1
Key Words: Beckett, Language, Postmodernism, Identity, Communication
Abstract
The value of language on the physical stage results in many complex consequences. In
making a literal reality from an immaterial concept, the performance of any form enacts a
paradox of identity; the character at once exists in situ and yet remains a spectrum, a
projection through a secondary body. The dramatist’s use of language in creating this subcorporeal being is, therefore, crucial. Samuel Beckett is one of the most influential
playwrights of the modern and postmodern period, and his mastery of language reveals the
very paradox of language as a vehicle of communication. Focusing on two of Beckett’s plays,
Waiting for Godot and Not I, this essay demonstrates the arbitrary nature of language, and
thus of identity through language. Our reliance on this form is made explicit, and by
deconstructing the structure of the plays, the argument is made that our notion of self-identity
is, in fact, inconsequential. I begin by exploring how Beckett’s plays reveal the mechanics of
language and how these mechanisms operate to create a fictitious but naturalised reality
through which the subject ascribes identity to his context and, subsequently, himself. The
essay then proceeds to examine the ensuing uncertainly which is created in the absence of
language and thereby evidences the origins of the anxieties of identity. The displaced origins
of language are exposed, through the charting of the progression of the modernist subject in
Beckett’s work, consequently reconfiguring language as a means of communication. I
explore the consequences of the presence and absence of the physical body, and also examine
the influence of the theological metanarrative on this creation of subject. The essay concludes
by exposing language as a parasitic form, and calls for a re-assessment of the standardised
and accepted notions of categorization.
The Consequence of Language: The Implications of Beckett’s Deconstruction and
Reconfiguration of Language and Identity on the Postmodern Tradition.
The negotiation of language in the postmodern tradition continues to attract
significant academic attention. In examining two plays by Samuel Beckett, Waiting for Godot
and Not I, I intend to demonstrate the progression of the modernist subject in Beckett’s works
and its subsequent effect on the Postmodern dialogue. Language in postmodern drama
functions not as an infallible mode of communication but rather as an arbitrary system
without origin which, in its current state, cannot sufficiently negotiate the realities of the
human condition. Beckett’s dramaturgy deconstructs and reconfigures language and identity
which, in so doing, denies the possibility of categorising his works beyond superficial points
of reference. Thus Beckett as a modernist, high-modernist or postmodernist is one and the
same identity, that is to say a ‘non-identity’, which transcends classification, boundaries and
language itself.
2
The obscene revelation of the mechanisms involved in the creation of meaning and
reality through deliberately instituted social apparatuses is a frequently reoccurring motif in
Beckett’s dramatic works.
Upon the physical stage Beckett materialises language thereby
revealing the subordination of his characters, and his audience, to it. In his essay, Ideology
and the Ideological State Apparatuses, Louis Althusser recognises this subjection of identity
to language, and thus ideology. He states ‘it is not to their real conditions of existence , their
real world, that “men” represent themselves’ to in ideology, but above all it is their relation to
those conditions of existence which is represented to them there.’1 Slavoj Žižek extends this
further suggesting that reality is ‘an experience… made meaningful through language.
Reality in itself, in its stupid existence, is never intolerable: it is language, it symbolisation,
which makes it so.’2 The dialogue of Vladimir and Estragon reflects this. It is only when the
characters recognise their situation through the application of language it is made into a
reality, be it only momentary. Accordingly, when each Vladimir and Estragon state ‘we are
happy’3 they are creating a condition of existence.
An extension of this argument further reveals language as a power not only to create
reality but as the single means of creating materiality. Referring once again to Althusser, his
theory of ‘interpellation’4 infers that to name an object is to call it into being; it is from this
name it is afforded value and, therefore, recognition of being ‘that which it is’ in comparison
to ‘that which it is not.’ In applying this to Waiting for Godot it becomes apparent that the
physicality of Godot is irrelevant, just as the actual type of tree upon the stage is irrelevant.
Godot ‘is’ because Vladimir and Estragon called him as such, the tree is ‘a willow’5 because
it is declared as such. He is a concept made material through the application of language.
