Assignment Paper 107
This blog is part of assignment of Paper 107: The Twentieth Century Literature: From World [AB1] War II to the End of the Century.
Table of Contents
Introduction
Sartre’s Existentialism – Freedom and Responsibility
Existentialism in Waiting for Godot – The Absurd and Inaction
Comparative Analysis – Sartre vs. Beckett
Key Dialogues and Their Existential Significance
Historical and Philosophical Context
Relevance of Existentialism in the Modern World
Conclusion
References
■ Personal Information:
● Name : Nishtha Desai
● Batch: M.A Semester 2 ( 2024-26)
● Enrollment number:5108240024
● E- mail Address: nishthadesai355@gmail.com
Roll number: 19
■ Assignment Details:
Topic: Paper& Subject code: Paper 107: Existence, Meaning, and the Absurd: Sartrean and Beckettian Perspectives on Existentialism
Submitted to: SMT. Department of English, Bhavnagar
Date of Submission: 17 April , 2025
This paper explores existentialist philosophy through Jean-Paul Sartre’s Existentialism Is a Humanism and Samuel Beckett’s Waiting for Godot. Sartre’s philosophy emphasizes radical freedom, responsibility, and the need for individuals to create meaning through actions. In contrast, Beckett’s play presents existential themes through absurdity, stagnation, and the failure to act. This study compares both perspectives, analyzing how Sartre’s call for agency contrasts with Beckett’s portrayal of passive existence. Through key dialogues and philosophical insights, this paper highlights the ongoing debate between existentialism and the absurd.
Keywords: Existentialism, absurdism, freedom, responsibility, waiting, meaning, Sartre, Beckett, inaction, purpose, human condition, choice, despair.
Introduction:
Existentialism, as a philosophical framework, challenges individuals to confront the profound questions surrounding existence and purpose in a seemingly absurd world. Jean-Paul Sartre, a philosopher and intellectual, and Samuel Beckett, an avant-garde playwright, present distinctive yet complementary viewpoints on these existential dilemmas. While Sartre emphasizes human freedom and the necessity to create meaning through choice and action, Beckett underscores the absurdity and futility of seeking purpose in a fragmented and chaotic reality. By examining Sartrean philosophy and Beckettian dramaturgy, this study seeks to explore how their perspectives illuminate the human condition and reflect the struggle to reconcile existence with the absurd.
1.Sartre’s Existentialism – Freedom and Responsibility:
Sartre’s existentialist philosophy is grounded in the idea that human beings define their own purpose through actions. Central to his argument is the notion that existence precedes essence, meaning that humans are not born with an inherent purpose but must shape their own identity through personal choices. This idea places the burden of freedom upon the individual, as there is no external authority—such as God or predetermined fate—to dictate human purpose.
However, this radical freedom comes with the weight of responsibility. Since each person is accountable for their actions, Sartre argues that individuals experience anguish, recognizing that their choices influence not only their own fate but also set an example for humanity. He also discusses abandonment, referring to the absence of divine guidance, and despair, which arises when humans realize that they can only control their own choices, not external events. Sartre’s philosophy insists on proactive engagement with life, asserting that inaction is itself a choice, and thus, an individual’s failure to define meaning is an act of self-betrayal.
2.Existentialism in Waiting for Godot – The Absurd and Inaction In contrast to Sartre’s advocacy for engagement, Beckett’s Waiting for Godot presents a world where meaning seems unattainable. The play follows Vladimir and Estragon, two characters who wait endlessly for the mysterious Godot, who never arrives. This endless waiting serves as a metaphor for the human search for purpose, echoing Albert Camus’ concept of the absurd hero, where individuals continue to seek meaning despite its apparent impossibility.
Estragon and Vladimir’s conversations are filled with cyclical, repetitive dialogue, highlighting their lack of meaningful action. Unlike Sartre’s existentialism, where humans are encouraged to take responsibility for shaping their destiny, Beckett portrays characters trapped in uncertainty and inertia. Despite their awareness of time passing, they do nothing to change their circumstances. The contrast between inaction and action is a major existentialist concern in the play, demonstrating the futility of waiting for external validation instead of taking decisive steps toward self-definition.
Furthermore, Beckett’s depiction of time is significant in existential thought. Time appears fragmented and meaningless, reinforcing the idea that human existence is arbitrary. Estragon and Vladimir’s inability to remember past events blurs their sense of identity and continuity, suggesting that memory itself is unreliable. This existential confusion further emphasizes their stagnation.
