Black Humour in the Plays of Samuel

Beckett

1
 1. INTRODUCTION

What is Black Humour? According to the Cambridge Dictionary, Black Humour is

defined as “a humorous way of looking at or treating something that is serious or sad”
(Cambridge, 2020). In other words, it is often used to reflect existential preoccupations that
concern painful issues for human beings, like death. It is difficult to understand how you can
address through comedy certain topics that might be controversial and disputed for society.
For Sigmund Freud, this type of humour would refute the tragic nature of our reality that
cause pain in our inner peace becoming into a clash against it denying this situation. In his
article Humour, Freud gives an example on how to overcome and disregard this reality:

“[A] criminal who was being led out to the gallows on a Monday remarked: ‘Well, the
week’s beginning nicely’, he was producing the humour himself; the humorous process is
completed in his own person and obviously affords him a certain sense of satisfaction.”
(Freud, 1927, p. 161)

In 1729, Jonathan Swift made use of this comedy in different works such as A Modest
Proposal. The famous Irish writer suggests in this book to feed rich gentlemen and ladies on
children from poor families in order to bring an end to indigence. This ridiculous idea, which
is morally inconceivable, is out of proportion so as to cause great hilarity instead of
repugnance by means of dark and absurd humour.

This illogical relationship between comedy and seriousness might be explained as

absurd. Throughout the twentieth century, some pieces of theatre had recourse to Black
Humour to explore the concept of the absurdity, with Samuel Beckett as the leading figure in
The Theatre of the Absurd. This complicated concept, coined by Martin Esslin in 1962, refers
to a movement affected by a strong stream of existentialism deriving from philosophers such
as Sartre and Camus. The absurd is dedicated to showing the struggle of the human being to
find the meaning of existence in a chaotic and irrational universe. Another famous author who
belongs to this movement, Eugene Ionesco, established his understanding of Absurd – in an
essay on Kafka – defining it as something “which is devoid of purpose” (Ionesco, 1957, as
cited in Esslin, 1961). Moreover, Albert Camus in The Myth of Sisyphus claimed that “this
divorce between man and life (…) truly constitutes the feeling of Absurdity” (Camus, 1955, p.
6).

The Theatre of the Absurd is distinguished by senseless plots in an empty world just
to demonstrate the incoherence of human existence and the human condition. At first, these
2
plays were regarded as nonsense theatre because of their disassociation from conventional
theatre. There is neither beginning nor end but after all these plays have something to say and
can be understood (Esslin, 1961). Nonetheless, it is important to differentiate The Theatre of
the Absurd from the Existentialist philosophers. Although these different fields of study focus
on the same concept, they do it differently. The existentialist philosophers defined the
uncertainty of the human existence and the meaning of the life in rational discourse while the
dramatists of the theatre of the absurd did not use a rational resource to approach these
existential themes (Esslin, 1961).

In the following pages, an attempt will be made to highlight the role of Beckett's
works within black humour and its meaning as his particular way of expressing it through the
Theatre of the Absurd. Likewise, this way of presenting facts and realities within the works
will be connected with their philosophical currents that developed in a special way after the
Second World War, highlighting among them existentialism.

3
 2. THE ACT OF WAITING

2.1 Absurd black humour

During the twentieth century, tyrannical government took place in the world and had a
huge impact on society. World War II sets a turning point in the history of humankind after
causing an unbelievable and terrible number of casualties because of discrimination and
persecution, such as the genocide of the Holocaust. Years and years of bombings and battles
were also an important factor of this century bringing about the destruction of families and
homes.

After the end of the World War II, a new artistic movement known as Absurd Theatre,
which is thought to work as a response to these historical events, emerged. The idea of absurd
is characterized by its disbelief about the universal principles of human existence; this
concept, which unconsciously forged its way in literature, conveys a feeling of absurdity
through the emptiness of the narrative arc in contrast to the traditional Aristotelian arc in
which the plot is essential (Bennet, 2015). In addition, the lack of exposition, which refers to
the background of the characters or the story, is also a significant feature from this literature;
“the characters merely appear and the story proceeds from there” (Bennett, 2015, p. 20). This
genre of literature draws the attention to the feeling of isolation and alienation that human
beings experience; it certainly asserts the absence of universal truth or value in opposition of
the rationalist suppositions of traditional humanism.