1
Louis Althusser, ‘Ideology and the Ideological State Apparatuses’ in Performance Analysis: An Introductory
Coursebook ed. Colin Counsell and Laurie Wolf, (London: Routledge, 2001) p37.
2
Slavoj Žižek, Violence: Six Sideways Reflections,(London: Profile Books, 2008) p55.
3
Samuel Beckett, ‘Waiting for Godot’ in Samuel Beckett: The Complete Dramatic Works, (London: Faber and
Faber, 2006) p56
4
Althusser, ‘Ideology and the Ideological State Apparatuses’, p39.
5
Beckett, ‘Waiting for Godot’, p15.
3
Martin Esslin notes that ‘in Waiting for Godot, the feeling of uncertainty it produces, the ebb
and flow of this uncertainty- from the hope of discovering the identity of Godot to its
repeated disappointment- are themselves the essence of the play.’ 6 The uncertainty to which
Esslin refers is the uncertainty of identity. In questioning Godot’s identity the audience is
questioning the construction of identity itself thereby exposing the nature of composition of
their self-identity, often resulting in a state of anxiety which permeates the play. Beckett is, in
effect, exposing language through language itself. He has created a character who exists in
reality, yet only exists because language has declared this existence and, in addition, the
conditions of this reality. Beckett suggests that the highest goal of a writer is ‘to bore one
hole after another in it [language], until what lurks behind it- be it something or nothingbegins to seep through.’7 The physical ‘nothingness’ of Godot, therefore, deconstructs the
authority of language, revealing it instead as a system designed to conceal the void which lies
beneath the superficiality of identity. Indeed, the void in itself has become an object which
we can recognise only because of its classification as such. Beckett reveals the power of
language to obscure what is ‘actual’ and, in so doing, questions the construction of reality and
the real.
Following the succession of Beckett’s plays, it is possible to see a progression of
form and attitude towards a practice which questions the authority of language. Not I, written
twenty years after Waiting for Godot was first published, documents a distinct alteration in
the style of Beckett’s dramaturgy. In this streaming narrative Beckett extends the modernist
subject to new, and disconcerting, frames which have been established from his previous
works. Thus, Not I draws upon a fearfully omnipotent language system identified in earlier
plays. Having deconstructed this system Beckett begins to question the authority of its
6
Martin Esslin, The Theatre of the Absurd: Revised and Enlarged Edition, (Hamondsworth: Penguin Books,
1980) p45.
7
Samuel Beckett, cited in Enoch Brater, ‘Beckett’s “Beckett”: So Many Words for Silence’ in Reflections on
Beckett: A Centenary Celebration ed. Anna McMullan and S.E Wilmer, (Ann Arbor: The University of
Michigan Press, 2009) p192.
4
source. Walter Benjamin, in The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction, writes
‘the presence of the original is the perquisite to the concept of authenticity.’8Beckett seeks to
reveal language as a structure without origin and therefore without authenticity. This is
consolidated by Ferdinand de Saussure’s theory of the sign, signifier and signified. Saussure
argues that the signifier is ‘unmotivated, i.e arbitrary in that it actually has no natural
connection with the sign.’9 This reveals the language system as an arbitrary yet paradoxically
mathematical construction which allows for an exponential expansion of meaning. The origin
of language is, therefore, founded upon an equation, where X signifies one signifier and Y
another, whose product, Z, can be to an infinite value: X + Y = Z∞. This equation evidences
the empty value of language, for if language means ‘everything’, as it has no fixed point of
reference, then it must also mean nothing. John Spluring suggests Beckett’s plays ‘continue
to inhabit and tease the mind with the persistence of objects whose original purpose has been
forgotten or become obsolete and whose presence existence is there strictly meaningless.’10
This assertion could equally be applied to the object of language as to another physical
concept to which Spurling may be referring. In fact, language has become so obsolete, in
Beckett’s plays, that Lois Gordon recognises that is no longer an ‘effective means for the
communication and discernment of meaning.’11
In Not I Beckett reconfigures the nature of language as a vehicle of communication.
