i

Yarmouk University

Faculty of Arts

Department of Translation

The Translation of the Theatre of the Absurd

Language through Beckett’s

Waiting for Godot""

By :

Rania Oun Ibbini

2008300020

Thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for

the degree of Master of Arts in Translation.

Yarmouk University, Irbid, Jordan

Supervisor: Prof. Abdullah Shunnaq

© A

rabi

c D

igita

l Lib

rary

- Y

arm

ouk

Uni

vers

ity

© A

rabi

c D

igita

l Lib

rary

- Y

arm

ouk

Uni

vers

ity

ii

Dedication

To my Father's Soul

To those who always inspire and support

me

To my mother

To my brothers and sisters

© A

rabi

c D

igita

l Lib

rary

- Y

arm

ouk

Uni

vers

ity

iii

Acknowledgments

My great appreciation is due to Prof. Abdullah Shunnaq for his

supervision, guidance, and patience to create this work. I also

would like to thank the members of the examining committee for

their effort and time.

My sincere gratitude goes to my mother, father, brothers, and

sisters for their patience and support throughout all stages of

writing my thesis.

© A

rabi

c D

igita

l Lib

rary

- Y

arm

ouk

Uni

vers

ity

iv

Table of Content

Title Page

Dedication ………..……………..…………………….…………....…...ii

Acknowledgments ...…………….…………………….………………..iii

Table of Contents .…...…………..………………………………….…..iv

Abstract …….………….………..………………………………….......vii

Chapter One: Introduction & Review of Related Literature…….........1

1.1 Introduction …………………………………………………...……….1

1.1.1 Background……………………………..……………….................1

1.1.2 Waiting for Godot: General view……..…………..………............11

1.2 Review of Related Literature …………………………………..…..13

1.2.1 Studies on dramatic and literary translation…………..……….……13

1.2.2 Studies on culture………………..………………………..…….....16

1.2.3 Studies on Theatre of the Absurd and Absurdity…………….…..17

Chapter Two: Method…………………………….………..……………23

2.1 Statement of the problem………………….………………………....23

© A

rabi

c D

igita

l Lib

rary

- Y

arm

ouk

Uni

vers

ity

v

2.2 Purpose of the study …………….…………………….………..…..25

2.3 Significance of the study ………………..……………….…………25

2.4 Data collection ……………..………………………….……….…...26

2.5 Data analysis …………………….……………………..……….......26

Chapter Three: Discussion and Analysis ……….………………….....27

Chapter Four: Summary, Conclusions and Recommendations……...59

4.1 Summary ………………………………………………….……..…..59

4.2 Conclusions ……………………………………………….…….……60

4.3 Recommendations …………………………………………….....…..62

References………………………………………………………..……....63

Appendix ………………………………………………………..……….70

Abstract in Arabic………………………………………………..…......78

© A

rabi

c D

igita

l Lib

rary

- Y

arm

ouk

Uni

vers

ity

vii

Abstract

The Translation of the Theatre of the Absurd Language through

Beckett’s "Waiting for Godot"

This study aims to explore the translatability of the Absurd expression through Samuel Beckett's Waiting for Godot. Special attention will be paid when discussing the main problems that face translators during the translation process, which includes an evaluation of certain strategies used to translate Absurd expressions.

In order to achieve the research target, the researcher will discuss sixteen monologues in Waiting for Godot. This will shed the light on many problems that may face translators while rendering such monologues from English to Arabic.

Analyzing the previously mentioned cases, it was concluded that the translator opts to use different strategies in order to reflect the Absurd image, as close as one can achieve, from the ST on the target language audience.

It was found that translating such expressions requires a vast knowledge in the source and target cultures both in the western and eastern worlds. An adequate knowledge of the Absurd Theatre characteristics among the source and target cultures insures an acceptable and reliable rendering of the text pragmatic function, since any omissions or deletions in the translation of such expressions may produce a text which lacks the flavor of its original

Key Words: Translation, Dramatic Translation, Absurdity, Theatre of the

Absurd, Waiting for Godot, Samuel Beckett, Source Text (ST),

Target Text (TT).