According to The Cambridge Introduction to the Theatre and Literature of the Absurd,
“it is elusive, complex, and nuanced: it refuses to be pinned down and that is why the absurd
can be studied over and over or reinterpreted” (Bennett, 2015, p. 2). In the mid twentieth-
century, the plays belonging to this type of writing started to be performed in theatres making
the audience and the critics indignant (Esslin, 1961). People were not ready for this; they were
used to the traditional coherent theatre which has a story to tell with its logical plots.
Definitely, the plays were nothing alike; for the most people, it was difficult to consider it as a
play, they just simply did not understand the plays that were wondering about the purpose of
this nonsense dialogue between the characters.

Within the Absurd, there is an important component which it makes use of in order to
achieve its goal: Black humour, a term coined by the French surrealist writer André Breton in
one of his important works entitled The Anthology of Black Humour in 1939 and identifies

4
Jonathan Swift as the true originator. The definition of Black Humour is unclear, Breton
displays a variety of examples of ‘humour noir’ and as Matthew Winston claimed in Veins of
Humor Breton did not intend “to designate a genre” (Winston, 1972, p. 270); this aggressive
humour employs illogical elements so as to attack human being rational surroundings in an
absurd world supporting the surreal and grotesque by disregarding any limitation of rational
thought. This constant manipulation of combining fear and enjoyment is essential in Black
Humour.

Purposeless characters alongside the emptiness of plots and language, which

contribute to this comical setting, are shared in both Absurd literature and Black humour.
Linking these two concepts lead to what Winston defines as ‘absurd black humour’ in which
the comedy is fundamental; he describes this connection as “a tone in drama and fiction which
is simultaneously frightening or threatening and farcical or amusing” (Winston, 1972, p. 273).
Beckett manages to make this happen in these two plays by playing with time in characters;
the act of waiting and its compulsive need for action turn into an important topic in which
Black Humour makes its appearance.

2.2 The need to act

Writers from the Absurd and from the Black humour stream converge in the same
paradoxical path where they need to create formless worlds. As has been mentioned before,
Samuel Beckett places several limitations to each of these characters’ physical and mental
ability in order to create something like an invisible cage around each individual “making the
possibility of purposeful action increasingly remote” (Pattie, 2001, p. 76). Throughout the
play repetitive actions are taking place in order to point out the passing of time, everybody
changes but without noticing. In Waiting for Godot, the second act is considered as a
repetition from the first act. Characters seem to be the same but they really have changed:
Pozzo now is blind and Lucky stops being an intelligent slave whereas in Endgame is just one
an act where in the end there is only one character of all. In this absurd universe, there is no
space for logic; therefore, time is now part of the absurdity.

It is important to explain that absurdism and dark comedy make use of a totally
ridiculous and arbitrary universe with the purpose of creating a space where there is no truth.
This example of a random and desolate world, whose objective is to create a powerful chaos

5
restricting the man’s situation even more, is one of the philosophical bases presented by
Martin Esslin regarding the Theatre of the Absurd along with Black humour. Within this
surrealistic setting where human beings’ life has become so unstable and futile, gives away to
humour. Having no other options to change their situation, they only have to ridicule their
own existence. In addition, according to the Theatre of the Absurd, it is essential to
distinguish the connotation of the word ‘ridiculous’ with respect to the absurdism (Bennett,
2015); it cannot be understood as its daily definition, this word used in these works suggest
that ‘ridiculous’ refers to the “divorce between man and his life” (Camus, 1955, p. 6).

In spite of the idea that the atrocity committed by the human beings in World War II is
one important fact of the appearance of absurdism, there was a question going around: where
was God? The absence of God can be related to Waiting for Godot; even though the reader
does not know who Godot is, the act of waiting may also be interpreted as the lack divine
power following these historical events which undermine its belief (Bennett, 2015).

Knowing that there are no absolute truths in the Beckettian theatre, ‘waiting’ is one
dominant and permanent fact. It is aimless and meaningless, nonetheless it is in the act of
waiting where human being feels the flow of time as a visible form. Being active during
lifetime provokes an absence of time, its passage is prone to be forgotten. Yet, “if we are
merely passively waiting, we are confronted with the actions of time itself” (Esslin, 1961, p.
50).