While still using the physical form to communicate he simultaneously reveals the futility of
using language to convey. The narrative in Not I is based upon a question of self-identity, yet
Beckett has denied the physical identity to the audience through his staging of the piece. This
staging, combined with the constant overflow of words, becomes overwhelming and renders
8
Walter Benjamin, ‘The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction’ in Illuminations trans. Harry
Zohn, ed. Hannah Arendt, (New York: Schockeen, 1968) p220.
9
Ferdinand de Saussure, from ‘Course in General Linguistics’ in Performance Analysis: An Introductory
Coursebook ed. Colin Counsell and Laurie Wolf, (London: Routledge, 2001) p5.
10
John Spurling, ‘Into Action’ in Beckett: A Study of his Plays ed. John Fletcher and John Spurling, (New York:
Hill and Wang, 1972), p116
11
Lois Gordon, Reading Godot, (New Haven and London: Yale university Press, 2002) p56.
5
the actual meanings of the words incomprehensible. The audience is transfixed not by the
‘story’ but by the discomfort of the audio visual spectacle. In addition, the violent force of the
language, such as in ‘the whole brain begging…[…]…begging for the mouth to
stop…[…]…trying to make sense of it…or make it stop’12 combined with the direct
reference to the urge to ‘start pouring it out’13 into the nearest lavatory causes the language to
self-connote a form of excretion and desired expulsion from the body. Beckett is, in effect,
levelling the value of language with that of a waste product and, in doing so, is denying its
authority as an overarching apparatus. In denying visible identity of Mouth, Beckett is
forcing the audience to construct an identity for her. Much like that of Godot, language is
used to create this identity; Mouth is what she says she is. Yet here, Beckett is simultaneously
critiquing language as worthless therefore suggesting that identity created through language,
which is all identity, is, by extension, worthless. Thus, Beckett manifests upon the stage the
essential modernist ethic: what is truth?
The deference in form apparent in Not I further draws away from the traditional
modernist stance through its approach and consideration of the theological metanarrative. In
order to appreciate this change it is imperative to first examine Beckett’s approach to this in
Waiting for Godot. The theological resonances within Waiting for Godot have been
scrutinised extensively, although it not my aim to argue the justification of such claims but
rather to explore Beckett’s relationship with the overarching, and commonly recognised,
social narrative. The implication of religion as a structure of language is clearly evident in
this play. The biblical creed ‘and so the word became flesh’ has, it could be argued, more
than a coincidental relationship to the structure of Waiting for Godot. The idea of a belief
based upon an object in absence which is instead created through the verbalisation of
language invites clear connotations virtually identical to those created through the
12
Samuel Beckett, ‘Not I’ in Samuel Beckett: The Complete Dramatic Works, (London: Faber and Faber, 2006)
p381
13
Ibid, p382
6
‘establishment of being’ of Godot. Yet Beckett’s work neither subscribes to this narrative nor
condemns it. The multiple theological references within Waiting for Godot rather
acknowledge the presence of the metanarrative and its almost invisible influence on society.
Beckett’s approach to this metanarrative in Not I, however, is quite different. The
laughter which accompanies the reference to ‘a merciful…[…]…God’14 demonstrates that in
ridiculing the authority of language through Mouth’s narrative of excretion Beckett is also
ridiculing the accepted omnipotent power of a religion founded upon language. It follows
that, if language has no authority then, consequently, a religion such as this must too be
devoid of authenticity and authority. Indeed, Beckett extends this further in examining ‘that
notion of punishment’15, a result of the recognition of sin which, through its verbal definition
as such, becomes more than a concept but a material action. This approach to the theological
discourse is, arguably, much more postmodern in character than that of Waiting for Godot. In
fact, Jean-François Lyotard defines postmodernism as ‘incredulity towards metanarratives.’16
He goes further suggesting ‘the narrative function is losing it functors…we do not necessarily
establish stable language combinations, and the properties of the ones we do establish are not
necessarily communicable.’17Beckett has developed his writing to a point beyond
acknowledgment towards deconstruction and ridicule which stems from an exhaustion of the
illogical social acceptance of such a narrative.
