Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

SAMUEL BECKETT’İN ENDGAME’İ İLE T. S. ELIOT’IN “THEWASTE LAND” ININ EKOELEŞTİRİNİN IŞIĞINDA KARŞILAŞTIRMALI BİR OKUMASI

Year 2024, Volume: 11 Issue: 1, 30 - 49, 22.04.2024

Abstract

Bu çalışma, Samuel Beckett’in absürd draması Endgame (1957) ve T. S. Eliot’ın “The Waste Land” (1922) şiirinin, kaotik ve karamsar bir dünyayı, kıyamet kurgusu ve atıflarıyla nasıl sunduğunu incelemektedir. Makale, bir dünya savaşının ardından yazılan tutarlı bir şekilde benzer bir ekoeleştirel algı kullanan iki metni yan yana getirmektedir. Her iki eser de doğanın yıkımının yol açtığı çaresizliği ve sefaleti yansıtmaktadır. Beckett, bir zamanlar hayatta olan her şeyin yok edildiği bir dünyayı tasvir etmektedir. Tüm ekosistem yok olmuştur ve karakterler geçmişin muhteşem zamanlarını özlemle anımsarken bugünkü acılarının yasını tutmaktadırlar. Beckett oyunu aracılığıyla, insanların kendi yıkımlarını getirdikleri ve zarar verdikleri yaşam döngüsünün yıkıcı sonuçlarının acısını çektikleri kaçınılmaz gerçeği tasvir etmektedir. Beckett’in draması, meşum bir ortam, çaresiz karakterler ve insanlığın geleceğine dair karamsar vizyon nedeniyle Eliot’ın “The Waste Land” şiirini yansıtmaktadır. Endgame’deki ana karakter Hamm’in umutsuzluğu, “The Waste Land” de benzer şekilde tasvir edildiği gibi, kısırlığı toprağın dirilişi ve insan varlığının korunması için hiçbir umut bırakmayan Balıkçı Kral efsanesine bir gönderme yapmaktadır. Makale, ekoeleştirel bir bakış açısıyla, Beckett’in oyununun ve Eliot’ın şiirinin, doğal üremenin korkunç hiçliği içinde insanlığın çektiği ıstırabı ve dünyada bu ıstıraba herhangi bir çare bulmanın imkansızlığını nasıl yansıttığını analiz etmektedir. Çalışma, Beckett’in Endgame oyunu ile Eliot’ın “The Waste Land” şiirinin, kıyametin son anına kadar sorumluluğu reddeden insan doğasını sergilediği, ve metinlerin ekoeleştirel analizinin bunların doğal dünyanın çevresel yıkımı hakkında insanlığı teyakkuza geçirerek bu karamsar vizyonla ikaz anlatıları işlevi gördüklerini ortaya çıkardığı sonucuna varmaktadır.

References

  • Ackerley, C. (2005). Inorganic form: Samuel Beckett’s nature. Journal of the Australasian Universities Modern Language Association, 104 (1), 79-101.
  • Adorno, T. W. (1982). Trying to understand Endgame. (Michael Jones, Trans.). New German Critique, 26, 119-150. (Original work published 1961)
  • Ateş, K. (2018). “You’re on Earth, there’s no cure for that!”: The dystopian future of nature in Samuel Beckett’s Endgame”, International Social Sciences Studies Journal, 4 (27), 5977-5982.
  • Beckett, S. (1957). Endgame. Retrieved July 3, 2014, from chrome extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://edisciplinas.usp.br/pluginfile.php/3346220/mod_resource/content/1/ENDGAME%20BY%20SAMUEL%20BECKETT.pdf
  • Biderci Dinç, D. (2023). Entropy in “The Waste Land” by T. S. Eliot. Kesit Akademi Dergisi, 9 (35), 717-744.
  • Chaucer, G. (n.d.). The Canterbury tales: General prologue. https://tigerweb.towson.edu/duncan/chaucer/duallang1.htm
  • Cohn, R. (1979). Words working overtime: Endgame and No Man’s Land. The Yearbook of English Studies, 9, 188-203.
  • Ekler, O. (2015). No more leeches in nature: Pentheus’ decaying corpse in Beckett’s Endgame, and Eliot’s Waste Land. Electronic International Journal of Education, Arts, and Science, 1 (2), 58-75.
  • Eliot, T. S. (1963). Collected poems. Harcourt, Brace & World, Inc. (Original work published 1922)
  • Garrard, G. (2004) Ecocriticism. Routledge.
  • Garrard, G. (2012). Endgame: Beckett’s “ecological thought”. Samuel Beckett Today/ Aujourd’hui, 23 (1), 383-397.
  • Giles, J. M. (2008). The aesthetics of relinquishment: Natural and social contracts in Beckett’s The End. Samuel Beckett Today/Aujourd'hui, 20, 175-88.
  • Güven, F. (2015). Destruction of nature and its effects in Endgame. Electronic International Journal of Education, Arts, and Science, 1 (1), 1-9.
  • Hamilton, G. (2002). Life goes on: Endgame as anti-pastoral elegy. Modern Drama, 45 (4), 611-627.
  • Hasselbach, H. P. (1976). Samuel Beckett’s Endgame: A structural analysis. Modern Drama, 19 (1), 25-34.
  • Juez, L. B. (2008) Beckett’s ancestors. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/books/2008/apr/08/fiction.samuelbeckett#:~:text=In%201961%20an%20American,is%20to%20let%20it%20in.
  • McKibben, B. (2006). The end of nature. Random House.
  • Milutinovic, Z. (2006). The death of representation and the representation of death: Ionesco, Beckett, and Stoppard. Comparative Drama, 40 (3), 337-64.
  • Mundhenk, M. (1981). Samuel Beckett: The dialectics of hope and despair. College Literature, 8 (3), 227-48.
  • Petronius, A. G. (n.d.) The Satyricon. Web. https://www.gutenberg.org/files/5225/5225-h/5225-h.htm
  • Yeats, W. B. (1991). The Second Coming. In R. J. Finneran (Ed.). The poems of W. B. Yeats, 158. Macmillan. (Original work published 1939)

