The play by Beckett has sparked an endless debate in the theatrical critical community that continues to this day. After all, what is Godot? What did Beckett—one of the leading figures of the Theatre of the Absurd alongside Eugène Ionesco, Adamov, and Jean Genet—mean by the interminable dialogue between two beggars who, faced with the boredom of life, constantly contemplate suicide but do not carry out their intention because the available rope is weak?

The dialogue between Vladimir and Estragon is both pathetic and desperate, concerning everything and nothing. Godot is a vague being, awaited at the end of each day, serving as a pretext to address their miserable, meaningless existence. Pozzo and Lucky, the other two characters, create a dynamic in which they confront each other with equal indifference and awareness of their futility, displaying the spectacle of servitude to their condition. This mirrors the situation of Estragon and Vladimir, who are subservient and blind to the endless passage of time in life, enslaved by the burden of carrying the days as a meaningless wait. Pozzo, who tyrannizes Lucky as the owner of his will, is himself stripped of desires that can be fulfilled.

For each of us who yearns for something every day, Godot is neither a thing nor a person. It is not the void that never arrives. Godot can indeed represent the clear hope of what is to come. We remain "Waiting for Godot". Nothing to be done.