The purpose of this study was to discover what relationship, if any, exists between the actor's perception of audience feedback concerning his portrayal of a character in a drama and the audience's perception of that particular character.

Submitted by Marlene Santos (marlene.bc.ufg@gmail.com) on 2016-03-03T19:23:56Z No. of bitstreams: 1 Dissertação - Adriel Diniz dos Reis - 2015.pdf: 2537313 bytes, checksum: 84c3106818ae1ac823337eedcd29ebd5 (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Luciana Ferreira (lucgeral@gmail.com) on 2016-03-04T11:01:48Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 Dissertação - Adriel Diniz dos Reis - 2015.pdf: 2537313 bytes, checksum: 84c3106818ae1ac823337eedcd29ebd5 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2016-03-04T11:01:48Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Dissertação - Adriel Diniz dos Reis - 2015.pdf: 2537313 bytes, checksum: 84c3106818ae1ac823337eedcd29ebd5 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2015-08-20 / The purpose of this communication is to present and analyze the representation of theatrical performance Waiting for Godot by Samuel Beckett, promoted by Máskara – Núcleo Transdisciplinar de Pesquisa em Teatro, Dança e Performance, from Escola de Música e Artes Cênicas (EMAC), Universidade Federal de Goiás (UFG) in 2005. This examination is based on the concept of performative time drawn from the analysis of prospects that blend the study of performances of Richard Schechner and Victor Turner, with time trials established in studies and reflections of Henri Bergson, Marcel Proust, Reinhart Kosellec and Paul Ricoeur, in conjunction with the practical discussions emerged in the production of Beckett presentation, as well as the dialectic of the human condition and time established by Beckett in that piece. Performers, time and human nature dialogues, construction, perception and representation of theatrical production are made. All these actions will be closely articulated in the development of this research in order to understand and explain this process, and as such proposals reflections approximate the studies inherent Cultural Performances, the work of the Máskara and reflections and concepts proposed by playwright in the theatrical text Waiting for Godot. / O objetivo da presente comunicação é apresentar e analisar a representação do espetáculo teatral Esperando Godot, de Samuel Beckett, promovido pelo Máskara – Núcleo Transdisciplinar de Pesquisa em Teatro, Dança e Performance, da Escola de Música e Artes Cênicas (EMAC), da Universidade Federal de Goiás (UFG), no ano de 2005. Este exame parte do conceito de Tempo Performático elaborado a partir das análises de perspectivas que mesclam os estudos das performances de Richard Schechner e Victor Turner, com os ensaios temporais estabelecidos nos estudos e reflexões de Henri Bergson, Marcel Proust, Reinhart Kosellec e Paul Ricoeur, em conjunto com as práticas discussões emergidas na produção do espetáculo beckettiano, assim como da dialética da condição humana e temporal estabelecida por Beckett na referida peça. São constituídos diálogos performáticos, temporais e de natureza humana, na construção, percepção e representação dessa montagem teatral. Todas essas ações serão minuciosamente articuladas no desenvolvimento dessa pesquisa, com o intuito de entender e explanar esse processo, e, como essas reflexões propostas aproximam-se dos estudos inerentes às Performances Culturais, do trabalho desenvolvido pelo Máskara e das reflexões e conceitos proposto pelo dramaturgo no texto teatral Esperando Godot.

No description available.

本研究從語用學的角度探討荒謬劇「等待果陀」（Waiting for Godot）中種種的語言脫序現象。荒謬劇作家將戲劇形式以及內容結合起來表達荒謬的主題，並不再視語言為能夠承載意義的工具，因此「等待果陀」中充滿了違背一般日常語言使用規則的脫序現象。本文運用語用學理論規則來分析劇中人物的對話，並將其分門別類以及計算數量，以達到探究「等待果陀」的作者貝克特（Samuel Beckett）在劇中製造荒謬效果的主要語言策略。 雖然「等待果陀」充滿了脫序的語言使用，但是讀者和觀眾們依然能夠閱讀、欣賞，進而評論以及解讀這齣荒謬劇。但是在日常對話中，脫序的語言使用卻往往意味著溝通的失敗。這顯示人們在一般日常溝通和文學批評解讀中運用不同的語用原則。然而，語用學在文學批評解讀上的著墨卻極少，也無法解釋為何讀者觀眾在面對脫序的語言對話時仍有能力解讀。因此，本文提出新的語用原則－持續原則（The persistence principle）－來解釋此一現象，並架構一個文學解讀的模型來闡述文學批評解讀與日常對話的基本差異。 / The present study analyzes the language use of Waiting for Godot from the pragmatic point of view. The absurd playwrights combine the form and content of play to convey the theme of absurdity, and do not trust language as a reliable vehicle to convey meaning. Therefore, the conversations of Waiting for Godot are filled with disordered and incoherent language use. The present study analyzes the conversations of the play with pragmatic principles, and categorizes the language uses in terms of the types of violation cases. In addition, the violation cases are calculated in order to reveal the main strategy that Samuel Beckett adopts for constructing the dramatic effect of absurdity. Surprisingly, the readers and audiences of Waiting for Godot could still appreciate and interpret the play even though the play is full of nearly incomprehensible conversations. In daily life, on the contrary, communication would likely break down if the language uses are like the ones in the play. It indicates that people activate different pragmatic principles in daily communication and in literary interpretation. However, very little attention is paid to the field of literary critics and interpretation, and pragmatic principles cannot explain why the readers/audiences of Waiting for Godot could comprehend the play. Therefore, the researcher proposes the “persistence principle” to explain how the readers/audiences search for the meaning of the text. Moreover, a model of literary interpretation is constructed to illustrate the basic differences between daily communication and literature reading.

