VLADIMIR
Two thieves, crucified at the same time as our Saviour. One—
ESTRAGON
Our what?
VLADIMIR
Our Saviour. Two thieves. One is supposed to have been saved and the other . . . (he searches for the contrary of saved) . . . damned. (1.62-64)
Vladimir’s story of the two thieves reminds us of the frequent absence of choice in an uncertain world; neither thief chose to be damned or be saved, but were subject to arbitrary chance.
VLADIMIR
Well? What do we do?
ESTRAGON
Don't let's do anything. It's safer. (1.194-5)
Thematically, this is one of the most important lines in the play. What we were saying is, Vladimir and Estragon chalk up their inability to choose to act by claiming that doing nothing at all is safer. If you never act, you can never act wrongly, and if you never choose, you can never choose incorrectly. The problem is, as a very wise and famous person once said, we choose by not choosing. Doing nothing is as unsafe as doing something. Which is bad news for these guys.
VLADIMIR
A running sore!
ESTRAGON
It's the rope.
VLADIMIR
It's the rubbing.
ESTRAGON
It's inevitable.
[…]
ESTRAGON
Look at the slobber.
VLADIMIR
It's inevitable.
[…]
VLADIMIR
(looking closer) Looks like a goiter.
ESTRAGON
(ditto) It's not certain.
VLADIMIR
He's panting.
ESTRAGON
It's inevitable. (1.348-365)
The repetition of the line "it’s inevitable" is important here; both men resort to a notion of determinism to explain what is clearly just the result of Pozzo abusing Lucky. Check out the structural symmetry in your text; the line alternates from Estragon to Vladimir and back to Estragon again; it frames these thirteen lines of dialogue and splits them in half (there are six lines in the first half of the exchange and six in the second half). This is not unlike the symmetrical, macro structure of the play’s two acts.
VLADIMIR
Let us not waste our time in idle discourse! (Pause. Vehemently.) Let us do something, while we have the chance! It is not every day that we are needed. Not indeed that we personally are needed. (2.526)
Vladimir has resolved himself to action, yet still wastes time in the very "idle discourse" he intends to condemn. His choice (in this case, to act) is negated by the very process of making that choice.
VLADIMIR
We have to come back tomorrow.
ESTRAGON
What for?
VLADIMIR
To wait for Godot. (2.841-3)
Vladimir finds himself once again condemned to wait for Godot, but he fails to realize that – just moments before – he made a choice to set up another "appointment." Through his apparently routine conversations with the Boy, Vladimir in fact condemns himself to a lifetime of waiting for Godot.
VLADIMIR
We'll hang ourselves tomorrow. (Pause.) Unless Godot comes.
ESTRAGON
And if he comes?
VLADIMIR
We'll be saved. (2.877-9)
Vladimir removes himself from the responsibility of choice by hinging his fate on the action of another – Godot. This way, he isn’t responsible for choice. It’s a lot like flipping a coin to decide whether to major in English or Math (as if that’s a tough one).
(Estragon with a supreme effort succeeds in pulling off his boot. He peers inside it, feels about inside it, turns it upside down, shakes it, looks on the ground to see if anything has fallen out, finds nothing, feels inside it again, staring sightlessly before him.)
VLADIMIR
Well?
ESTRAGON
Nothing.
VLADIMIR
Show me.
ESTRAGON
There's nothing to show.
VLADIMIR
Try and put it on again. (1.34-8)
Estragon’s putzing about with his boot is a central iteration of absurdity in the play. It’s unclear what he’s looking for inside the boot and obviously irrational to think that anything will materialize if he puts it back on. On the other hand, we are also introduced to the sort of backwards logic of Waiting for Godot in this scene. Vladimir has a point: if Estragon puts his boot on, there will be something inside it.
VLADIMIR
I thought it was he.
ESTRAGON
Who?
VLADIMIR
Godot.
ESTRAGON
Pah! The wind in the reeds.
VLADIMIR
I could have sworn I heard shouts.
ESTRAGON
And why would he shout?
VLADIMIR
At his horse.
Silence.
ESTRAGON
(violently) I'm hungry!
VLADIMIR
Do you want a carrot? (1.245-53)
Notice how Vladimir and Estragon switch rapidly from serious subject matter (whether or not Godot has arrived) to absurdly inane details (that would be carrots). This is part of the play’s attempt at "tragicomedy," but also the reason why Vladimir and Estragon can’t take part in anything meaningful: they are too distracted by the petty habits of everyday life.
VLADIMIR
Do you want a carrot?
ESTRAGON
Is that all there is?
VLADIMIR
I might have some turnips.
ESTRAGON
Give me a carrot. (Vladimir rummages in his pockets, takes out a turnip and gives it to Estragon who takes a bite out of it. Angrily.) It's a turnip!
VLADIMIR
Oh pardon! I could have sworn it was a carrot. (1.253-7)
If we look at Waiting for Godot through our Magic Allegory Lens, this exchange becomes commentary on the way that most people lead their lives, concerned with the petty differences between turnips and carrots and missing the bigger picture.
VLADIMIR
You want to get rid of him?
POZZO
He wants to cod me, but he won't.
VLADIMIR
You want to get rid of him?
POZZO
He imagines that when I see how well he carries I'll be tempted to keep him on in that capacity.
ESTRAGON
You've had enough of him?
POZZO
In reality he carries like a pig. It's not his job.
VLADIMIR
You want to get rid of him?
POZZO
He imagines that when I see him indefatigable I'll regret my decision.
[…]
VLADIMIR
You want to get rid of him?