© A

rabi

c D

igita

l Lib

rary

- Y

arm

ouk

Uni

vers

ity

1

CHAPTER ONEIntroduction & Review of Related Literature

1.1. Introduction

1.1.1. Background

In general, translation is “rendering the meaning of a text into

another language in the way that the author intended the text.”

(Newmark 1988, p.5)

However, the mission of a translator of a dramatic work is slightly

different from any other literary piece. A dramatic text is written in

order to be performed on stage. The translator of such a text has

therefore to bear in mind that the readers (i.e. the audience in this case)

shall not only follow the written form of the script but also and

primarily its spoken version.

Reading through different articles, for almost all the theorists of

translation, in order to investigate problems of translating Absurd

expressions from English into Arabic, the researcher finds that

translation is not an isolated discipline, and it has never been. It is

indeed an interdisciplinary field. Bassnet (1998: 26) points out that

translation studies is an interdisciplinary field. Exploring the possible

problems of translating Absurd expressions from English to Arabic

showed a heated debate since translation itself is viewed in a different

way by different scholars. Bassnet for example describe translation as

© A

rabi

c D

igita

l Lib

rary

- Y

arm

ouk

Uni

vers

ity

2

"a Chameleon Quality" since translation is "able to change its color and

shape, to translate itself into many different things"

Bakalla (1984) discusses Arabic literature over different periods.

He asserts that Arabic literature is one of the richest literatures in the

world. Its history goes back to more than fifteen hundred years and has

made substantial constitutions to other literatures through the world at

various periods in its history. In this respect, the task of translating

Arabic literature is hard due to the difficulty concerning reflecting the

same impact of the ST into the TT.

Catford (1965:1) defines translation as" an operation performed

in languages: a process of substituting a text in one language for a text

in another." Producing equivalence is the ultimate goal of the translator.

Dubois cited in Bell (1991:5) defines translation as:Translation is the expression in another (or target language) of what has been expressed in another, source language, preserving semantic and stylistic equivalence.

Bell also (ibid:6) defines translation as:Translation is the replacement of a representation of a text in one language by a representation of an equivalent text in a second language.

Newmark ( 1988:48) states:The orienting purpose of any translation should be to achieve 'equivalent effect' i.e., to produce the same effect (in one as close as possible) on the relationship of the translation as was obtained on the relationship of the original. (This is also called 'equivalent response' principle. Nida calls it dynamic equivalence.

© A

rabi

c D

igita

l Lib

rary

- Y

arm

ouk

Uni

vers

ity

3

Holman and Boase –Beier (1999:7-8) state that translators in the

sense of literal translation must have the following characteristics:

Translators first of all have to be informed, attentive readers, literary critics sensitive to the relation between the SL text and the linguistic cultural environment in which it was exposed. They will want to know what role SL audience expectations and understanding played in the original writer's concern to earn the approval of his or her readers.

Students of translation may face many problems during the process

of translation, but the most important one is literal translation which

results from the lack of understanding the text. According to Fargal and

Shunnaq (1999:16): "literal translation is probably the oldest type of

translation practice. It involves the conveyance of denotative meaning

of phrases and sentences in a text from one language to another.

Therefore, literal translation works where there is correspondence

between the two languages in terms of semantics and structures."

As for the language of Waiting for Godot, Esslin (1980) points that

Niklaus Gessner tabulated ten modes of disintegration of language

observable in Waiting for Godot. They are as follows: simple

misunderstandings; double-entendres; clichés; repetition of Synonyms;

inability to find the right words; telegraphic style (loss of grammatical

structure, communication by shouted commands); no punctuation marks

where language loses its function; loss of meaning of single words;

© A

rabi

c D

igita

l Lib

rary

- Y

arm

ouk

Uni

vers

ity

4

inability to remember what has been said; and monologues as signs of

inability of communication.