A COMPARATIVE READING OF SAMUEL BECKETT’S ENDGAME AND T. S. ELIOT’S “THEWASTE LAND” IN THE LIGHT OF ECOCRITICISM*

Year 2024, Volume: 11 Issue: 1, 30 - 49, 22.04.2024

Abstract

This study investigates how Samuel Beckett’s absurd drama Endgame (1957) and T. S. Eliot’s poem “The Waste Land” (1922) present a chaotic and pessimistic world through their apocalyptic setting and allusions. The paper juxtaposes the two texts composed in the aftermath of a world war that consistently use an analogous ecocritical perception. Both works reflect the despair and miseries caused by the destruction of nature. Beckett depicts a prominent world of extermination for everything that was once alive. The whole ecosystem has been consummated, and the characters mourn for their present-day sufferings while reminiscing about the past’s splendid times. Through his play, Beckett portrays the inevitable reality that humans bring their own destruction and suffer from the devastating consequences of the life cycle they have damaged. Beckett’s drama mirrors Eliot’s poem “The Waste Land” due to the ominous setting, the desperate characters, and the pessimistic vision for the future of humanity. The hopelessness of the main character, Hamm, in Endgame, is an allusion to the myth of the Fisher King, whose infertility leaves no promise for the resurrection of the land and the preservation of human existence, as similarly depicted in “The Waste Land”. From an ecocritical perspective, the paper analyzes how Beckett’s play and Eliot’s poem reflect the suffering of humanity in the horrid nihility of natural reproduction and the impossibility of finding any cure for this suffering on Earth. The study concludes that Beckett’s play Endgame and Eliot’s poem “The Waste Land” portray human nature denying responsibility till the last moment of the apocalypse, and the ecocritical analysis of the texts reveals that they serve as cautionary narratives with this pessimistic vision by alerting humanity about the environmental destruction of the natural world.