O foco dessa dissertação é analisar o papel, as características, e a presença dos bobos ao longo da história, focando em sua constante aparição no teatro. Os personagens principais da minha análise serão o Bobo, na peça Rei Lear de William Shakespeare, e Vladimir e Estragon, na peça Esperando Godot de Samuel Beckett. Na análise desses personagens, discuto semelhanças entre os autores, que já foram notadas por críticos como Martin Esslin, Jan Kott, e Northrop Frye, e mostro como os personagens de Beckett são similares aos bobos de Shakespeare. Bobos, no teatro, frequentemente agem como mediadores entre o palco e a plateia, guiando os espectadores e falando verdades. O Bobo de Lear diz verdades criticando seu mestre e o lembrando das decisões erradas que ele tomou; os personagens em Esperando Godot dizem verdades sobre a falta de sentido de nossas vidas e, mais importante, nos mostram essa falta de sentido no decorrer da peça. Em relação à linguagem, o uso dela pelos bobos é diferente do uso dos outros personagens porque eles a manipulam para criar desentendimentos e jogos de palavras. No teatro de Shakespeare, a principal razão para esse uso peculiar da linguagem é que os bobos querem mostrar sua sagacidade; no teatro de Beckett, eles usam uma linguagem sem sentido para mostrar que ela está quebrada e que tentativas de comunicação são inúteis. Através das ações e diálogos dos bobos de Beckett em Esperando Godot, podemos ver que a vida é absurda e que vivemos em um mundo cheio de incertezas. Apesar de personagens bobos geralmente serem vistos como superficiais e insignificantes, especialmente nas peças de Shakespeare, eles são extremamente importantes no teatro e têm uma maneira única de interagir com os outros personagens e com o público. / The focus of this thesis is to analyze the role, characteristics, and presence of fools throughout history, focusing on their recurrence in the theater. The characters I will focus on are Lear's Fool in William Shakespeare's King Lear, and Vladimir and Estragon in Samuel Beckett's Waiting for Godot, discussing similarities between the two authors, which have been mentioned by critics such as Martin Esslin, Jan Kott and Northrop Frye, and showing how Beckett's characters are similar to Shakespearean fools. Fools in the theater often act as mediators between the stage and the audience, guiding spectators and telling truths. Lear's Fool tells truths by criticizing his master and reminding him of the wrong decisions he has made; the characters in Waiting for Godot tell truths about the meaninglessness of life and, most importantly, show us this meaninglessness throughout the play. The use of language by fools is different from that of other characters because they manipulate it to create misunderstandings and word games. In Shakespeare's theater, the main reason for this peculiar use of language is that fools want to show their wit; in Beckett's theater, the characters use nonsensical language to show that language has broken down and that attempts at communication are pointless. Through the actions and dialogues of Beckett's fools in Waiting for Godot, we can see that life is absurd and that we live in a world full of uncertainties. In spite of the fact that fool characters are often seen as shallow and insignificant, especially in Shakespeare's theater, they are of extreme importance in the theater and have a unique manner of interacting with other characters and with the audience.