Catford (1965) asserts that the ST and the TT items rarely have

the same meaning linguistically, but they can function in the same

situation. In total translation, ST and TT texts or items are translation

equivalents if they are used interchangeability in a given context. This

means that translation equivalence can nearly be established at the

sentence level. The sentence is the most grammatical unit that is directly

related to speech-function within a situation.

Emery (2004: 144) writes about translation, equivalence and

Fidelity saying:

[T]hese three interlinked terms-translation, equivalence and fidelity- are conventionally used and 'understood' but translation theorists have been reluctant to grant them much - or even any thing- in the way of theoretical status. Utilising the insights of pragmatic theory, this paper aims to do precisely that demonstrating how each term can be clearly defined in an intrinsic (i.e. non-relative) fashion. The terms are interdependent but would seem that the cornerstone or the heart of the problem is the concept of translation.

Newmark (1981: 146) points out that when there are a number of

synonyms in the source language, then the translator should choose the

word that stylistically fits its context not the word that translates the ST

item.

Bell (1991: 6) makes the problem of equivalence clearly known by

saying:

© A

rabi

c D

igita

l Lib

rary

- Y

arm

ouk

Uni

vers

ity

5

Texts in different languages can be equivalent in different degrees (fully or partially equivalent), in respect of different levels of representation (equivalent in respect of content, of semantic, of grammar, of lexis, etc.) and at different ranks (word-for-word, phrase-for-phrase, sentence-for-sentence)

Fargal and Shunnaq (1999:2-5) define translation as a project for

transferring meaning from one language to another. Their definition

includes the key concept "equivalence" in the process of translating.

They add that no translator could think of translation without taking this

concept into account since the notion of equivalence relates to the

ordinary senses of the verb to translate. Hence, the term equivalence is a

key term in the process of translation and " non- equivalence" poses a

central problem for translators.

Different definitions have been provided of translation, Newmark

(1981:7) states that “Translation is a craft consisting in the attempt to

replace a written message and / or statement in one language by the

same message and / or statement in another language ".

Nida and Taber (1969) explain the process of translating as the one

that consists of reproducing in the receptor language the closest natural

equivalent of the source language message, first in terms of meaning

and secondly in terms of style.

Literary translation is one of the most difficult types of translation to

be translated. That is due to different types of literary texts such as

novels, plays, poems, novellas and short stories and each of which

© A

rabi

c D

igita

l Lib

rary

- Y

arm

ouk

Uni

vers

ity

6

requires a special knowledge to deal with in the process of translation.

Al - Safi (1994), among others, sees that, a literary work is dynamic

rather than static. Accordingly, a dynamic translation demands that the

translator should comply with the target linguistic system; the

translation should be appropriate, i.e. fit the context of the message; the

translation should be natural and free; the translation should be

acceptable to the target audience or literary readership, and it should

aspire to occupy a position in target literature as any other original

works of art.

To illustrate the difficulty of translating literary texts, Newmark

(1998:63) asserts that the translator may face a problem while dealing

with a literary text since the literary text has denotative and connotative

meanings different of the non-literary text. In this case he says:

Non-fiction ('informative texts') are concerned with reality and denotations, fiction with the imagination and connotations. Literary texts are ultimately allegorical and, more or less indirectly, a moral comment or criticism of life. Non-literary texts are concerned with facts, events and ideas without connotations. Literary texts are full of sound; non-literary texts are not.

The researcher, in this respect, turns to clarifying it in the translation

of some literary expressions especially those of the theatre of the

absurd. The theatre of absurd is a phrase invented by Esslin (1961) to

refer to the plays of such 1950’s characteristics as Eugene Ionesco,

Edward Albee, Jean Genet, Harold Pinter, and Sammuel Beckett.