Beckett’s drama does not rely solely on language as a system of communication; in
fact several of his plays discard it altogether. Yet in the absence of language another system
of communication must be set up, whether that is through gesture, stage scenery or audio
techniques, which in turn must follow certain semantic rules. Roland Barthes notes that ‘the
paradox is that, the raw material [language] becoming in a sense its own end…a tautological
14
Ibid, p377.
Ibid, p377.
16
Jean-François Lyotard, The Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge trans. Geoff Bennington and
Brian Massumi, (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2004) pxxiv.
17
Ibid, pxxiv.
15
7
activity.’18 Language serves only to produce more language, yet this reproduction does not
offer new meaning. Language is an exhausted commodity and so must participate in a
cyclical process of self-reproduction, engaging in a parasitic activity of expelling old, ‘dead’
signifiers and engulfing new ones. This, according to Frederic Jameson, is the essence of
postmodernism which he identifies as ‘the consumption of sheer commodification as a
process.’19
Beckett’s exposé of language forms much of the foundation of the postmodern
language dialogue. The deconstruction of language, and as a consequence identity, is a more
recognisably modernist function. Beckett, however, stretches this function to inhabit a space
somewhere between the modern and the postmodern, a space which could be defined as the
sur-modernist, or more commonly high-modernist, in which identity is not only shattered but
made completely redundant. Yet, to attempt to ‘identify’ Beckett’s work is, in itself, a task of
recognition through language and, so, a futile task. The postmodern is the exhaustion of the
modern. It is what is left after the destruction from which new modes of recognition and logic
must be composed. Beckett’s work extends beyond the modern because it does not simply
discard this debris, as in the modern tradition, yet nor does it consume it, as in that of the
postmodern. Instead, Beckett offers a type of liberation by simply acknowledging the
presence of language and its (dis)function in society. Thus, Beckett’s work is both a reference
for and a critique of the disparity of the modern and the commodification of the postmodern.
It is a consequence of language, and a rebellion of the ‘identified’.
18
Roland Barthes, ‘Authors and Writers’ in A Barthes Reader ed. Susan Sontang, (New York: Hill and Wang,
1982)p186-187.
19
Frederic Jameson, Postmodernism, or The Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism, (London and New York: Verso,
1991) pX.
8
Bibliography
Althusser, Louis. ‘Ideology and the Ideological State Apparatuses’ in Performance Analysis:
An Introductory Coursebook ed. Colin Counsell and Laurie Wolf. London: Routledge, 2001.
Barthes, Roland. ‘Authors and Writers’ in A Barthes Reader ed. Susan Sontang. New York:
Hill and Wang, 1982.
Brater, Enoch. ‘Beckett’s “Beckett”: So Many Words for Silence’ in Reflections on Beckett:
A Centenary Celebration ed. Anna McMullan and S.E Wilmer. Ann Arbor: The University of
Michigan Press, 2009.
Beckett, Samuel. ‘Waiting for Godot’ in Samuel Beckett: The Complete Dramatic Works.
London: Faber and Faber, 2006.
Beckett, Samuel. ‘Not I’ in Samuel Beckett: The Complete Dramatic Works. London: Faber
and Faber, 2006.
Benjamin, Walter. ‘The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction’ in
Illuminations trans. Harry Zohn, ed. Hannah Arendt. New York: Schockeen, 1968.
Esslin, Martin. The Theatre of the Absurd: Revised and Enlarged Edition. Hamondsworth:
Penguin Books, 1980.
Gordon, Lois. Reading Godot. New Haven and London: Yale university Press, 2002.
Jameson, Frederic. Postmodernism, or The Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism. London and
New York: Verso, 1991.
Lyotard, Jean-François. The Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge trans. Geoff
Bennington and Brian Massumi. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2004.
Saussure, Ferdinand de. From ‘Course in General Linguistics’ in Performance Analysis: An
Introductory Coursebook ed. Colin Counsell and Laurie Wolf. London: Routledge, 2001.
Spurling, John. ‘Into Action’ in Beckett: A Study of his Plays ed. John Fletcher and John
Spurling. New York: Hill and Wang, 1972.
Žižek, Slavoj. Violence: Six Sideways Reflections. London: Profile Books, 2008.