Absurd theater cherishes the idea of a fathomless idea and, at the same time, a perplexing being because the 20th century has given chances to thinkers to give a different understanding of being and life. Samuel Beckett speaks of the absurd as the method that champions our being simply because being is meaningless.
The play Waiting for Godot, waves the fabric of a meaningless meaning of being, simply because those heroes of the play speak of nonsense. The play does not have any female characters, a dimension rarely approached by other playwrights. The title is so intriguing because it suggests meaningful words but in a very meaningless fashion.
Godot and who is Godot? This is the question.
Godot, as a name, is definable by a variety of implied meanings because Godot, as a word, could be divided into three parts of syllables, that is, to give an order for someone to go and do it. This sentence and the pronoun 'it' leaves things ambiguous, and this presentation is deliberately done to make the readers wonder about the real character of Godot. The other assumption rests on religious conception because God means divinity and the two remaining letters could suggest anything. Conducting a thorough estimation of the religious aspect suggests an attempt for salvation as the man and the only reason for being. To say that being is meaningless is to deny life its own reason for being.
Beckett has presented a title to suggest the fundamental issue of life. Waiting is nothing more than a process where time could lose its value. Ever since man's awareness of being, which crystallizes time as a passing phenomena, becomes totally important because 'to wait is to be' and 'to be is to do' and 'to do is to wait for the process to come to an end', and in being, one must wait for the achievement of something.
In time, Godot lives, and, for a time, he believes he exists because the process of waiting itself is fundamental to his own existence. He exists to wait, and when he waits, he is doing something. Samuel Beckett has presented his own play as revolving in time and as a time moving in a circle repeating itself, but the introductory image of the hero who is trying to take off his shoes is highly suggestive of somebody trying to make use of time.P.5
The introductory statement is highly suggestive of hopelessness, a major characteristic and feature of the absurd theatre, because when Estragon keeps trying uselessly to take off his shoes, then the next step could not be done and the immediate future of his is of no value. 'Nothing to be done' was not optimism but relax, surrender to and into, and a continuous process of time targeting nothingness. To wait is to do something in waiting, but Beckett presents the dilemma of modern man as sucked into a vortex of timelessness, because time for him should mean achievement but since nothing to be done, then time is futile and so on id life. Time is absurd and life, in this context, does not have a meaning. To speak of the religious side is to see Beckett as a re-enacting the saga of salvation where the purpose of life is nothing but salvation from sins. However, and since what they wait for is indefinable, and at the same time infinite, they can draw a dimension both in their being and in their time.
Samuel Beckett employs the concept of salvation to refer to biblical stories where thieves were punished and their punishment was seen as a rescue to them from their own sins. The opening scene of the play shows the two major characters Vladimir and Estragon teaming up to speak to one another concerning their own past, present and future. Taking off the shoes could hurt. The implied meaning is suggestive of an attempt of doing something, to save someone from pain. However, when saving from pain has been done, would the next step bring a conclusive evidence of genuine peace and a true meaning of being? The answer can never be firmly delivered because the two characters have never shown and sterling effort to give the two dimensions to the expected coming of Godot.

The title of the play Waiting for Godot, does not give any true definition to the nature and the meaning of the word Godot. The question is who is Godot? Is left without an answer and avoiding a proper definition of the word is deliberately set in order to keep people and readers guessing and, at the same time, giving them freedom to guess the true nature of Godot. In case Godot is given the real nature, then this perplexing character would lose its intriguing nature.
In Godot there is no past, and characters do not reflect on their past. They only try to see their own future. Beckett conducts his exploration of the title in an absurd manner because and while he ascribes to Godot great importance; his own definition of the process of waiting looks prompting in different orientations, and this methodology has influenced playwrights like Harold Pinter and his play Old Times. In his own Waiting for Godot, life has no more sins anymore, because even the process of salvation itself looks useless and this is a great U-turn in his own understanding of sin and salvation based on western culture.
To call Beckett's work a closed circlet is to see that he does not have the intention to zoom out of the form of time and place and even action he advocates. He looks faithful to the most famous Aristotelian requirements of time, place and action. The two protagonists look totally committed to the place where they exist and to the unity of time because they do not zoom back to conduct a flashback process, but they speak about time as a one unchangeable unit. His play that ends in a sense of deadlock note sounds complex and pessimistic enough to present any glimpses of hope because the process of waiting says nothing except waiting, and only the observation of time is considered but not time itself as a passing phenomenon. The play looks complex enough because of its protagonists like ' why should Godot be so late and are they really committed to observing his own commands should he arrive.'