© A

rabi

c D

igita

l Lib

rary

- Y

arm

ouk

Uni

vers

ity

7

Haj-Hussein (1997:100) citing Abbood (1978) points out that at the

beginning of the theatre of the absurd the West rejected and heavily

criticized the absurd theatre. The Arab world, as well, rejected both by

the intellectual and the common man alike. In the West, the theatre was

accepted as a new movement while it does not constitute a complete

movement in the Arab world.

Justifying that point of view, Abbood (1978) shows that the main

reason was that the Arab psyche is totally different from the western

one. Arab intellectuals claimed that the western individual was saturated

with rationalism, while the eastern ones, the Arab in particular, were

still in want of such rationalism.

The theatre of the Absurd is distinctive due to its language as it is

nonsense but naturalistic. This may create misunderstanding among

characters when characters resort to nonsensical language or clichés

function. This will make the process of translation more difficult, since

such kinds of texts requires more effort from translators to get and

reflect the idea of the ST as well as the impact on the TT audience.

Much of the dialogue in Absurdist drama, (especially in Beckett's

and Albee's plays, for example), reflects this kind of evasiveness and

inability to make a connection. When language is apparently

nonsensical, it also demonstrates this disconnection. It can be used for

comic effect, as in Lucky's long speech in Godot when Pozzo says

© A

rabi

c D

igita

l Lib

rary

- Y

arm

ouk

Uni

vers

ity

8

Lucky is demonstrating a talent for "thinking" as other characters

comically attempt to stop him.

To avoid the problems that may face the translator in the process of

translating some absurd expressions, the translator must be familiar with

different types of translation.

Translation types have been discussed by many scholars such as

Catford (1965), Fargal and Shunnaq (1999) and IIyas (1989), among

others.

a. Full vs. Partial translation

IIyas (1989:29) shows that in Full translation the translator should

replace every part of the ST in the TT without leaving any part of the

ST untranslated. While in partial translation the translator may resort to

translation and transference since some part or parts of the ST are left

untranslated for having no equivalents in the TT.

b. Total vs. Restricted translation

According to Catford (1965), total translation is the translation in

which all levels of the ST are replaced by TT material, i.e. ST and

grammar are replaced by TT lexis and grammar. Whereas, restricted

translation, for Catford (1965:2), is the replacement of ST textual

material by equivalent TT textual material, at only one level.

c. Free, Literal and Word – for – word translation

© A

rabi

c D

igita

l Lib

rary

- Y

arm

ouk

Uni

vers

ity

9

Word-for-word translation generally means what it says, i.e. it is

word oriented. It is useful since it throws light on the nature of the ST

lexis and grammar since it follows the ST grammatical structures.

Literal translation lies between the two extremes. It might start from a

word-for- word translation, and, make changes in conformity with TT

grammar. It involves the conveyance of the denotative meaning of

phrases and sentences in a text from one language to another. (Farghal

and Shunnaq 1999:13).

They (ibid:13-21) have also another classification for types of

translation. They classify them into four: (1) Literal translation which

involves the conveying of denotative meaning of phrases and sentences;

(2) Metaphorical translation which involves the translation of the ST

metaphor into a TT metaphor, (3) Précis translation whereby the

translator provides a TT summary of the source text (ST), and finally

(4) Adaptation and Free translation whereby a ST literary text is relayed

into the TT by reproducing or paraphrasing (i.e., wording) the content

without the form.

Though there are many types of translation that can be used by the

translator in order to simplify the process of translation, the most

important thing is to find the proper equivalence in the TT that may

substitute the one in the ST. Catford (1965:21) states, "the central

© A

rabi

c D

igita

l Lib

rary

- Y

arm

ouk

Uni

vers

ity

10

problem of translation – practice is that of finding TT translation theory

is that of defining the nature and conditions of translation equivalence."

Dickins, Hervey, and Higgins (2002:19), refer to equivalence as

"Descriptively, 'equivalence' denotes the relationship between ST

features and TT features that are seen as directly corresponding to one

another, regardless of the quality of the TT."

Kenny (2001:77) further defines equivalence as a "relationship that

holds between the ST and the TT, which allows the TT to be considered

as a translation of the ST, and also it holds between the parts of the STs

and the TTs."

