In Samuel Beckett’s play, “Waiting for Godot,” he portrays the greatest human despair: the kind of misery felt in a universe absent of meaning. His protagonists, Vladimir and Estragon, struggle for meaningful lives, but their journey leads to hopelessness, anguish, and frustration instead.

We are no different from them. People look for meaning at every corner of their lives. But in our endeavors, we cling onto hope and lose sight at what is in front of us. Amidst a world of nothingness, devoid of meaning and purpose, Beckett suggests it is best to acknowledge such a world than agonize over it like his characters do.

Since the beginning of time, we have questioned the meaning of life in every aspect of our daily routines; however, we find none because none exists.

Beckett clearly illustrates this point in “Waiting for Godot.” Through the course of the play, he demonstrates it is better to accept a nihilistic universe than wage war against it, as many of us do.

It’s set in the countryside—nothing but a willow tree stands in the middle of a barren field. The events and actions undertaken by Vladimir and Estragon here are trivial and pointless, but Beckett deliberately conveys these futile events to illustrate a nihilistic atmosphere. He depicts the useless behavior that the protagonists commit in a desolate field as a symbol and metaphor for our nihilistic world.

Vladimir himself declares, “All will vanish…in the midst of nothingness!” “Nothingness” implies meaninglessness and purposelessness—a world with no substance. They gradually recognize these circumstances, when Estragon states, “Nothing happens. Nobody comes, nobody goes. It’s awful” (Act 1, 35). As a result, both attempt to find meaning and purpose to counter the nihilism.

In our world, people devote their time to certain goals, like a career, social status, or even the acquisition of wealth and materialistic goods. For Vladimir and Estragon, they believe it is their purpose and meaning to obtain their goals, but the universe provides none of such. Of course, it is human nature to aim for success and happiness, but once people attach meaning to wealth or a certain career, for instance, their life revolves around it, their life becomes a journey headed to one destination.

This leads to only living in the future, forgetting the present moment and forever clinging to something which may never happen or be as meaningful as hoped. This mental trip leads to despair, consequently.

For example, Vladimir and Estragon’s goal is Godot. Through the entire play, the two wait for him, unaware of who he is or why they’re there, but both hope to see him nevertheless. By the second act, it is clear that Godot may not even exist, yet Beckett suggests this does not matter to them because “waiting for Godot” is their purpose and meaning in life. He provides meaning to their existence. Godot is, in fact, a “destination” that Vladimir and Estragon pursue.

However, this journey is painful. The two carry out insignificant acts, like looking into hats and fumbling with boots, to pass time until Godot appears. This only leads to anguish. At one point, Vladimir wonders, “Will night never come?” (Act 1, 29). Clearly, they struggle to get by each day, and every time Godot fails to appear, their hopes melt into despair. This repetitive journey towards a pointless and likely nonexistent destination devours them.

Of course, we are no different from Vladimir and Estragon. Our journey has only but one destination: dreams. Whether it is wealth, power, or a career, on our way to meet these dreams, we pass time with useless consumerism and pointless materialistic goods, hoping the present moment will vanish so we are one step closer to our dreams.

This way, the present becomes irrelevant to our lives. Hence, everything is bet on one future destination.

Like our journey, Vladimir and Estragon’s “wait” is a battle against nihilism. They refuse to accept the meaningless world; instead, Godot becomes their meaning. Even if this is a mere illusion designed to defend oneself from the harsh truth of nihilism, it does not matter to Vladimir nor Estragon. Consequently, these characters live in delusion.

People have sought for a reason to live, pursued meaning and purpose where only the “absurd” awaits. We all possibly have a “Godot.” But, in our struggle to find value, we become desperate and frustrated along the way. Until finally we come to realize there was never a “Godot” in the first place. Or perhaps our dream fails, is tortuous, and difficult to handle; it may not meet our expectations. Thus, our entire life pursuing this one destination is a waste. Beckett advises to accept the meaningless existence of humanity, so your soul finds inner peace.

He demonstrates this point through his other character, Lucky. Though he appears to be the most unhappy person in the play, he suffers less because he accepts the meaningless existence that the world destined. Lucky is a slave to Pozzo, his master, but unlike Vladimir and Estragon, he is never frustrated nor despaired.

While they depend on Godot to improve their lives, Lucky does not seek a better life. When Pozzo wishes to abandon him, “Lucky weeps” (Act 1, 25). This suggests Lucky does not strive for another life. He accepts his status and the meaninglessness and purposelessness that comes along with it. He is not in pursuit of hope, a.k.a “Godot,” and is therefore at peace with himself. He has, in truth, accepted nihilism.

Beckett goes so far to suggest Lucky has more control over his life than Vladimir and Estragon. Of course, this is counter-intuitive. Afterall, slaves do not possess control. In fact, throughout the play, Pozzo screams, “Up pig!…Up hog!…Back!” (Act 1, 18). These are a few of the countless demands he yells at Lucky.

Yet, the greatest irony is that he carries more freedom, as Vladimir and Estragon are the ones “tied to Godot” like slaves (Act 1, 15).

They allow a distant—and perhaps non-existent—force rule their lives, as the two wait for him and rely on him. Consequently, Godot—real or not—determines their fate. While Lucky is a slave, he accepts these conditions and his fate is controlled by him alone, not a dreamlike force. At any point, he is able to leave Pozzo but remains instead; rather, Lucky is in power. With this in mind, Lucky lives in the present as the other two strive for a future, unaware that Godot is the very cause of their struggle, frustration, and near suicide.  

Though the story of Vladimir and Estragon is written in 1953, the issue of the “absurd” prevails. It is a conflict between individuals, their desperate plea for meaning in life, and a universe which provides none of such. The existential crisis only offers one solution: to acknowledge the meaningless existence rather than conceive meaning in an illusory force. Though Vladimir and Estragon’s wait for Godot became a purpose, frustration and despair still dominate their lives.

A philosopher by the name of Albert Camus describes a fate similar to theirs. The Myth of Sisyphus tells the story of an evil king who defies the gods and is punished in his afterlife. He is sentenced to roll a boulder up a colossal mountain, only to see it roll back down. Again, he rolls it up, and again, it descends. His task has neither an end nor a point to it; instead, his life is meaningless.

But, as Camus explains, Sisyphus finds happiness regardless; he accepts his place in life and he does not stain his thoughts with false hope or a better life, one with purpose and meaning. The king’s acknowledgment allows him to realize the “absurdity” of his situation and remain at peace.

Similarly, Lucky acknowledges this nihilistic aura, devoid of false hope and illusion. Perhaps he is truly “lucky.”