3. Comparative Analysis – Sartre vs. Beckett:
Sartre and Beckett both explore existential themes but from opposing angles. Sartre promotes a philosophy of self-determination and proactive meaning-making, while Beckett exposes the absurdity of human existence, showing characters paralyzed by indecision. Sartre’s existentialism is optimistic in that it allows individuals to shape their reality through choices, whereas Beckett’s portrayal of Estragon and Vladimir suggests a more pessimistic view—one where humans remain stuck in meaningless repetition, unable to break free from existential doubt.
The play subtly critiques Sartre’s position, showing that despite recognizing their own freedom, people may still choose to remain stagnant. The inability of Estragon and Vladimir to leave, despite voicing their desire to do so, serves as a direct counterpoint to Sartre’s insistence that individuals must actively define their purpose. Beckett, therefore, presents an existential dilemma: even when freedom exists, does it necessarily lead to action? The play suggests that the fear of uncertainty, coupled with the absurdity of life, may keep individuals trapped in cycles of hesitation and passivity.
4.Key Dialogues and Their Existential Significance:
Waiting for Godot:
Vladimir: “Let’s wait and see what he says.”
Estragon: “Who?”
Vladimir: “Godot.”
Estragon: “Good idea.”
Analysis: This exchange shows Vladimir’s reliance on an external force (Godot) for answers, while Estragon questions the waiting itself. The dialogue highlights the human tendency to depend on external validation rather than creating meaning for oneself.
Waiting for Godot:
Estragon: “Charming spot.” (He turns, advances to front, halts, facing auditorium.) “Inspiring prospects.” (He turns to Vladimir.) “Let’s go.”
Vladimir: “We can’t.”
Estragon: “Why not?”
Vladimir: “We’re waiting for Godot.”
Estragon: (Despairingly) “Ah!”
Analysis: This passage highlights the tension between Sartre’s call to action and Beckett’s portrayal of passive existence. Estragon briefly entertains the idea of change, but Vladimir insists on waiting, reinforcing the theme of inaction.
6.Historical and Philosophical Context :
Existentialism emerged in response to the crises of the 20th century, particularly after World War II, when traditional structures of meaning were called into question. Sartre’s philosophy was shaped by the horrors of war and the need for personal responsibility, while Beckett’s absurdism reflected the chaotic and fragmented state of postwar reality. By analyzing these works in their historical context, one can see how existentialism became a response to the disillusionment of modern life.
7.Relevance of Existentialism in the Modern World Existentialist thought remains deeply relevant today, particularly in discussions about personal identity, purpose, and the overwhelming number of choices available to individuals. Many people experience a sense of alienation and anxiety similar to what Sartre and Beckett describe. The struggle between taking action and falling into passive routines is an ongoing existential crisis that modern society continues to face.
Conclusion:
The contrast between Sartre’s existentialism and Beckett’s absurdism highlights the complexity of human meaning-making. Sartre encourages individuals to embrace their freedom and define their own purpose, whereas Beckett presents a vision of humanity in which people remain caught in cycles of waiting and indecision. The debate between action and inaction remains relevant today, questioning whether Sartre’s philosophy is truly attainable or if Beckett’s portrayal of human stagnation is a more accurate reflection of reality. In the end, the question remains: Is existentialist freedom enough, or does Beckett’s absurdism suggest that meaning itself may always be elusive?
References :
Bardati, Journey. "HE DOES NOTHING, SIR — Existentialism in Beckett’s Waiting for Godot." Medium, 27 Apr. 2024, https://medium.com/@journeybardati/he-does-nothing-sir-9ad345417762.
De, Shomik. “Existentialism and Samuel Beckett’s Waiting for Godot.” Journal of Emerging Technologies and Innovative Research, vol. 5, no. 7, July 2018, pp. 731–732. JETIR, www.jetir.org/papers/JETIR1807999.pdf
Meena, Mukesh Kumar. "Existentialism in Samuel Beckett’s Waiting for Godot: An Analysis." International Journal of Education, Modern Management, Applied Science & Social Science, vol. 4, no. 3(I), July-Sept. 2022, pp. 88-91.
Inspirajournals.com,https://www.inspirajournals.com/uploads/Issues/1627056933.pdf.
Sartre, Jean-Paul. Existentialism Is a Humanism. 1946. Marxists Internet Archive, www.marxists.org/reference/archive/sartre/works/exist/sartre.htm.
Thank you....
Words : 1374
Image : 1
Comments
Post a Comment