Blog # 3

Blog #3 topic # 2 “Argue that you cannot do a close reading of Waiting for Godot”         

         Upon trying to do a close reading of less than twenty lines from “Waiting for Godot,” I came to the conclusion that it is not possible to complete this task. If reading this play had to be compared to something, I would compare it to watching a short clip from a cartoon slowed down to one-tenth speed.

         As the analogy in the introduction suggests, the story is presented at a very slow rate. Trying to target less than twenty lines of this play is a frustrating process as not much significant action is happening. For example, when Pozzo enters the play, over forty five lines are devoted to Vladimir and Estragon confusing Pozzo for Godot and then explaining to a confused Pozzo that they're waiting for someone named Godot; who they don't even know or have met before.  

         It is difficult to not acknowledge that certain meanings may be derived from the example described in the previous paragraph, however the story is trivial and only negligible amounts of analysis may be derived from the discourse. In this situation, it is difficult to dissect, attribute and support any conclusion reached from the targeted lines.

         The real meaning of this play is hidden better than a pirate’s treasure, and the author does not give readers any map, let alone any hints. If a few lines, or even a page of the story were to be deleted, would anyone notice that something is missing? Or if one were to add a few spontaneous lines, would anyone notice the difference? The author is so unpredictable and ambiguous that there is no room for readers to possibly guess the “deeper” picture the author is trying to paint. The results of one completing a close reading of words put together by random letters and one examining this story will yield a similar conclusion.

         Many may argue that there is no story without a meaning. However, in trying find a meaning, they find themselves trying to interrogate the story for a meaning similar to the way Billy Collins portrays readers “reading” in his poem “Introduction to poetry.” Collins writes “They [readers] begin beating it with a hose / to find out what it really means.” Readers need to let a story speak to them, and to discover how it makes them feel, instead of relying on unreliable “meanings” that they beat out of the poem simply because there has to be a meaning. Without beating this poem (and their heads) a reading of this story proves impossible for readers.

            Reading this story does not easily appeal to the Ethos, Pathos or Logos senses of readers. A true and honest reading is not possible for “Waiting for Godot.” Readers often find themselves “waiting for a meaning” to arrive similar in a way to Vladimir and Estragon waiting for Godot to arrive.