Group items tagged

As a long time viewer of the work of Beckett, Hall brings a sense of credibility to the article due to his long standing relationship with all Beckett's productions. Of them, as he implies, Waiting for Godot was the most challenging of then to figure out. With only a blank stage, a tree, and two characters, so much of the production was left up to the opinions of the audience. In Hall's own opinion, this single play is what shaped the way modern theater is thought of, as something that does not ever need to confine to what may have been put forth by the greatest minds in theater. Hall, even being such an admirer for so long, was actually the only producer willing to put the work into the major theaters of the western society. For so long the production was only put forth in a small Paris theater, and Hall was the only man willing to put his own neck on the line to show the world what he sees in this unknown artists creation. What hits me the strangest is that Hall never thought the work would grow, that he never wanted to make it a global sensation, but merely wanted to expose audiences to what he saw in the metaphorical work. As stated "Waiting for Godot hasn't dated at all. It remains a poetic masterpiece transcending all barriers and nationalities". Which is exactly how the work should be considered in today's work of drama and English literature .

Argument: The moral characters of a young couple disintegrate as they wait to inherit a vast fortune. Claims: It is ironic how Anthony and Gloria only had to expect to get money to be corrupted by it. They are selfish and self-indulgent, both of which contributed to their attachment to greed, excess, and alcohol. Fitzgerald's disapproval of their actions is clearly evident throughout the book. Evidence: "As they move through their pointless round of pleasures, they demand wilder and stronger stimulation, but this only contributes to their downward spiral." "Quite a few of the pleasure-seeking, carefree antics of Anthony and Gloria-at least in the earlier sections of the novel-are based on escapades of Fitzgerald and his wife." "The third-person narrator veers between bemused appreciation of Anthony and Gloria as unapologetic hedonists and hardly veiled disapproval of their waste of talent and lives." http://search.ebscohost.com.lib.chandleraz.gov/login.aspx?direct=true&db=lfh&AN=MOL9830000741&site=lrc-live

In what is known as one of Beckett's most infamous works, it appears that what occurs on stage and even between the actors and audience is a game. In his review of the work, Atkinson boldly claims that it was "Impressive in the macabre intensity of the mood", making it a close contender with Beckett's "Waiting for Godot". While the argument of the article may not be relatively easy to pick up, upon closer inspection of the critique it may seem as if Atkinson has no opinion on the matter due to the highly interpretive and almost incomprehensible manner in which Beckett's works are put forth. Atkinson even states "Don't expect this column to give a coherent account of what--if anything-- happens. Almost nothing happens in the sense of action." So what exactly can be said about the work? Clearly Beckett has found a knack in creating a feeling of nothing, in "Endgame" as well as in "Waiting for Godot", the settings are never clearly described, and what little details are given out may in fact be seen in infinite number of ways. For example the author, Atkinson, has seen the other works of Beckett before reviewing his latest, this article being published the day after the debut in new york on Jan. 29, 1958, which would indeed give him a bias as to how he would experience the work. If someone were to review the play who had never seen anything of Beckett's before, it may be almost certain that most of what is said would be confusion, and misunderstanding about the purpose of the play. I feel that Atkinson, having had the experience, accurately portrays the works in his article/review. Beckett is a modern writer who plays out work in an old style. His two plays mentioned before are both considered comedies, but not in the laugh out loud sense, but the classical interpretation of what comedies where meant to be. Yet still creating an almost post- apocalyptic environment while maintaining an elevated psychological approach to the viewing experience.

Cody Villanueva Jensen AP LIT 24 January 2011 Literary Analysis #3 Yann Martel's novel Beatrice and Virgil, in comparison to his highly praised novel Life of Pi, did not merely meet the expectations of critics. According to MICHIKO KAKUTANI, a New York Times writer, this novel that follows the life of a donkey, monkey and a writer's detailed stories re-telling the Holocaust, is said to be "misconceived and offensive as his earlier book." Mimicking animalistic characters and simple text in Martel's previous novel, Beatrice and Virgil, is a simple metaphor using animals to portray Jewish extinction. Kakutani also points out that Martel's novels also includes a play that is closely resembled to that of "Beckett's "Waiting for Godot."" Not only does Kakutani perceive this as awkward, but do not appeal to the novels ending but making it a "disappointing and often perverse novel." But Kakutani gives little to support such reasoning, but clutters his argument with an overall summary that gives the reader a brief understanding of the novel. His overall purpose for such a criticism, or article one may say, is a list of brief downsides compared to Martel's past novel, possible noting that Martel Life of Pi is a single novel of achievement and that Martel is not a writer that continues eloquence throughout his series of novels. Even though it is hard to assume bias within Kakutani's criticism, it can be perceived that this novel brought no interest to Michoko. Therefore Kakutanis simply sits closely to a neutral position when describing his feelings toward the novel Beatrice and Virgil, simple stating small downsides and flaws the novel has compared to Yann Martel's other literary works.