions of matter and form and even accomplishes the alienating effect which Brecht could never successfully achieve in his own highly rational theatre (Esslin 5). By presenting a “spectacle of nothing,” the Theatre of the Absurd confronts the audience with absolutely nothing: nothing to follow, connect, or predict. It is interesting to note, however, that, staring into this abyss, the audience is confronted not with void, but plentitude: as Beckett has famously said, “Nothing is more real than nothing.” …show more content…

Rather than a discrete world in which behaviors are judged according to traditional modes of intelligibility, Godot presents a kind of dialectic, shocking the audience by the conjunction (or disjunction) between the play and real life. In this sense, Waiting for Godot (and Absurd plays in general) accomplishes the inverse of The Well-Made Play; because, while the Well-Made Play presents an imbalance which must be resolved internally in the action, Godot creates an imbalance that is not resolved internally, but externalized in the

Open Document