The plot development and its dialogue shift in each act emphasizing with these
variations the essential sameness of the characters’ situation. Even though everything is
changing, nothing is happening. As Estragon says in his most lucid moments “nothing
happens, nobody comes, nobody goes, it’s awful” (Beckett, 1959, p. 41). When the second act
takes part in the play, Pozzo becomes blind and has no memory about meeting Vladimir or
Estragon showing in this way the time speed and its relation with waiting.

The main characters are constantly renewing their appointment with Godot -who is
never revealed in the story and he never appears- and that is a self-damning action which
forces them to do the same thing the rest of their days. In Endgame, Hamm and Clov are
unable to identify the meaning of ‘yesterday’:

HAMM: Yesterday! What does that mean? Yesterday!

6
 CLOV: (violently) That means that bloody awful day, long ago,

before this bloody awful day. I use the words you taught me. If

they don’t mean anything anymore, teach me others. Or let me

be silent.

(Beckett, 1958, p. 44)

Moreover, Hamm cannot remember what he has done five minutes earlier conveying
that they are blocked without any perception of time and are locked up in this dead-end path.
The characters are handcuffed to this flux of time and this act of waiting as human beings are;
“this is what the human condition [...] is like: a constant and unfulfilled waiting [...] and all we
[...] can do is to distract ourselves with pointless games and futile banter” (McDonald, 2015,
p. 50).

3. CHARACTERS AND DIALOGUE

This continuous duality between darkness and humour that characterises the absurd
black humour is reflected in the way characters are manipulated. The author feels obliged to
create a setting of chaos: it is necessary to invoke special individuals that will make the story
develop itself in keeping with the ideals of the absurd. Otherwise, it would be very difficult to
understand these works without the help of these characters and their inherent black humour.
According to the definition of Matthew Winston about dark comedy, the protagonists of these
plots are fundamental to the outcome of the play:

“Absurd black humor tends to present characters who seem to belong to the world
of comedy. Such characters do not develop in the course of a work; they are their own
dilemma and will forever be so.” (Winston, 1972, p. 278)

Samuel Beckett was against the conventions of traditional dramatic structure by the
absence of plot and by making use of the characters’ struggle to find some answer of their
bleak situation. His own characters do not act as real people on the stage, they are just
presented in the setting with no purpose. The theme is not quite clear due to the lack of

7
information about this group of people; there is no background at all, the reader/audience do
not know who they are. Costumes, which usually indicate epoch, social standing, gender etc
do not fulfil this function in absurd theatre; stage set and dialogue do not indicate
geographical, cultural, social or cultural location; even names give no indication of specific
geo-cultural provenance. The characters portrayal is habitually depicted as incompetent,
depressed people and usually belonging to the back streets of society (Bennett, 2015).
Vladimir and Estragon and Hamm and Clov are examples of this representation that certainly
make black humour work in these plays so as to make the absurd and bleak situation apparent.

In Beckett’s two-act play, Vladimir and Estragon are the protagonists waiting each day
for Mr Godot to arrive. First of all, Vladimir makes the decisions and remembers significant
aspects of their past. He is the person who continually reminds Estragon that they must stay
because of Godot. Vladimir could be regarded as the questioning intellectual who cannot bear
to feel pain. He is unable to cope with the suffering of others, unfortunately he is constant
pain (Esslin, 1961).

On the contrary, Estragon is the instinctive one with a childish attitude, concerned
about mundane matters as at the beginning of the play where he is blaming his boots because
his feet were hurting; unlike Vladimir, he constantly wants to leave. However, this difference
may lead to a dependent relationship because Estragon has to rely on his friend (Esslin, 1961).
Vladimir is the one who takes care of him; he is the one who comforts Estragon’s when he is
suffering as well as remembering their appointment with Mr Godot. In spite of the fact that
Estragon thinks about leaving because it would be better for both characters, he decides to
stay alongside Vladimir. It is evident throughout the play that Estragon is the less intelligent
but also the emotional character who is disturbed by life and needs somebody to support him.

ESTRAGON: Why will you never let me sleep?

VLADIMIR: I felt lonely.
ESTRAGON: I had a dream.
VLADIMIR: Don't tell me!
ESTRAGON: I dreamt that…
VLADIMIR: DON'T TELL ME!
ESTRAGON: Who am I to tell my private nightmares to if I can't tell them to you?
VLADIMIR: You know I can't bear that.

