Biggar 1
Matt Biggar
Professor Puchner
Seriously Funny: The Comic Voice
November 15, 2011
Opening Our Eyes to Wisdom
In William Shakespeare’s tragedy King Lear, Lear’s power blinds him from seeing the
truth, which leads to his sudden downfall. During the play, Lear’s most beloved subordinate,
Fool, offers wisdom that benefits and comforts Lear throughout his tragic journey. Shakespeare,
through his characterization of Fool, argues that someone removed from a position of power is
less likely to be corrupt. This allows Fool to see a clearer form of reality and speak the truth.
Similarly, in Waiting for Godot, Lucky takes the role of Fool. Lucky's master treats him much
worse than that of Fool, yet their voices are closer to the truth than any other characters in their
respective plays. Characters Vladimir and Estragon abuse speech as a way of passing the time.
For Lucky, however, speech is a rare occurrence, but when given the opportunity to talk, he
reflects the truth. The playwright Beckett suggests that the voice of the subordinate should be the
most trusted and respected voice in society. His use of language through Pozzo, his insight
through Lucky, and his subtle comparisons to King Lear all prove Beckett’s assertion.
Pozzo’s dehumanizing language towards Lucky allows Beckett to be effective in proving
Lucky’s insight’s utmost importance. Lucky and Pozzo are first introduced in Act 1. Pozzo has
Lucky by a rope tied around his neck. Immediately I get the impression that Lucky is a mule
plowing the pathway for Pozzo. Upon seeing Vladimir and Estragon, Pozzo suddenly yells,
“Back,” jerks the rope, and plummets Lucky into the ground. Vladimir and Estragon, up until
now the only narrating voices in the play, are taken aback by this showing of brutality: “Vladimir
Biggar 2
and Estragon turn towards him, half wishing half fearing to go to his assistance.” (Beckett 30)
Although it is clearly apparent that Lucky is a slave, the two friends show sympathy towards
Lucky’s cause. Beckett’s language allows this sympathy to occur. Vladimir just about walks over
to Lucky to examine or help him before Pozzo continues to dehumanize Lucky. Pozzo explains,
“Be careful! He’s wicked…With strangers.” (Beckett 30) Pozzo speaks of Lucky as if he is some
sort of untrained dog. If you get to close to him, he could lash out at any moment. Both Vladimir
and Estragon show more interest in Lucky upon first meeting the two men than Pozzo. After
some introductions, Pozzo continues to demand simple, one or two word orders to Lucky. The
names with which he addresses Lucky are appalling: “Up pig! Every time he drops he falls
asleep. Up hog! Stop! Turn!” (Beckett 32) Now Beckett has not only won the sympathy of Didi
and Gogo, but any viewer with any belief in human rights is now horrified. Pozzo does not have
the decency to refer to Lucky by his name; he would rather put him in his place by calling him
names of dirty barnyard animals. Beckett’s use of language is effective in grabbing the viewer’s
attention and gaining the sympathy of every onlooker, on or off the stage. For a while, there is no
dialogue, simply a long narration of Lucky fetching items for Pozzo, with Pozzo continuing to
belittle Lucky. Pozzo, during this narration, even addresses Didi and Gogo, yet the two friends
seem to be more interested in Lucky’s story. They converse,
Estragon: What ails him?
Vladimir: He looks tired.
Estragon: Why doesn’t he put down his bags?
Vladimir: How do I know? (They close in on him.) Careful!
Estragon: Say something to him.
Vladimir: Look!
Biggar 3
Estragon: What?
Vladimir: (pointing) His neck!
Estragon: (looking at the neck). I see nothing.
Vladimir: Here. Estragon goes over beside Vladimir.
Estragon: Oh I say!
Vladimir: A running sore! (Beckett 34-5)
Didi and Gogo react sympathetically to Pozzo’s inhumane treatment of Lucky. Didi and Gogo
are far more interested in Lucky, the subordinate, than Pozzo, the master. They want to discover
more about him and hear his side of the story. This interest in the subordinate stems from
Beckett’s unique ability to use harsh language to appeal to both the characters in the play and the
audience. I am truly interested at this point in the play as to why Lucky acts the way he does. I
want to know, out of sympathy, Lucky’s side of the story. How does he feel about Pozzo’s
treatment of him? How does he view the world in this powerless position? Beckett’s language
creates interest in Lucky, which in turn creates grand interest in anything that comes out of
Lucky’s mouth. Therefore, in the one scene that Lucky does indeed talk, his speech is deemed
even more valuable and worth listening to. Overall, Beckett’s brutal language choice in
describing Pozzo and Lucky’s relationship softens the viewer into sympathizing for and gaining
interest in hearing Lucky’s side of the story. That way, when Lucky does make his speech,
everyone is paying attention. This stylistic choice allows him to be effective in making the case
that the subordinate should be the most trusted and respected voice in society.