That is why absurdity looks leaving an atmosphere of helplessness and creating a world of cruelty. Beckett's art looks concerned with the social and political circumstances of his time. That's why there is no way everyone could accuse Beckett of being irresponsible because his own feeling of pessimism and uselessness is a mood that reflects the work of destructive forces that leave reason in a state of inability to present a logical answer to what happens in the 20th century. To call his work 'an escape' could be seen as an underestimation of his own understanding of human psychology. He is, in short, a person who is realistic enough to present a man and destiny in limbo. That is why the process of birth for Beckett looks problematic enough because whenever any concept of birth is mentioned; salvation does not fall short of a new birth like Baptism where to be saved is to be born again into life. Having experienced the arbitrariness of birth and randomness of being, Beckett looks regretful of any attempt foe a new birth because such attempts would be a birth into the same circle of meaningless; there is no hope of another birth. (P. 8+9)
The first meaningful statement which presents the protagonist's fate is short of giving a definite answer and definition of the word 'salvation'. Taking into consideration the concept of salvation as religiously oriented, there is a true approach to understand the title which suggests salvation. As sinners by birth, they believe that they come in search of the savior to save them from supposed help and supposed mistakes they have committed, but the anecdote the convey of the two thieves, leaves the two robbers equal putting with the savior himself. Beckett's picking of this story testifies to his will to make salvation a process that looks rather dubious because salvation is time, and time passes, and if salvation does not come, then it would be waste of time to wait salvation and energy, and this process looks futile like taking of boots which cannot be concluded. Beckett goes too far in his implied concept of time as 'salvation' because he believes that time is useless and there is no way anyone could get to the end of it; salvation.
Estragon believes that people are bloody ignorant, and this is because they cannot save themselves in the way that should be followed. Beckett choice of the vocabulary shows him at his best, because ignorance is the outcome of inability to know. Vladimir and Estragon conduct a dialogue that never leaves them ignorant by nature but willingly ignorant. So, hopeless and despair hum as a reality, and salvation looks not only beyond reach, but again it looks useless because of ignorance. In case of the coming of the savior, when Estragon is ready to adopt the strength needed to conduct a thorough and full circle of time employed for salvation, the answer is rather dubious. And here lies one of the main aspects of absurdity skepticism. In average aspect, the characters look skeptic of what they believe in even themselves because the dialogue they exchange looks useless. However, such a dialogue is totally meaningful because ignorance looks the master code for people and their inspirations. Estragon wants his mate to go, but the answer is so negative because they want to wait, and waiting looks just for the sake of waiting because it looks meaningless and sterile.(P. 10+11)

 
The first few lines of the play usher a stage of uncertainty affiliated with illusions, where identity and reality are not only obscure but rather they look like a mirage, that existed only as unreal reality. The sense of exile looks comparative because it works on so many levels in tone with intellectual, spiritual and real reality, and so is that the absurd theatre which filters and creeps into the hidden part of Estragon and Vladimir, revealing their ability to be themselves. They are deprived possibly of logical order and, at the same moment, simulative enough to make them presume, logically, an adjective with a certain human view of tomorrow. This sense of exile rests on the fact that they have crossed the line of nature. Intellectually, they are unable to sustain and maintain a normal debate, fruitful enough to make readers and spectators alike deduce a lesson of life. The dialogue is incoherent and so is time, and so are ideas. That is why the two main characters feel that they have transcended the real time to the time of twilight zone where they belong to the both zones and, at the same time, belong to none. So, in short, they have exiled themselves from any commitment to any sort of normality. The mound and their waiting are nothing than waiting to return from exile that they have imprisoned themselves in, but, for Beckett such an exile could be the last reality that he needs to understand a world of illusion, and this is the bottom line of the Absurd Theater to which Harold Pinter’s Old Times belongs. Exile of unbreakable circle that they found themselves in offers no hope of salvation except in meaningless waiting. Beckett and Pinter believe in a view of human being in isolation in a man existed by himself and past into alien universe to conceive this universe as possessing no inherent reality, value or meaning and to represent human life in its fruitless nothingness, where it ends toward the nothingness.