8
 (Beckett, 1959, p. 16)

Throughout Waiting for Godot and Endgame, Beckett’s attempt to pair these
characters is achieved up to the point of being complementary by their own personalities. By
grouping them, the polarities of these plays -such as a death versus life, or blindness versus
sight- are being presented and confronted. There is some dominance in the relationship
between Didi and Gogo, as they come to be known, but it is contrasted with that of Pozzo and
Lucky which represents quite the opposite of friendship. Even though these two apparently
have a less constructive connection, they too are unable to leave each other. Servitude,
inequality and this union of master-slave are the elements that make Pozzo and Lucky
function efficiently in dramatic terms; annoyed by one another, their relationship will not
decay if they remain the same (Esslin, 1961).

The same happens in the post-apocalyptic world of Hamm and Clov, their relationship
seems to be illogical to the reader/audience. Hamm, who is confined to his wheelchair and
suffers from blindness, represents tyranny as Pozzo does in Godot. He needs to be in control
as he has control over his foster child, and at the same time his servant. This irrational
relationship is pretty confusing but even though Hamm and Clov are different types of
personalities, they complement each other; even so Clov is attached to Hamm, he says that his
attempts to leave his foster dad have failed because he has never been able to do it. Clov
cannot understand why he still obeying him just like the irrational relation of Lucky and
Pozzo, sadistic master and submissive slave (Esslin, 1961).

It seems that they are displaying a duality which forms a complete being as it can be
seen in Didi-Gogo. They have to be together in order to function correctly otherwise they
cannot work; they both form a pseudo couple who think and act as one. As Esslin said: “Yet,
being complementary natures, they also are dependent on each other and have stay together”
(Esslin, 1961, p. 48). In addition, according to Eugene Webb, Endgame might suggest that the
characters are inside of a human being skull when the “curtains are drawn” in the “two small
windows” of the room, representing in that way the eyes closure to the external world (Webb,
2014, p. 55). Creating a chaos setting is favourable for black humour to develop: the more
absurd the stage is, the better the black humour will act.

Not only are the characters per se important but also the dialogue that takes place in
both stories has a significant role in Beckett’s works. The language exchanged between these

9
individuals is essential to bring to the fore the concept of black humour with absurdism. As
Winston claimed, verbal play “is one of the elements that shows black humour’s affinity with
comedy” (Winston, 1978, p. 32). In the middle of the twentieth century, Beckett starts to
experiment with this type of language; he actually understands that realistic language is not
able to express what it can be said, therefore he decides to destroy all logical elements
belonging to communication so as to achieve the inexpressible of language (Bennett, 2015).

From that point, in order to display this comedy mixed with absurdism, the Irish writer
explores the dialogue in both plays with two important literary devices. In the first place,
Beckett uses these characters, with limited features and personalities, and their dialogue by
using a literary technique that functions to embody chaos in conversation: non-sequitur.
Characters employ this element by uttering something which does not have any relation to
what preceded it, underlining the meaningless life of human being. The non-sequitur
undermines the sense of progression towards meaning, elucidation and comprehension that
rationalism assumes humans are capable of. It is impossible for them to truly communicate; in
Black Humour the pointless use of language is a perfect tool in order to reflect chaos along
with comedy (Winston, 1972). And finally, the second device is the famous cross-talk where
characters talk and answer quickly and straightforward; according to David Bradby, “it helps
us to understand why the play is able to achieve such a poignant mix of the tragic and the
comic while remaining in a thoroughly down-to-earth, everyday situation” (Bradby, 2001, p.
43).

VLADIMIR: You must be happy too, deep down, if only you knew it.

ESTRAGON: Happy about what?

VLADIMIR: To be back with me again.

ESTRAGON: Would you say so?

VLADIMIR: Say you are, even if it's not true.

ESTRAGON: What am I to say?

VLADIMIR: Say, I am happy.

ESTRAGON: I am happy.

10
 VLADIMIR: So am I.

ESTRAGON: So am I.

VLADIMIR: We are happy.

ESTRAGON: We are happy (silence). What do we do now, now that we're happy?