O foco dessa dissertação é analisar o papel, as características, e a presença dos bobos ao longo da história, focando em sua constante aparição no teatro. Os personagens principais da minha análise serão o Bobo, na peça Rei Lear de William Shakespeare, e Vladimir e Estragon, na peça Esperando Godot de Samuel Beckett. Na análise desses personagens, discuto semelhanças entre os autores, que já foram notadas por críticos como Martin Esslin, Jan Kott, e Northrop Frye, e mostro como os personagens de Beckett são similares aos bobos de Shakespeare. Bobos, no teatro, frequentemente agem como mediadores entre o palco e a plateia, guiando os espectadores e falando verdades. O Bobo de Lear diz verdades criticando seu mestre e o lembrando das decisões erradas que ele tomou; os personagens em Esperando Godot dizem verdades sobre a falta de sentido de nossas vidas e, mais importante, nos mostram essa falta de sentido no decorrer da peça. Em relação à linguagem, o uso dela pelos bobos é diferente do uso dos outros personagens porque eles a manipulam para criar desentendimentos e jogos de palavras. No teatro de Shakespeare, a principal razão para esse uso peculiar da linguagem é que os bobos querem mostrar sua sagacidade; no teatro de Beckett, eles usam uma linguagem sem sentido para mostrar que ela está quebrada e que tentativas de comunicação são inúteis. Através das ações e diálogos dos bobos de Beckett em Esperando Godot, podemos ver que a vida é absurda e que vivemos em um mundo cheio de incertezas. Apesar de personagens bobos geralmente serem vistos como superficiais e insignificantes, especialmente nas peças de Shakespeare, eles são extremamente importantes no teatro e têm uma maneira única de interagir com os outros personagens e com o público. / The focus of this thesis is to analyze the role, characteristics, and presence of fools throughout history, focusing on their recurrence in the theater. The characters I will focus on are Lear's Fool in William Shakespeare's King Lear, and Vladimir and Estragon in Samuel Beckett's Waiting for Godot, discussing similarities between the two authors, which have been mentioned by critics such as Martin Esslin, Jan Kott and Northrop Frye, and showing how Beckett's characters are similar to Shakespearean fools. Fools in the theater often act as mediators between the stage and the audience, guiding spectators and telling truths. Lear's Fool tells truths by criticizing his master and reminding him of the wrong decisions he has made; the characters in Waiting for Godot tell truths about the meaninglessness of life and, most importantly, show us this meaninglessness throughout the play. The use of language by fools is different from that of other characters because they manipulate it to create misunderstandings and word games. In Shakespeare's theater, the main reason for this peculiar use of language is that fools want to show their wit; in Beckett's theater, the characters use nonsensical language to show that language has broken down and that attempts at communication are pointless. Through the actions and dialogues of Beckett's fools in Waiting for Godot, we can see that life is absurd and that we live in a world full of uncertainties. In spite of the fact that fool characters are often seen as shallow and insignificant, especially in Shakespeare's theater, they are of extreme importance in the theater and have a unique manner of interacting with other characters and with the audience.

O foco dessa dissertação é analisar o papel, as características, e a presença dos bobos ao longo da história, focando em sua constante aparição no teatro. Os personagens principais da minha análise serão o Bobo, na peça Rei Lear de William Shakespeare, e Vladimir e Estragon, na peça Esperando Godot de Samuel Beckett. Na análise desses personagens, discuto semelhanças entre os autores, que já foram notadas por críticos como Martin Esslin, Jan Kott, e Northrop Frye, e mostro como os personagens de Beckett são similares aos bobos de Shakespeare. Bobos, no teatro, frequentemente agem como mediadores entre o palco e a plateia, guiando os espectadores e falando verdades. O Bobo de Lear diz verdades criticando seu mestre e o lembrando das decisões erradas que ele tomou; os personagens em Esperando Godot dizem verdades sobre a falta de sentido de nossas vidas e, mais importante, nos mostram essa falta de sentido no decorrer da peça. Em relação à linguagem, o uso dela pelos bobos é diferente do uso dos outros personagens porque eles a manipulam para criar desentendimentos e jogos de palavras. No teatro de Shakespeare, a principal razão para esse uso peculiar da linguagem é que os bobos querem mostrar sua sagacidade; no teatro de Beckett, eles usam uma linguagem sem sentido para mostrar que ela está quebrada e que tentativas de comunicação são inúteis. Através das ações e diálogos dos bobos de Beckett em Esperando Godot, podemos ver que a vida é absurda e que vivemos em um mundo cheio de incertezas. Apesar de personagens bobos geralmente serem vistos como superficiais e insignificantes, especialmente nas peças de Shakespeare, eles são extremamente importantes no teatro e têm uma maneira única de interagir com os outros personagens e com o público. / The focus of this thesis is to analyze the role, characteristics, and presence of fools throughout history, focusing on their recurrence in the theater. The characters I will focus on are Lear's Fool in William Shakespeare's King Lear, and Vladimir and Estragon in Samuel Beckett's Waiting for Godot, discussing similarities between the two authors, which have been mentioned by critics such as Martin Esslin, Jan Kott and Northrop Frye, and showing how Beckett's characters are similar to Shakespearean fools. Fools in the theater often act as mediators between the stage and the audience, guiding spectators and telling truths. Lear's Fool tells truths by criticizing his master and reminding him of the wrong decisions he has made; the characters in Waiting for Godot tell truths about the meaninglessness of life and, most importantly, show us this meaninglessness throughout the play. The use of language by fools is different from that of other characters because they manipulate it to create misunderstandings and word games. In Shakespeare's theater, the main reason for this peculiar use of language is that fools want to show their wit; in Beckett's theater, the characters use nonsensical language to show that language has broken down and that attempts at communication are pointless. Through the actions and dialogues of Beckett's fools in Waiting for Godot, we can see that life is absurd and that we live in a world full of uncertainties. In spite of the fact that fool characters are often seen as shallow and insignificant, especially in Shakespeare's theater, they are of extreme importance in the theater and have a unique manner of interacting with other characters and with the audience.