It is worth mentioning here that there are various types of translation

equivalence each of which has its distinctive function to apply in the

translated text. Nida (1964:156), for instance, differentiates between

formal and dynamic equivalence: In consideration to formal

equivalence, he states:

Formal equivalence focuses attention on the message itself, in both form and content. In such a translation one is concerned with such correspondence as poetry to poetry, sentence to sentence, and concept to concept. Viewed from this formal orientation, one is concerned that the message in the receptor language should match as closely as possible the different elements in the source language.

Concerning the dynamic equivalence, Nida states that a translation

which attempts to produce a dynamic rather than a formal equivalence

is based upon ' the principle of equivalent effect. In simplified terms,

© A

rabi

c D

igita

l Lib

rary

- Y

arm

ouk

Uni

vers

ity

11

this equivalence type is not concerned with the maximum match

between the source message and the target message, but with the

achievement of a relationship between the receptor and the message like

that obtained between the original receptor and the message.

1.1.2. Waiting for Godot : General View

Samuel Barclay Beckett (13 April 1906 – 22 December 1989) was an Irish avant-garde novelist, playwright, theatre director, and poet, who lived in Paris for most of his adult life and wrote in both English and French …. He is one of the key writers in what Martin Esslin called the "Theatre of the Absurd". His work became increasingly minimalist in his later career. (Wikipedia)

"Beckett wrote in both French and English and is perhaps best

known for his plays, especially En attendant Godot (1952;Waiting for

Godot)." (Britannica)

Waiting for Godot is considered as the most famous example of the

Absurd Theatre, which adopted the idea on which the Absurd concept

stands on; namely the absence of fate or absolute which resembles in

the absence of Godot.

It is a tragicomedy consists of two acts. It was first published in

1956. It is a play about two vagabonds who impose on their wilderness

an illusion but desperately defended waiting. The Godot they wait for

is a vague figure at best and would probably be a disappointment to

them if he comes, but they have to persuade themselves that he will

someday come to offer some kind of hope to them .

© A

rabi

c D

igita

l Lib

rary

- Y

arm

ouk

Uni

vers

ity

12

Throughout the play there is a sense of misgiving between both

Vladimir and Estragon, whether they are waiting at the proper place

beside the intended tree or not, further it discusses whether this is the

right day or ever whether Godot is going to show up at all. While they

wait, they fill their time with a series of mundane activities (like taking

a boot on or off and trivial \ ridiculous conversations (trumps, carrots)

interspersed with more serious reflection (dead voices, suicide, The

Bible).

Vladimir and Estragon, who appear on the stage without age,

profession or even family background. They also have no home to go

to. They address each other by two nicknames, Didi (Vladimir) and

Gogo (Estragon), which do not suggest any identifiable names.

In both acts they pretend as they are leaving each other, but almost

they do not, they come back in the middle of the stage. Both of them

believe that they cannot go away since they are waiting for someone

called ‘Godot’, about whom we know nothing but that he will not come.

They spend their time talking in different endless haphazardly topics

which creates absurdity. Throughout the play, Vladimir has trouble with

his hat and Estragon with his boots.

Pozzo and Lucky are also another two characters who appear for a

while in both the two acts. The relationship between them is slave and

an owner. Lucky is the slave whereas Pozzo is the master. There are

© A

rabi

c D

igita

l Lib

rary

- Y

arm

ouk

Uni

vers

ity

13

also two brothers who seem to be worked with Godot. They come at the

end of each act to inform Vladimir and Estragon that Godot will not

come and that they have to wait for another day.

1.2 Review of Related Literature

This chapter deals with the literature related to this study. Since the

study addresses absurd expressions in an English literary work and its

translation into Arabic, the researcher will classify the related literature

into the following categories: studies on literary translation; studies on

dramatic translation; studies on culture; and studies on the Theatre of

the Absurd and Absurdity.