(Beckett, 1959, p. 60)

As a matter of fact, this type of conversation that is seen in Beckettian theatre might be
compared with the tricks and antics of the circus clown or from vaudeville comedy. In the
Theatre of the Absurd, Martin Esslin mentions an essay relating to Proust in which Beckett
claimed that “the attempt [of communication] where no communication is possible is merely a
simian vulgarity, or horribly comic” (Esslin, 1961, p. 32). At first, the dialogues from
Beckett’s plays might be regarded as incoherent and empty but without a shadow of a doubt
they have a deeper meaning than it is thought with the purpose of showing what
reader/audience usually fail to see so that it becomes visible and obvious.

4. DEATH

As is seen in the introduction and in the previous content, Existentialism had a huge
impact on Beckett’s works. First of all, Existentialism “is a philosophy that takes as its
starting point the individual's existence. [...] what sets it apart from most other philosophies is
that it begins with the 'individual' rather than the 'universal'” (Earnshaw, 2007, p. 1). The Irish
writer is mostly concerned with the human being itself and the meaning of its existence.
Exploring the nature of individuals, his characters are depicted with feelings of confusion or
anxiety towards their situation and towards an apparently absurd world. Portraying human’s
inner pain, Beckett drew attention to death through absurd black humour in both books
presented in this dissertation.

Brom Weber, in the essay The Mode of Black Humour, declares that this type of
comedy aims at serious issues of human being which are not regarded as something to laugh
at. Dark comedy consists of exploring the humour through different obscure topics such as
“the death of men, the disintegration of social institutions, mental and physical disease,

11
deforming, suffering, anguish, privation, and terror” (Weber, 1973, p. 388). In Waiting for
Godot, as well as in Endgame, Beckett managed to display this tool focusing on death and
suicide; Vladimir and Estragon dedicated themselves to wait someone they do not know while
they are contemplating suicide whereas Hamm and Clov are portraying a process of dying
using comedy. Throughout these plays, reader and audience are able to feel the burden of
these characters’ anguish constantly realizing the presence of death. In Endgame, as Eugene
Webb explained in his work The plays of Samuel Beckett, this slow process is compared to
“grain upon grain” as if it were moments piling up whose “impossible culmination will be
every time somewhere ahead of them” (Webb, 2014, p. 58):

CLOV: Finished. It’s finished. [...] Grain upon grain [...] The impossible heap.

(Beckett, 1958, p.1)

When Clov is looking out, he starts to describe the outside like there is no more nature.
Every single detail is depicted pejoratively giving the impression that life is slowly coming to
its last minutes inside and outside the room where the scene is taking place. Moreover, the
death of Hamm’s mother, Nell, represents that any means of sustaining life is eventually
running out; the last symbol of fertility has passed away removing the option of life in the
story. No character reacts to her death, showing their lack of concern about death.

In the tramps’ story, Vladimir and Estragon are waiting for someone they do not
recognize. They do not know who Godot is and why they have an appointment with him, but
it would certainly be a great disappointment whether their unknown character does not
appear. In addition, these individuals believe that Godot will someday come, and he will give
them the answer of their situation offering some kind of hope. As is explained in the first
section, Vladimir and Estragon are just waiting throughout the story and thus they are helping
themselves with the thought of “in this immense confusion one thing alone is clear. (they) are
waiting for Godot to come” (Beckett, 1959, p. 80). As is mentioned in the act of waiting,
people start to wonder about God’s existence due to historical events. This kind of hope is
certainly the important question: Where is God? How can he allow such events in the world?
In a certain way, they are looking for significant sense in this absurd world; they are distracted
with pointless concerns and nonsense talks that are clung to this absurdity that the world is
surrounded by. They are hoping to obtain some rational answer about their situation by having
an appointment (Esslin, 1961; Bennett, 2015).

12
 It is widely known that the use of comedy in an absurd scenario making reference to
death and human suffering means that black humour appeared on the scene. Furthermore, its
form is considered as sarcastic and, most important, inappropriate because its strength lies in
laughter about something atrocious that exposes the horrific features of human being such as
the meaningless of life. Therefore, it has two stages of procedure: first, the laughing and then,
the reflection. The combination of black humour and absurdism possible to examine questions
such as death, the meaning of human existence and the place of God in human existence. Due
to its form of addressing serious topics from life, since it is a humour that revolves in the
darkest contexts of life, this humorous nature demonstrates that it is able to be used as way of
teaching how to carry on living. The presence of this kind of humour in these stories breaks
any emotional relationship between the reader/audience; in the case of Black Humour, its
objective apart from causing laughter is to eliminate or counteract any fear or pain (Roas,
2010).