Lucky is the most insightful character in the play, because he uses speech more
effectively than any other character. Vladimir and Estragon use speech merely as a way of
passing the time. While waiting for Godot, Didi and Gogo discuss many different topics. They
Biggar 4
try contradicting each other, speaking French, discussing nature, when finally they have nothing
more to talk about. When moving from topic to topic, they belittle their dialogue as a “little
canter.” (Beckett 84) Neither character seems to advance their level of thinking throughout the
play. This is symbolized by their lack of movement. To end both Act 1 and Act 2, they agree on
going on, yet they do not back it up in action. Similarly, they wish to have meaningful
conversation, but neither of them discusses very serious topics. Beckett chooses for Lucky to be
the speaker of truth in the play as opposed to Vladimir or Estragon, because he wants the
argument to come from someone who has been knocked down by society. In turn, Beckett’s
minimalist arguments that favor the imperfect are stronger.
Furthermore, Pozzo represents an esteemed member of society in Act 1; therefore,
observing that Pozzo’s language is, in fact, meaningless, bolsters Beckett’s overarching claim
further. Didi and Gogo are antsy waiting for Godot when Pozzo is first introduced into the play.
At first, the two friends mistake him for Godot. They tell Pozzo that Godot is the man for whom
they are waiting. Pozzo then inquires as to why they would be waiting on his land. The fact that
Pozzo is a landowner proves he is of an upper echelon in society. He calls them disgraceful, as if
he thinks any decent man would be aware of the fact that it’s his land. Other classic examples of
loftiness include his pipe smoking, his lack of need to utilize the entire piece of chicken, and his
ownership of a slave. Also, Gogo, after watching Pozzo eat, asks, “Er…you’ve finished with
the…er…you don’t need the…er…bones, Sir?” (Beckett 36) Estragon is timid in his form of
addressing Pozzo as if he is worried about upsetting a man more powerful than him. It is clear
that Beckett characterizes Pozzo as the most distinguished character in the play, if not in society.
However, once we actually get to know the slave owner through his language, we realize
something about Pozzo: Although meaningful in rank, he does not convey meaning with words.
Biggar 5
Pozzo tries to seem academic, but his words are really just a bunch of rubbish. Estragon
tries to figure out why Lucky never puts down Pozzo’s bags. Pozzo says Lucky wants to
“mollify” him, or appease him, so Lucky can persuade his master not to sell him. Vladimir has to
ask, “You want to get rid of him,” six times before Pozzo gives a straight answer. (Beckett 42) In
between, Pozzo is hypothesizing different ways on why Lucky would hold the bags like he does,
while Vladimir is ready to advance the conversation. Vladimir fails to detect meaning in Pozzo’s
language. This is given away when he ignores Pozzo’s other statements and continues to ask if
he wants to get rid of him. The deepest insight Pozzo offers in this whole exchange before
becoming blind is when he explains how the light changes over the course of the day. He tries to
make his description sound dramatic, with sudden pauses, hand gestures, and hesitations, when
really all he is doing is explaining that the sun comes up in the morning and goes down at the end
of the day. Pozzo uses big words, “tirelessly torrents of red and white light it begins to lose its
effulgence…” (Beckett 50) Beckett argues that society’s higher members tend to use big words
to explain things, when really they mean nothing. He satirizes the upper class’s tendency to try to
confuse those who are less educated in explaining concepts. Through satire, Beckett expresses
his disapproval in Pozzo’s voice. The slave owner’s concepts are simple, and his language is the
same, in essence. Therefore, since Pozzo tries to convolute simple concepts, his speech should
not be respected or relied upon. Beckett shoots down Pozzo’s linguistic credibility to prove that
voices like Lucky’s should be the most trusted in society, not those that outwardly appear
promising due to their high social stature.
Lucky’s speech, unlike his master’s, is full of meaning, proving the subordinate needs to
be paid more attention. In the first part of Lucky’s speech, he claims that there is an absence of
God. Already, Lucky proves to be the most profound and insightful character. Lucky continues
Biggar 6
on to say that the consequences of this current decline in God’s presence are we are no longer the
center of the universe, so mankind is in decline. He ends by saying that man will continue to
deteriorate, so nothing can hide the fact that man is only a skull. This means that man, in the end,
will inevitably die, and all that will remain to prove it in nature’s history is his bones. Lucky’s
subordination has forced him to think a lot about death. Let’s face it; his life is hardly worth
living. He is reduced to an animal by his master, constantly having to fetch different items.