POZZO
Remark that I might just as well have been in his shoes and he in mine. If chance had not willed otherwise. To each one his due.
VLADIMIR
You waagerrim?
POZZO
I beg your pardon?
VLADIMIR
You want to get rid of him?
POZZO
I do. (1.437-450)
Vladimir asks his question five times without response. It’s not until he slurs his speech that he is able to communicate effectively with Pozzo—just another example of the backwards logic of Waiting for Godot.
VLADIMIR
Charming evening we're having.
ESTRAGON
Unforgettable.
VLADIMIR
And it's not over.
ESTRAGON
Apparently not.
VLADIMIR
It's only beginning.
ESTRAGON
It's awful.
VLADIMIR
Worse than the pantomime.
ESTRAGON
The circus.
VLADIMIR
The music-hall.
ESTRAGON
The circus. (1.486-495)
At first, Estragon’s habit of repeating the same line in an exchange seems absurd. But it makes an interesting point: neither of them was saying anything new anyway. Repeating "the circus" is no less useful than listing off another synonym for "cheap entertainment."
VLADIMIR
(to Pozzo) Tell him to think.
POZZO
Give him his hat.
VLADIMIR
His hat?
POZZO
He can't think without his hat. (1.621-4)
Actions are restricted by absurd rules in Waiting for Godot. The bowler hat itself is already a comic symbol, thanks to Charlie Chaplin, so the dependence of something so vital—thinking—on such a trivial object is doubly ridiculous.
VLADIMIR
(alarmed) Mr. Pozzo! Come back! We won't hurt you!
Silence.
ESTRAGON
We might try him with other names.
VLADIMIR
I'm afraid he's dying.
ESTRAGON
It'd be amusing.
VLADIMIR
What'd be amusing?
ESTRAGON
To try him with other names, one after the other. It'd pass the time. And we'd be bound to hit on the right one sooner or later.
VLADIMIR
I tell you his name is Pozzo.
ESTRAGON
We'll soon see. (He reflects.) Abel! Abel!
POZZO
Help!
ESTRAGON
Got it in one!
VLADIMIR
I begin to weary of this motif. (2.613-23)
Vladimir is very likely "weary" of the absurdity, but his comment itself is absurd because of its metafictional nature; he seems almost to step out of the play for a moment to observe it objectively—definitely not allowed in rational theater.
VLADIMIR
Pull on your trousers.
ESTRAGON
What?
VLADIMIR
Pull on your trousers.
ESTRAGON
You want me to pull off my trousers?
VLADIMIR
Pull ON your trousers.
ESTRAGON
(realizing his trousers are down) True.
He pulls up his trousers.
VLADIMIR
Well? Shall we go?
ESTRAGON
Yes, let's go.
They do not move. (2.881-88)
The absurd comedy of the trouser bit is matched with the absurd tragedy of Vladimir and Estragon’s inability (or unwillingness?) to move off the stage.
VLADIMIR
Our Saviour. Two thieves. One is supposed to have been saved and the other . . . (he searches for the contrary of saved) . . . damned. (1.64)
Much of the uncertainty in Waiting for Godot is the result of a world in which results are arbitrary. The motif of the 50/50 chance starts here, with the discussion of two thieves, one saved and the other damned for no discernible, discriminating reasons.
VLADIMIR
But all four were there. And only one speaks of a thief being saved. Why believe him rather than the others? (1.86)
Vladimir makes that point that even things that many consider to be true are subject to doubt. Beliefs are without rationale in the world of Waiting for Godot.
VLADIMIR
We're waiting for Godot.
ESTRAGON
(despairingly) Ah! (Pause.) You're sure it was here?
VLADIMIR
What?
ESTRAGON
That we were to wait.
VLADIMIR
He said by the tree. (They look at the tree.) Do you see any others?
[…]
ESTRAGON
Looks to me more like a bush.
VLADIMIR
A shrub.
ESTRAGON
A bush.
VLADIMIR
A—. What are you insinuating? That we've come to the wrong place? (1.94-109)
The torturous nature of this endless wait for Godot derives from the uncertainty surrounding the act. If Vladimir and Estragon can’t be certain as to the right location, the central action of their daily lives (the waiting) may be moot.
VLADIMIR
But you say we were here yesterday.
ESTRAGON
I may be mistaken. (Pause.) Let's stop talking for a minute, do you mind?
VLADIMIR
(feebly) All right. (1.143-5)
ESTRAGON
(with effort) Gogo light—bough not break—Gogo dead. Didi heavy—bough break—Didi alone. Whereas—
VLADIMIR
I hadn't thought of that.
ESTRAGON
If it hangs you it'll hang anything.
VLADIMIR
But am I heavier than you?
ESTRAGON
So you tell me. I don't know. There's an even chance. Or nearly. (1.188-92)
Vladimir and Estragon are barred from even this act—that of suicide—because of an uncertainty as to whether or not it will work. In the "Choices" theme we look at how these two men consistently make "decisions" to act, yet are then somehow barred from actually doing anything. It may be that uncertainty is the barrier between choice and action.
VLADIMIR
Well? What do we do?
ESTRAGON
Don't let's do anything. It's safer.
VLADIMIR
Let's wait and see what he says.
ESTRAGON
Who?
VLADIMIR
Godot.
ESTRAGON
Good idea. (1.193-8)
The men use Godot as their reassurance that objective truth is coming soon, or at least someone with the authority to tell them what to do. This should clear up their issues of uncertainty. Of course, this assumption is incredibly ironic since the men can’t be sure of Godot’s arrival (or existence, or name, or form, and so on).