NELL: Nothing is funnier than unhappiness.

(Beckett, 1958, p. 18)

One possibly response to the absurd nature of existence that is proposed in the play is
suicide. According to Martin Esslin, Albert Camus shed light on why a human being should
not take suicide as an escape of his/her situation, since life is meaningless (Esslin, 1961) 1.
Camus did not consider suicide as an answer to the absurdity of human condition; it is
possible to accept and live within this situation instead of seeking to escape from the problem
of existence by suicide. The French philosopher represented the human condition using the
mythical character of Sisyphus: Sisyphus realizes the pointlessness of his task as human being
is becoming aware of the futility of life. According to Bennett, “Camus suggests that it is
better to live as if there is inherent meaning in the world so that humans can [...] revolt against
the absurd in order to make one's own life meaningful” by creating their own purpose in this
meaningless world (Bennett, 2015, p. 16).

1 After the war, Albert Camus was the most popular of Existentialist writers and regarded as the inspiration of
the Theatre of the Absurd. Through his book The Myth of Sisyphus, the notion of the absurd became relevant to
absurd literature (Bennett, 2015).

13
 This philosophical thought can be seen in Beckett’s works; the purpose of these plays
is not to reach a horrific tragic end but to accept that ‘tragic’ part in order to release all
anguish and anxiety that human being is surrounded. In spite of death’s negative connotations,
the Irish playwright wants to convey to reader/audience that accepting this metaphor of death
is beneficial for people’s life so they can follow their own path in life. In Samuel Beckett: A
Biography, London, Beckett said that “what comforts [him] is the realization that [he] can
now accept this dark side as the commanding side of [his] personality. In accepting it, [he]
will make it work for [him]” (Bair, 1980, p. 299). In addition, Camus suggest the reader in his
book of Sisyphus that “one must imagine Sisyphus happy” (Camus, 1955, p. 123); since life is
meaningless, human should seek escape of the absurd situation by creating meanings.

As is said before, Black Humour helps the absurd in terms of exploring serious issues.
It supports this previous idea of having a different point of view in this meaningless life; in
Black Humor, existentialism and absurdity, Bruce Janoff described dark comedy as something
which cannot be considered as pessimistic. It is mainly used to address the extreme situations
that human concern (Janoff, 1974). Therefore, Black Humour must be regarded as an
important tool in Beckett’s dramas which provides through characters some relief from the
awareness of the human condition. It can be seen in Waiting for Godot when Vladimir is
laughing because he is aware that being born implies to be condemned to a life of suffering in
which nothing can be done:

VLADIMIR: Suppose we repented.

ESTRAGON: Repented what?

VLADIMIR: Oh […] (He reflects.) We wouldn’t have to go into the details.

ESTRAGON: Our being born?

Vladimir breaks into a hearty laugh which he immediately stifles, his hand pressed to his
pubis, his face contorted.

VLADIMIR: One daren’t even laugh any more.

ESTRAGON: Dreadful privation.

VLADIMIR: Merely smile. (He smiles suddenly ear to ear, keeps smiling, ceases as
suddenly.) It’s not the same thing. Nothing to be done.

14
 (Beckett, 1959, p. 11)

The reality of death is indirectly presented throughout the plays of Waiting for Godot
and Endgame; thus, black humour acts a brave symbol that faces up to the important
problematic of the end of life. Despite the fact that this connection of both concepts might be
seen unthinkable since dying is not a common topic in individuals conversation, Peter
Narvaez describes the use of dark comedy in such serious issues as a “technique for
communicating and dealing with the enigma of [...] mortality” (Narváez, 2003, p. 11).
Furthermore, it may be displayed as a particular tool whose purpose is to mitigate the pain and
fear suffered from human existence (Narvaez, 2003).