References

  • Ackerley, C. (2005). Inorganic form: Samuel Beckett’s nature. Journal of the Australasian Universities Modern Language Association, 104 (1), 79-101.
  • Adorno, T. W. (1982). Trying to understand Endgame. (Michael Jones, Trans.). New German Critique, 26, 119-150. (Original work published 1961)
  • Ateş, K. (2018). “You’re on Earth, there’s no cure for that!”: The dystopian future of nature in Samuel Beckett’s Endgame”, International Social Sciences Studies Journal, 4 (27), 5977-5982.
  • Beckett, S. (1957). Endgame. Retrieved July 3, 2014, from chrome extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://edisciplinas.usp.br/pluginfile.php/3346220/mod_resource/content/1/ENDGAME%20BY%20SAMUEL%20BECKETT.pdf
  • Biderci Dinç, D. (2023). Entropy in “The Waste Land” by T. S. Eliot. Kesit Akademi Dergisi, 9 (35), 717-744.
  • Chaucer, G. (n.d.). The Canterbury tales: General prologue. https://tigerweb.towson.edu/duncan/chaucer/duallang1.htm
  • Cohn, R. (1979). Words working overtime: Endgame and No Man’s Land. The Yearbook of English Studies, 9, 188-203.
  • Ekler, O. (2015). No more leeches in nature: Pentheus’ decaying corpse in Beckett’s Endgame, and Eliot’s Waste Land. Electronic International Journal of Education, Arts, and Science, 1 (2), 58-75.
  • Eliot, T. S. (1963). Collected poems. Harcourt, Brace & World, Inc. (Original work published 1922)
  • Garrard, G. (2004) Ecocriticism. Routledge.
  • Garrard, G. (2012). Endgame: Beckett’s “ecological thought”. Samuel Beckett Today/ Aujourd’hui, 23 (1), 383-397.
  • Giles, J. M. (2008). The aesthetics of relinquishment: Natural and social contracts in Beckett’s The End. Samuel Beckett Today/Aujourd'hui, 20, 175-88.
  • Güven, F. (2015). Destruction of nature and its effects in Endgame. Electronic International Journal of Education, Arts, and Science, 1 (1), 1-9.
  • Hamilton, G. (2002). Life goes on: Endgame as anti-pastoral elegy. Modern Drama, 45 (4), 611-627.
  • Hasselbach, H. P. (1976). Samuel Beckett’s Endgame: A structural analysis. Modern Drama, 19 (1), 25-34.
  • Juez, L. B. (2008) Beckett’s ancestors. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/books/2008/apr/08/fiction.samuelbeckett#:~:text=In%201961%20an%20American,is%20to%20let%20it%20in.
  • McKibben, B. (2006). The end of nature. Random House.
  • Milutinovic, Z. (2006). The death of representation and the representation of death: Ionesco, Beckett, and Stoppard. Comparative Drama, 40 (3), 337-64.
  • Mundhenk, M. (1981). Samuel Beckett: The dialectics of hope and despair. College Literature, 8 (3), 227-48.
  • Petronius, A. G. (n.d.) The Satyricon. Web. https://www.gutenberg.org/files/5225/5225-h/5225-h.htm
  • Yeats, W. B. (1991). The Second Coming. In R. J. Finneran (Ed.). The poems of W. B. Yeats, 158. Macmillan. (Original work published 1939)
There are 21 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language English
Subjects British and Irish Language, Literature and Culture, Comparative and Transnational Literature
Journal Section Articles
Authors

Seher Özsert 0000-0002-2931-499X

Publication Date April 22, 2024
Submission Date August 16, 2023
Published in Issue Year 2024 Volume: 11 Issue: 1

Cite

APA Özsert, S. (2024). A COMPARATIVE READING OF SAMUEL BECKETT’S ENDGAME AND T. S. ELIOT’S “THEWASTE LAND” IN THE LIGHT OF ECOCRITICISM*. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Edebiyat Fakültesi Dergisi, 11(1), 30-49.
AMA Özsert S. A COMPARATIVE READING OF SAMUEL BECKETT’S ENDGAME AND T. S. ELIOT’S “THEWASTE LAND” IN THE LIGHT OF ECOCRITICISM*. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Edebiyat Fakültesi Dergisi. April 2024;11(1):30-49.
Chicago Özsert, Seher. “A COMPARATIVE READING OF SAMUEL BECKETT’S ENDGAME AND T. S. ELIOT’S ‘THEWASTE LAND’ IN THE LIGHT OF ECOCRITICISM*”. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Edebiyat Fakültesi Dergisi 11, no. 1 (April 2024): 30-49.
EndNote Özsert S (April 1, 2024) A COMPARATIVE READING OF SAMUEL BECKETT’S ENDGAME AND T. S. ELIOT’S “THEWASTE LAND” IN THE LIGHT OF ECOCRITICISM*. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Edebiyat Fakültesi Dergisi 11 1 30–49.
IEEE S. Özsert, “A COMPARATIVE READING OF SAMUEL BECKETT’S ENDGAME AND T. S. ELIOT’S ‘THEWASTE LAND’ IN THE LIGHT OF ECOCRITICISM*”, Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Edebiyat Fakültesi Dergisi, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 30–49, 2024.
ISNAD Özsert, Seher. “A COMPARATIVE READING OF SAMUEL BECKETT’S ENDGAME AND T. S. ELIOT’S ‘THEWASTE LAND’ IN THE LIGHT OF ECOCRITICISM*”. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Edebiyat Fakültesi Dergisi 11/1 (April 2024), 30-49.
JAMA Özsert S. A COMPARATIVE READING OF SAMUEL BECKETT’S ENDGAME AND T. S. ELIOT’S “THEWASTE LAND” IN THE LIGHT OF ECOCRITICISM*. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Edebiyat Fakültesi Dergisi. 2024;11:30–49.
MLA Özsert, Seher. “A COMPARATIVE READING OF SAMUEL BECKETT’S ENDGAME AND T. S. ELIOT’S ‘THEWASTE LAND’ IN THE LIGHT OF ECOCRITICISM*”. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Edebiyat Fakültesi Dergisi, vol. 11, no. 1, 2024, pp. 30-49.
Vancouver Özsert S. A COMPARATIVE READING OF SAMUEL BECKETT’S ENDGAME AND T. S. ELIOT’S “THEWASTE LAND” IN THE LIGHT OF ECOCRITICISM*. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Edebiyat Fakültesi Dergisi. 2024;11(1):30-49.