Is it not time for my pain-killer? - Humour & Relationships in Beckett's theatrical world

Beckett surely has a way to address his humour, and his theatrical works are no exception to this rule. In my last post I focused on how human despair plays a very crucial role in the comedy of Beckett, and Endgame most certainly delivers that same kind of cynicism. One can see these characters are in a state of disparity through looking at the symbol of the bicycle which has become a motif for happiness in many of Beckett’s works. Clov and Hamm both bring up a point that either of them would had liked a bicycle, but those days have surely passed.






As I discussed in my previous post, a lot of Beckett's humour comes from nonsensical means which is normally an exaggeration of events. This is no different in the case of Endgame, yet Beckett presents it differently through conversation between characters that appears more realistic than in Waiting for Godot. I say this because each of these characters have a sense of identity where before it seemed they were just displacements of a central character. I propose there is actually a development in the characters (character development in a Beckett work!???) which contributes to the humour from how flawed these folks are even at their best. 

Aside from the comedy Beckett explores terrifically, I found the relationship between Ham and Clov to be outstanding (A relationship amongst characters? Did Beckett really write this?). It is quite absurd Clov sticks around no matter how shitty Hamm may treat him, but there is a certain kind of love they share for each other that words cannot describe. They both act like they owe the other for whatever reason, yet it seems there isn't any particular reason they feel this debt of companionship. I believe the reason I thought this was so moving comes from some personal relationships I have had with friends throughout the years. There have been time I have wondered why I am mates with a person and why I help them with their problems, but I normally am not able to yield an answer. Sometimes this causes me to block a person out of my life since I see no reason for union to continue; although, many times I continue to befriend someone because something I can't explain attracts me to her/him. This is similar to the way I see my family since many of them are radically different than myself and it is hard many times to find any common ground, yet I know there exists a meaningful, loving relationship with these family members despite a lack of understanding.

I cannot speak for Beckett, but this relationship makes me feel that these seemingly meaningless relationships have a lot more depth than I would care to believe. It isn't just about opposite attracts or hearing both sides of the story. I think I find myself in these situations because some trait in that person makes me feel good and hopefully it is likewise for that person thus why they are still there after my bullshit.

So is there happiness in this play without the bicycle and underneath the cynical humour? Absolutely! The larger picture I propose Beckett is painting in this play is happiness does not come as an easy handout, and we must search for it in places we feel is tainted by despair, alienation and fear.