Beckett presents the texture of characters immune to understand in the normal sense of the word. The question about the carrot is suggestive of an attempt and a counter attempt. Defining the nature of the carrot is derived from time, object and the need to know . answering the question is a fashionable manner like “carrot is a carrot” may look illogical in the classical terms, because carrot is a matter of time-wasting when this object is misused and a matter of presenting and illusory formula that sets man in meaningless motion and here lies the grasp of the matter because should this answer be logical, is Godot himself a real person, then it would have a meaning. So, they are waiting for an idea that does not have a conspicuous implication and proper interpretation, that’s why they are waiting for nothing, but it is everything, and the carrot is a carrot. But giving no answer to that question corresponds the nature of Godot; carrot is a carrot, and Godot is Godot. That is why “ a carrot is a carrot” releases them from presuming a logical answer and at the same time, it is an escape answer quit affiliated to that the nature of Godot; the carrot is a carrot and Godot is Godot, the great name they lived under his shadow, and they do not want to venture out of that shadow, last they scorched by the sun of reality. That is why “the carrot is a carrot”, and it must not have another answer.
Vladimir believes that he has come to the wrong place which means that waiting for Godot has brought them to the land of exile. The dialogue develops to show that both of them have nothing certain because yesterday means tomorrow as far as the logical sequence of time is concerned. Being unable to identify themselves with reality is suggestive of the breakup of the characters themselves and
Hence, characters are the product of the civilization that has gone beyond any logical limits, and in short, Estragon, Vladimir, Pozzo, Lucky and the boy are the victims of civilization that has failed to sustain spiritual and intellectual integrity of people. They cannot be coming out of their own developed value. They have inherited the value, and they are part of the fabric of the social norms and traditions. Being unable to answer or understand or make sense of their being is a clear indication that they are victims of a material civilization that has caused their exile and their alienation even from themselves.
In the play, the characters look lost, performing senseless actions, absurd and useless. Characters like Estragon and Vladimir look drowned in meaninglessness that develops to be grotesque, and their suffering that looks normal is in reality a tragic one. Estragon suggests that all his life he has been comparing himself to Jesus Christ.
The spiritual alienation nestling in the dungeon of their own estranged character has developed to create a sort of gap between them. As characters are waiting, as it appears, for that Godot who might be interpreted as God and the reality of spiritual hunger, they both live in the wilderness of faith. Arriving to that meaninglessness of reality suggests that they knew that they have become far away from sensibilities of that spirit; the way they look down from heaven. For them, heaven is a place where they can dream of redeeming themselves. Being estranged to his redemption leaves them wishful in their thinking. Heaven evokes a sense of spiritual reality, but they cannot comprehend that because they live in exile from the true sense of faith.
The inability to foster a return to normality makes them help and accept that meaninglessness of being. Estragon has been comparing himself to Jesus Christ throughout his life, but the next step of corroborating this comparison into an implemented practice remains an unfulfilled idea. Their exile has made them develop within a closed circle where everything, almost, looks repetitive; they can only look at all aspects of time as if they were of the same value; they have no future because they know nothing of their past, and thus their present is meaningless. In short, their exile has become the chosen home from which they cannot exile themselves from.
Beckett sounds like caricature when trying to turn inside out the psychology of the character. They say they are waiting for Godot, and Estragon says that he has been comparing himself to Jesus Christ; a development of a religious connotation, but by the end, they both suggest forgetting all about it. The spiritual disband they live in irremediable as it looks, but they cannot stop attempting any spiritual approach despite their full knowledge that they are not going to have it. Godot stands for far fetish idea acknowledged by resigning consciousness because of the inability to foster and get further spiritual integrity that could sealed off exile as a forced destination where they find themselves wasting not only their time but their being as well.
Absurd theatre shows how man has become a sort of human species, not human being because human dignity is an imperative issue that gives man the defined contour. Values have been reversed and absurd theatre does not look a waste of time to read. It shows, in depth, a tragic reality of some people who have transcended meaningfulness. Absurd theatre rings a long bell at human beings existence because it has lost all meaning. The implied massage could very much be a call to return to spiritual and moral values.