1.2.1 Studies on dramatic and literary translation

The mission of a translator of a dramatic work is slightly different

from any other literary piece. A dramatic text is written in order to be

performed on stage. The translator of such a text has therefore to bear in

mind that the readers (i.e. the audience in this case) shall not only

follow the written form of the script but also and primarily its spoken

version. The translator of a dramatic text has to respect the specialty of

a spoken word. Dialogues do not narrate and depict actions or situations

as in prose but they form them. They do not narrate how people meet

and make relationships but perform the people acting and

© A

rabi

c D

igita

l Lib

rary

- Y

arm

ouk

Uni

vers

ity

14

communicating with each other. Therefore Straková (1994, p.140)

mentions two kinds of a dramatic translation:

1. A piece of drama is translated as a literary text, and is originally

intended more or less to be published for readers. That would be

the case of most of the classical texts from Ancient times till 19th

and 20th century. The translator proceeds from the original text

and attempts to keep the most of its specificity. He is the only

responsible and independent creator of the target text. The

translator forms the final version of the translation regardless of

the potential stage realization.

2. The director asks the translator for translation of a particular play

for the setting with original and sophisticated poetics. The target

text is exclusively written in cooperation with the particular

theatre company. The original text is not that important any more,

production features and a complete director intention

predominate. The directors and often the actors themselves

consider the text (and often even the original work) a kind of

half- ready text, which they adapt during rehearsing the play, not

always with a positive result. They create a dramatic text,

transform the drama situations and adapt the language.

© A

rabi

c D

igita

l Lib

rary

- Y

arm

ouk

Uni

vers

ity

15

Newmark comes with another theory of translating a dramatic work.

According to him, the main purpose of translating a play is to have it

performed successfully.

“Therefore a translator of drama inevitably has to bear the potential spectator in mind though, here again, the better written and more significant the text, the fewer compromises he can make in favour of the reader. Further, he works under certain constraints: unlike the translator of fiction, he cannot gloss, explain puns or ambiguities or cultural references, not transcribe words for the sake of local colour: his text is dramatic, with emphasis on verbs, rather than descriptive and explanatory. Michael Meyer, in a little noticed article in Twentieth Century Studies , quoting T. Rattigan, states that the spoken word is five times as potent as the written word – what a novelist would say in 30 lines, the playwright must say in five. The arithmetic is faulty and so,I believe, is the sentiment, but it shows that a translation of a play must be concise – it must not be an over-translation.” (Newmark 1988, p.172)

Literary translation is a difficult type of translation due to the

specific features of literary texts. This requires knowledge to render the

impact of the source text to the target audience.

The Great Soviet Encyclopedia (1970) points out that literary

translation is:

a genre of literary creativity in which a work written in one language is re- created in another . Because literature is verbal, it is the only art that is subject to linguistic barriers, unlike music, painting, sculpture, or dance, the literary work is accessible only to those who know the language in which it is written. The specific characteristics of literary translation are defined by its place among other types of translation and by its relationship to original literary creativity.

© A

rabi

c D

igita

l Lib

rary

- Y

arm

ouk

Uni

vers

ity

16

In a study about the specific problems of literary translation, with

particular reference to the translation of dramatic texts, Bassnett

(1991:123) states that:

In trying to formulate any theory of theatre translation, Bogatyrev’s description of linguistic expression must be taken into account, and the linguistic element must be translated bearing in mind its function in theatre discourse as a whole.

To evaluate the above mentioned idea by Bassnett, it is worth

mentioning here that Bogatyrev (1971:517-30) cited in Bassnett

(1978:161-80) states that while discussing the function of linguistic

system, he declares that linguistic expressions in theatre is a structure of

signs constituted not only as discourse signs, but also as other signs.

Bassnett (1991) asserts that throughout the history of literary

translation less effort has been made in studying the problems of

translating prose. The main concentration is to discuss the issues of

translating poetry.