15
 5. CONCLUSION

Black Humour does not have a unique definition or a specific classification in part
because of its diversity. As a consequence of this lack of definition, it has provoked many
descriptions about what black humour is whereby different authors, critics and scholars have
given distinct titles of this concept such as dark comedy or gallows humour. In fact,
according to Winston, black humour is not designated as a genre of literature but it is rather
“an attitude [which] uses ironic and biting intelligence to attack sentimentality, social
convention and an apparently absurd universe” (Winston, 1972, p. 270). Moreover, the famous
writer André Breton approached this comedy as perspective of human being that takes out any
sentimentality and social conventions in nonsense world (O’Neill, 1993). The manifestation of
black humour in the theatre would be to push the situations presented in comedy to the limit
by using the absurd that constitutes the characteristics of Beckett's works.

Absurd situation plays an important role within Black Humour. The use of the absurd
is one of the elements of humour in general where it leads to unreal circumstances that by
themselves cause hilarity. But in the case of black humour, the absurd allows you to take a
close look at complex, existential aspects or elements of life that nobody talks about. The
absence of time, plotless stories and complicated narrative are characteristic that absurd and
black comedy concern. Samuel Beckett develops this connection in both play that are
analysed; in Waiting for Godot, time flies whereas two tramps are waiting for an unknown
character. Meanwhile, a variety of repetitive actions creates an atmosphere wherein Black
Humour takes over the absurd situation that happens in the story. The same applies with
Endgame: the plot do not change at all and the characters are mocking their meaningless life.

16
 6. BIBLIOGRAPHY

Bair, D. (1980). Samuel Beckett: A Biography. London, England: Pan books Ltd.
Beckett, S. (1958). Endgame: a play in one act; followed by act without words: a mime for
one player. New York, NY: Grove Press.
Beckett, S. (1959). Waiting for Godot: a tragicomedy in two acts. London, England: Faber
and Faber.
Bennett, M.Y. (2015). The Cambridge introduction to theatre and literature of the
absurd. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Bloom, H. & Hobby, B. (2010). Dark Humor, Bloom's literary themes. New York,
NY: Bloom's Literary Criticism.
Bradby, D. (2001). Beckett: Waiting for Godot. Cambridge, England: Cambridge
University Press.
Cambridge University Press. (2020). Cambridge Dictionary. Retrieved from
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/es/diccionario/ingles/black-humour.
Camus, A. (1955). The Myth of Sisyphus and Other Essays. New York, NY: Vintage
Books.
Earnshaw, S. (2007). Existentialism: A Guide for the Perplexed. London, England:
Bloomsbury Publishing Plc.
Esslin, M. (1961). The Theatre of the Absurd. New York, NY: Vintage Books.
Freud, S. (1927). Humour. The Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological
Works of Sigmund Freud, Volume XXI (1927-1931): The Future of an
Illusion, Civilization and its Discontents, and Other Works, 159-166.
Janoff, B. (1974). Black humor, existentialism and absurdity: a generic confusion.
Arizona Quarterly, 30, 293–304.
McDonald, R. (2015). Waiting for Godot and Beckett’s Cultural Impact. In D. Hulle
(Ed.). The New Cambridge Companion to Samuel Beckett (Cambridge
Companions to Literature, pp. 48-59). Cambridge, England: Cambridge
University Press.
Narváez, P. (2003). Of corpse: Death and humor in folklore and popular culture.
Logan, Utah: Utah State University Press.
O’Neill, P. (1990). The comedy of entropy: humour, narrative, reading. Toronto,
Canada: University of Toronto Press.

17
Pattie, D. (2001). The complete critical guide to Samuel Beckett. London, England:
Routledge.
Roas, D. (2010). La risa grotesca y lo fantástico. In Andrade P., Gimber A.,
Goicoechea M. (Ed.). Espacios y tiempos de lo fantástico: una mirada desde
el siglo XXI Bern, Switzerland: Peter Lang (pp. 17-31).
Webb, E. (2014). The Plays of Samuel Beckett. Seattle, WA: University of
Washington Press.
Winston, M. (1972). Humour noir and Black Humor. In Levin, H. (Ed.). Veins of
Humor (pp. 269-284). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Winston, M. (1978). Black Humor: To Weep with Laughter. In Charney, M. (Ed.).
Comedy: New Perspectives (pp. 31-43). New York, NY: New York Literary
Forum.

18