Vladimir and Estragon are clearly the play’s main characters. Beckett hopes that common men
like Didi and Gogo learn to listen to Lucky more often, so they can learn that life is not all about
waiting. Lucky preaches that since we will all inevitably return to the earth, it is more
worthwhile for man not to wait around. It is up for debate whether or not the two friends are
waiting for God, but Lucky’s wisdom applies to Didi and Gogo either way. Beckett offers hope
that the common man will listen to subordinates in Act 2. Vladimir is extremely confused; Pozzo
has returned blind, and the once competent Pozzo cannot even recall interacting with Didi. When
Pozzo and Lucky are about to leave, Vladimir makes a request: “Tell him to sing…Or to think.
Or to recite.” (Beckett 114) Vladimir shows interest in hearing Lucky’s thoughts. This is
incredibly important, because Lucky’s speech is far from clear and concise. However, Vladimir
is enthralled, and he wants to hear him again. Beckett confirms that more people in society
should do the same: Although they aren’t the most elegant speakers, subordinates should be
turned to in the most confusing moments for the closest depiction of reality.
Pozzo’s speech does gain some meaning, however, when he is blinded, because he is no
longer in a position of power. Vladimir questions Pozzo, wondering when Pozzo is blinded.
Pozzo reacts furiously, “Have you not done tormenting me with your accursed time! It’s
abominable! When! When! One day, is that enough for you, one day he went dumb, one day I
Biggar 7
went blind, one day we’ll go deaf, one day we were born, one day we shall die, the same day, the
same second, is that not enough for you? They give birth astride of a grave, the light gleams an
instant, then it’s night once more.” (Beckett 116) This is the same rhetoric offered in Lucky’s
speech. After the scientific revolution, man is just an infinitesimal, tiny blot amongst an everexpanding universe. Time is irrelevant, because a year is just a blink in the universe’s history.
Before, man used to get satisfaction and empowerment out of knowing that God created the earth
in the center of the universe for mankind. Now that Pozzo is reduced to a marginalized, blind
member of society, he realizes that one human life and death is irrelevant in the course of
history. Beckett blinds Pozzo so he can show that it takes some sort of marginalization in order
to understand the truth.
The similarities between Shakespeare’s Fool and Beckett’s Lucky correlate with
Beckett’s argument to trust and respect the voice of the subordinate. Lucky’s main argument is
that man is not as strong as he once thought he was; we are all tiny specs in an infinite universe
after all, and the only trace to be left is our skull and bones. Nature will always win, because, in
the end, we all die. Similarly, Fool tries to reveal the truth to his master, Lear. Just like Pozzo
does not realize the truth about time until he is blind and Lucky is dumb, Lear does not realize
the truth about human nature until he is mad and Fool is dead. Both Fool and Lucky spend years
loyal to their master offering them common sense. Each story offers evidence proving that if
only the master listened to their subject sooner, his good fate would have been preserved. But
both characters learn too late. Jane Knott comments on why the Fool is a voice to be heard: “He
is looking from the outside and does not follow any ideology. He rejects all appearances, of law,
justice, moral order. He sees brute force, cruelty and lust. He has no illusions and does not seek
consolation in the existence of natural or supernatural order, which provides for the punishment
Biggar 8
of evil and the reward of good.” Similarly, Lucky rejects the old Christian ideal that man is the
center of the universe. His subordination removes him from all hierarchical influences, and his
views remain pure and uncorrupted. He sits back and views mankind from a neutral perspective.
All these reasons support the fact that a subordinate should be the voice in society held in the
highest regard.
In conclusion, the name ‘Lucky’ has a double meaning. His position in society is not a
favorable one, yet it allows him to gain pure, truthful insight on mankind. Set up by Pozzo’s
brutal language, reinforced by Lucky’s insight in comparison to the other characters’, and
confirmed by his subtle comparisons to King Lear, Beckett asserts that society should turn to and
respect the subordinate as its most trustworthy voice. Therefore, the majority should look at
society’s least unfortunate not as pawns to take advantage of, but instead they should be viewed
as an untapped fountain of wisdom.
Biggar 9
Works Cited
Beckett, Samuel. Waiting for Godot. New York: Grove Press, 1954.
Knott, Jane. Shakespeare our Contemporary. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 1964.