Lefever (1992) argues that a skillful literary translator should study

the nature of both languages. He is faithful and accurate where he does

not deviate and where he fills the gap with an appropriate equivalent

that protects the right of his own language while following the author's

genius as closely as possible.

1.2.2 Studies on culture

© A

rabi

c D

igita

l Lib

rary

- Y

arm

ouk

Uni

vers

ity

17

The cultural aspect was emphasized by Bassnett (1991). She

points out that texts which involve cultural backgrounds are difficult to

be translated. For example, the word 'snow' in Finnish has different

names and also 'camel' in Arabic, 'light' and 'water' in English and the

types of bread in French. This results in difficulty in translating.

Casagrande (1954:335) in Shunnaq (1992: 6) says, "One does not

translate LANGUAGE, one translates CULTURES".

Aziz (1999) says that translation across cultures inevitably results

in ideological shifts and these shifts are greater where the gap between

the source culture and the target culture is wider.

Farghal and Shunnaq (1999:122) states that "Arabic and English

are two languages which are not only remote linguistically but they are

also remote culturally." According to them, cultural expressions have

different forms such as: word collocations, proverbs, humor, religious

expressions and beliefs.

Barkho (1987) cited in Abu Hamdan (2000) points out that if the

source and target languages belong to different cultural areas (i.e. the

European and Islamic cultures), the translator has to take into account

not only linguistic but also cultural differences.

1.2.3 Studies on Theatre of the Absurd and Absurdity

Esslin (1980:19) defines the “Absurd “as follows:

© A

rabi

c D

igita

l Lib

rary

- Y

arm

ouk

Uni

vers

ity

18

Absurd originally means “out of harmony", in a musical context. Hence its dictionary definition: “out of Harmony with reason or propriety; incongruous, unreasonable, illogical". In common usage, “absurd” may simply mean “ridiculous” but this is not the sense in which Camus uses the word, and in which it is used when we speak of the Absurd … Ionesco defined his understanding of the term as follows: “Absurd is that which is devoid of purpose…cut off from his religious, metaphysical, and transcendental roots, man is lost; all his actions become senseless, absurd, useless”.

Historically, after tracing the foundation of postmodern literature

and arts in general, we found out that the main sense of absurdity plus

many other characteristics like disruption and humorous criticism are all

seem to emerge out of the chaos left by World War 11.

De Vasconcelos (u.d:441) points out:

It is therefore a clear emergence and consequence of certain economical and political conditions of life in Western post-war societies and is usually assumed as a rebellious outcry against all establishments, all meanings of pain, suffering, poverty and death, all assumptions of man as a rational being, all metaphors of divinity, of metaphysics, of intelligibility and order.

The Theatre of the Absurd which flourished in the western world

has also reflected its impacts on the Arabic literature, especially those of

the Egyptian drama as shown in Haj–Hussein (1997:1):

The feeling of the futility, meaninglessness, and purposelessness of human actions which characterizes the Theatre of the Absurd is noticeable in some of the works of these Arab dramatists. As the absurdists in the West started experimenting with new dramatic techniques and stage conventions, the Arab dramatists tried to introduce new innovations and practices into the traditional theatre in the Arab world.

© A

rabi

c D

igita

l Lib

rary

- Y

arm

ouk

Uni

vers

ity

19

Haj-Hussein (1997) attempts to analyze some of the plays of

Tawfiq Al-Hakim: (The Tree Climber, 1962) and

(Fate of Cackroach, 1966), and Yousif Idris's (The

Clowns,1964), and Salah Abd al-Sabur's (A Night

Traveller,1969) in order to trace how they were influenced by Samuel

Beckett and Eugene Ionesco, (i.e. the Theatre of the Absurd

playwrights). Finally, he concludes that there is an actual influence of

this theatre on Egyptian drama, and that of the four chosen plays only

one play, The Tree Climber could be considered as an embodiment of

the technique of the Absurd, the other three plays employ the techniques

of the Absurd Theatre only partially.

