The phrase ‘Absurd Drama’ or ‘The Theatre of Absurd’ gained currency after Martin Esslin’s book ‘The

Theatre of Absurd’ was published in 1961. The Theatre of the Absurd emerged in the mid-20th century
as a revolutionary movement in drama, challenging traditional theatrical conventions and exploring the
absurdity of human existence. At its core, the Theatre of the Absurd reflects the disillusionment and
existential angst that pervaded the post-World War II era. Emerging in the wake of widespread
destruction and the loss of faith in traditional values and structures, absurdist playwrights sought to
capture the sense of absurdity and meaninglessness that defined the human condition in the modern
world. They rejected traditional narrative structures and embraced ambiguity, fragmentation, and non-
linearity in their plays, reflecting the chaotic and irrational nature of existence.

Man in the absurdist play is cut off from his religious and transcendental roots; man is lost and all his
actions become senseless, absurd and useless. To the two characters in Waiting for Godot, the meaning
of their lives is just endless waiting. They could not find what they are waiting for. Their life is
meaningless. They even could not find the essence of human existence. Though they live in the real
world, their lives are ridiculous. In the Theatre of the Absurd, playwrights express their true feelings to
this world by means of the protagonist whom they have depicted in their plays. A play, in fact, is a
mirror which reflects the real phenomena in the society. In the Theatre of the Absurd the playwrights
strive to express the senselessness of the human race and the inadequacy of the rational approach by
the open abandonment of rational devices and discursive thought.

Existentialism is a philosophical movement emphasizing individual freedom, responsibility, and the

search for meaning in a world devoid of inherent purpose or certainty. Vladimir and Estragon have the
freedom to leave and stop waiting for Godot, but they choose to stay. This highlights their existential
dilemma of making choices in the face of uncertainty and the lack of clear guidance. Existentialism often
rejects traditional religious and metaphysical explanations of existence in favour of a secular, human-
centred approach. In "Waiting for Godot," the characters' waiting for Godot can be interpreted as a
metaphor for humanity's search for meaning in a post-religious world. However, Beckett leaves Godot's
identity and significance deliberately ambiguous, suggesting that traditional religious or metaphysical
explanations are inadequate to address the existential dilemmas faced by modern humanity.

Godot is a mysterious, absent figure who never appears in the play. He can be seen as a symbol of the
search for meaning, purpose, or salvation that individuals often pursue in life. The characters'
anticipation of Godot's arrival represents the human tendency to seek external sources of meaning and
validation.

No definite conclusion or resolution can ever be offered to Waiting for Godot because the play is
essentially circular and repetitive in nature. A traditional play, in contrast, has an introduction of' the
characters and the exposition; then, there is a statement of the problem of the play in relationship to its
settings and characters. Furthermore, in a traditional play, the characters are developed, and gradually
we come to see the dramatist's world view; the play then rises to a climax, and there is a conclusion.
This type of development is called a linear development. In the plays of the Theatre of the Absurd, the
structure is often exactly the opposite. We have, instead, a circular structure, and most aspects of this
drama support this circular structure in one way or another.

The setting is the same, and the time is the same in both acts. Each act begins early in the morning, just
as the tramps are awakening, and both acts close with the moon having risen. The action takes place in
exactly the same landscape — a lonely, isolated road with one single tree. More important than the
repetition of setting and time, however, is the repetition of the actions.