I'll say this very simply: If you are interested in existentialism, philosophy in general, or the theater of the absurd, read this book. If you are looking for a book with any plot or deeper meaning, look elsewhere. If you choose to read this, a word of warning: though it is a short book, it is the opposite of a page-turner. You can barely finish a page before you have to put the book down and think about something else. Also, it will most likely depress you.

this past week i've had the good fortune to work backstage at a production of "Waiting for Godot." During that time I heard and saw this play many many times, and I've had a lot of time to think about the characters. Truth be told, this is one of the most intricate, deep works of literature i've ever come into contact with. It has so much relevance, and so many valid interpetations.

The production that I was a part of was very good, and extremely well acted. This is definitely a play that needs to be seen, not read. There IS a lot of humor in the acting that is lost just reading stage directions.

I would now like to talk about the characters and symbols of this play. If you're not interested, you can stop here.

Some see it as a play about the inability of man to give meaning to his own life. Others see it as a poignant treatise on god's non-involvement with human affairs. As for myself? I found each of these views valid, but what intrigues me the most is the idea that Gogo and Didi are stuck in purgatory and are waiting for the end of the world. This is not far fetched, as Samuel Beckett was an Irish writer, and would have been very familiar with Catholic dogma. Also, the character of the "boy" uses symbols from the book of Revelations. He says that he takes care of the "goats" and that his brother takes care of the "sheep." These are symbols for the unsaved and saved souls, respectively. In this interpetation, Gogo and Didi are both unsaved.

There are symbols in the nicknames of the characters as well. There's alot to be said for the names "Gogo" (a command and concerned with the future) and "Didi" ('i did' backwards, a name of authority and commmandING, and concerned with the past). The relationship of Pozzo and Lucky parallels that of Gogo and Didi as well, but in exaggerated form. Pay close attention to this. It says a lot about their characters.

There are very specific reasons that the two main characters are eternally stuck. Didi's problem is that he's conceited and he's never satisfied. This can be seen in his very first statement, and in the treatment of his hat. In other words, there is nothing to be done b'c anything he can do is 'beneath' him. Gogo's vice is that he's too stuck on self-interest. He's always concerned with the pain in his legs, food, and ways to take advantage of a situation. For him, there's nothing to be done b'c he has no care for anything that does not immediately effect him.

Finally, I would like to mention that there ARE scenes where Gogo and Didi have memories that go very far back in their lives. They're usually muddled or ignored by the other character, though, so the memories become useless.

Existentialist playwright, Samuel Beckett, has a true knack for relevance. Captivating one of the most basic questions that has plagued man since the beginning of time, Beckett's tragicomedy, Waiting for Godot, epitomizes the reality which defines our existence. The simplistic play presents themes provoking deep insight. Does God exist? What are we doing here? What does it mean to be human? Comprised of two acts that essentially contain nothing, Beckett's minimalist drama has ironically been acclaimed as one of the greatest works of the twentieth century.

I personally recommend this as a must read.

This book was written in the 1950's and I suppose that these were different times because allot of the trial and error research Lilly does is disturbing. I have only read the first three chapters and i felt the need to talk about it on amazon. In his first experiments on the dolphins he is given five to test the brain patterns by directly simulating the brain. And instead of learning more about dolphins and carefully experimenting on anesthetic for the animail, he instead runs headlong into the operating room and kills two dolphins on the table before he realizes that somthing isnt working. He then is able to revive one after it has not breathed for 10 min and elects to put it back in the water half brain dead to "see if it was still able to swim" . It wasnt. So he then elects to scrach the whole experiment of studing the brain alive so he instead kills all five dolphins to get "good brain specimens". He then finishes the chapter talking about how its strange that dolphins have all the equipment to hurt man but never does even when provoked. Wow real good deductions Lilly. (sarcasim) So the only reason i gave it two stars is because the conclusions he finally (after needlessly killing) draws are well thought (even if his experiment are not) and the basic theisis is intriging.

The first serious look at the attempts by humans to communicate with dolphins. Lilly breaks new ground with his coverage of expirements to date.
Most work in this field has been only written up before in classified military projects. Reluctantly I had passed my copy on to a student majoring in marine biology.
This review is written from memory as I came here seeking to buy another copy. I liked it enough to buy it twice. My recommendation that you buy it once is happily tendered.