Micheal Cumming (2007-2008:9) describes the structure of

absurdist drama as a spaceship orbiting earth or also as a Ferris Wheel

revolving on an axle; both of which endlessly repeat their path. They

are tethered to the forces beyond their control. ( web 1)

To support the idea that has been shown above one should know

where it shows in Beckett's play Waiting for Godot; this can be clarified

in the following quotation:

The same is true of Vladimir and Estragon in Waiting for Godot. They wait for Godot at the beginning of the play, wait for Godot in the middle of the play, and wait for Godot at the end of the play. Godot never comes. So Vladimir and Estragon continue to revolve—but never evolve. They are caught in the absurdity of continuously moving but never progressing. (web 2).

© A

rabi

c D

igita

l Lib

rary

- Y

arm

ouk

Uni

vers

ity

20

As shown in Beckett (1986) the action and Language in Waiting

for Godot have a repetition and cyclic nature. Act two repeats and

parallels act One. Accordingly, Waiting for Godot appears to be as an

endless series of stage images as been realized by Vladimir, i.e., the

play starts with Vladimir and Estragon waiting for Godot and ends with

them still waiting for him.

The researcher finds out that throughout the play both Vladimir

and Estragon are either in contradiction or they echo each other and also

they ask and answer each other by short questions and answers. This

can improve the idea when Esslin (1980) says, "Language in Beckett's

plays serves to express the breakdown, the disintegration of language."

Accordingly, Oliver (1965) explains the idea of monotonous and

repetitious nature of reality which is emphasized in Beckett's play

Waiting for Godot to show that monotony is not used for its own sake; it

is used by the Absurdist dramatist, rather, as Oliver maintains," as … a

term which connotes an emotional response; it is, rather, a philosophical

assessment, the absurdist assessment of the value of all action." This

technique is found in the following example:

Estragon: In a ditch. Vladimir: (admiringly). A ditch! where? Estragon: (without gesture). Over there. Vladimir: And they did not beat you? Estragon: Beat me? certainly they beat me. Vladimir: The same lot as usual. Estragon: The same? I don’t know. Beckett (1986:9)

© A

rabi

c D

igita

l Lib

rary

- Y

arm

ouk

Uni

vers

ity

21

Or

Vladimir: They make a noise like feathers. Estragon: Like leaves. Vladimir: Like ashes. Estragon: Like leaves. (Long Silence) Beckett (1986:63)

: .) : ( !

) : ( . :

: . : .

:. )(): 20046(

: . : .

: . : ) .) (2004 :72(

The researcher finds that there is an interdependent relationship

between the two characters, i.e. Vladimir and Estragon, in Waiting for

Godot. Gascoigne (1967) says that," Vladimir represents the more

spiritual part and Estragon the more animal." In other words, that is to

say that Vladimir has a problem with his hat which means that he is

concerned with thoughts, while Estragon has a problem with his boot

which means that he is concerned with the senses of the body. These

semiotic issues should be taken into consideration by the translator

between English and Arabic if functional equivalence in translation is

sought.

© A

rabi

c D

igita

l Lib

rary

- Y

arm

ouk

Uni

vers

ity

22

Finally, opposite to the fact that the topics – if there are some – in

the Absurdist drama has neither specific start nor an end, the emergence

of the theatre of the absurd has its own started after the World War II

and also has its all end.

The above idea is shown in Al-Hammad (1426 H.) when she says

that that Factors influencing the emergence of theater of the absurd are

Literature myth and superstition, Freudian philosophy, Philosophy of

existentialism, Marxism, and many other factors while she concentrates

At the end Al

Hammad says that the theatre of the Absurd has stopped at both the

western and the eastern world, since we are in a need to solve our

problems in a simple way in which all the human beings levels can

understand it without any kind of sophistications as which appeared in

the theatre of the Absurd.

For this reason the dramatists stopped writing in this kind of

drama and consider it as a passing wave due to certain circumstances

only. (web 3)

© A

rabi

c D

igita

l Lib

rary

- Y

arm

ouk

Uni

vers

ity