The study elucidates the relation of Tom Stoppard's play Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead to Hamlet on the one hand and to the Theatre of the Absurd on the other. The two plays chosen to represent the Theatre of the Absurd are Samuel Beckett1 s Waiting for Godot and Harold Pinter* s The Caretaker. Since Stoppard is admired as a master craftsman of language, the emphasis is on his use of language. The extent to which the use of the cliché characterizes the three absurd plays is examined. It is found that the language area covered by the term cliche is not clearly defined and that the term is not uniformly applied. The inquiry centres on finding features, such as repetition, music-hall passages and "ready-made" language, that could explain why the dialogue in the three plays might appear cliche-ridden and on comparing the three plays in respect of these features. 　 The study further draws parallels between Stoppard's play and Waiting for Godot in the use of various techniques, such as misunderstandings, anticlimax and afterthought. It is found that there is often a conscious adoption by Stoppard of Beckett's techniques. To clarify the relation of Stoppard's play to Hamlet various aspects of the two plays are studied. These aspects include changes introduced into stereotyped expressions, punning, the use of parody and the handling of two specific motives, madness and death. Parallels are found in spite of the fact that several centuries separate the two plays, not least in respect to style, technique and language. / digitalisering@umu

Submitted thesis follows up clowning as phenomenon that can be approached in different ways and understood from different points of view. The perspective depends on a theoretical base and methodological tools, including a conceptual apparatus. Because the viewpoint of the phenomenon is the core of submitted theses, I have decided to use as a methodological tool discoursive analysis, particularly bakhtinian analysis. Theoretical background is provided by Mikhail Bakhtin's theories and concepts (dialogism, heteroglossia, speech genres) and Julia Kristeva's theory of intertextuality (that was inspired by bakhtinian thinking). One of key terms of this theses is the concept of transgression which relates to supposition that transgression is one of principal features of clowning. The theses submits confrontation of two different approaches to the phenomenon of clowning. First one is provided by structuralist model by Paul Bouissac. Bouissac describes clowning as an abstract system, relatively static and closed code, which is builded of stabilized signs. His conception presents clowning as a phenomenon firmly tied up with the circus structure. Although Bouissac defines transgression as a characteristic feature of clowning, from his point of view is this transgression limited by borders of circus. Crossing...

When the Irish writer Samuel Beckett (1906-1989) wrote Waiting for Godot in 1948-1949 he was in a state of artistic depression and confusion. He had already turned to French instead of English and with a manuscript for the stage he made an effort to get away from what he called ”the awful prose” he was working on at that time. Waiting for Godot had its first opening night in Paris in 1953, and during the years since then many different interpretations have been made of this challenging work of art. In this essay, with the meta textual elements in Waiting for Godot as a foundation, I’m reading the drama as a writer’s struggle with his material – not strictly biographical, but with Beckett as an artistic example. Vladimir and Estragon, as well as Pozzo and Lucky, then become personalizations of the voices in the mind of the author, where intellect/reason/analysis on one hand and intuition/feeling/fantasy on the other are working side by side, or as a pair of opposites, to try to get along through conflict and cooperation; conferring, clashing, and complementing one another. Godot will then function as the mystical and driving force, the necessary lack of purpose or fundamental meaning that keeps the artist in touch with art. In this aspect Godot has not to come; his absence is an absolute condition to get the play going, to keep the writer writing, to make all artists continue their lonely, tiresome, difficult work. Waiting for Godot tells us something about the struggle every writer has to face when writing a play, or a novel, or a poem, where he, or she, has to speak with and listen to the inner voices of intuition and intellect and try to get by in spite of the overall sense of hopelessness of it all. Art is at the same time without meaning and of infinite value and I believe that this paradox is alive and working in Waiting for Godot.