Talk:Endgame (play)

Talk

doubt prevents the character in Hamlet's revised version of The Mousetrap from taking decisive action. What is "Hamlet's revised version of The Mousetrap"? Mark¹ 02:34, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

The Mousetrap is the play that Hamlet has the players put on, his revised version includes the speech designed to oust Claudius as his Old Denmark's killer Evil Angry Cat 13:51, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps you're right - gasp! Unfortunately, I don't feel that I'm able to produce an adequate production history of the play. Perhaps you can. In any case, I think that it is helpful for the play to have some kind of production history listed, historically significant productions, of course, and just as importantly from my view point, recent productions in the North America, demonstrating the continuing relevance of the play. By the way, I have no connection with the Torn Space Theatre company production, except for having seen the play and enjoyed their vivid realization of Beckett's creation. 22:40 23 March 2007

It has also been theorized that Hamm is an actual person who on his death bed is imagining this gloomy reality due to the onset of death. As plausible a theory as this is, there is no proof from the author, his past, or his acquaintances to support it.

Is there a shred of textual evidence to lean on to prove this? If not, I think it should definitely go.

copyright?

Is this work still covered under copyright, and, if so, isn't there a wikipedia policy against linking to full online text of a copyrighted work?--Vidkun (talk) 16:13, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

It certainly is copyright, and you don't mess with the Beckett estate. Not sure about the second question, but it doesn't sound ethical. Cop 663 (talk) 01:34, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

What does this need to improve to a C class article? - User Phaeton23

It IS NOT CERTAINLY under copyright protection in the USA. This was first published pre-autorenewal era (57)and went into the Public Domain in the United States due to lack of renewal66.195.42.6 (talk) 01:13, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

References

Summary?

A summary is missing. Does anyone feel up to writing one? One, maybe two paragraphs would be enough. 188.220.45.209 (talk) 22:12, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

Image removed

The image was removed as a copyright violation. Whoever uploaded it went so far as to claim it was his original work, and he was giving it a CC license. Big no-no.

Wikipedia rules are stricter than fair use, by the way. What is permitted is an identifying cover image for books on their page. First editions are strongly preferred: since this has "historical" cachet. Presumably theater productions can rely on posters, but they are certainly much more difficult to find!

Moreover, the image file cannot be uploaded to Wikicommons, as this one had been. It can be uploaded to Wikipedia with an accompanying explanation. See here for what the French and US first editions look like.

Also, the image cannot be recycled for the template. I would recommend someone in New York take a free image of the Samuel Beckett Theatre, with his name clearly visible!

PS, I could probably add a summary in a few days (heck, pretty much any Beckett work). I've been busy the past two months with Joseph McElroy and Michael Brodsky and I expect to stay busy, and I have some other severely underrepresented authors in mind to work on.Choor monster (talk) 22:58, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Plot summary?

There are a couple of old comments above, highlighting the lack of a plot summary - but no progress. If someone familiar with the work could add this, it would be a great benefit to those of us who haven't seen it. ~dom Kaos~ (talk) 13:40, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

“You remain”

Someone added the I admit impressive interpretation that when Hamm says “You remain” he is addressing the rag that he has promptly draped over his face.

This is valid, yet in no way standard or unequivocal.

I strongly prefer my own interpretation, which I find stronger in thematic force, and with lines up very neatly with other elements of the play - that Hamm is addressing the audience directly.

So, whoever wrote that (or someone else), please consider rephrasing it as a possible interpretation rather than a definite one.

Thanks. 2A02:3032:400:DD35:8063:F5B5:F751:75C6 (talk) 21:11, 7 March 2022 (UTC)

Difficulty sourcing the Bloom quote(s)

If anyone has any ideas/leads on tracking down the source(s) of the Harold Bloom quotes at the top of the article ("'I know of no other work of its reverberatory power,' but stated that he could not handle reading it in old age for its harrowing, bare bone existentialism"), I'd be greatly appreciative.

The direct quote cites an article that provides no further source, and was unfortunately written a few months after the quote was added to this page, so I worry this is might be circular reporting of a quote that might not actually exist. And the second, summarized quotation turns up even less. It was originally added by an IP editor, so we can't backtrack the info that way, and the author of the article doesn't have a public email address that I could find, just a twitter, so I tweeted at him, but I think I'm probably unlikely to get a response.

I have digital copies of Bloom's Samuel Beckett's Waiting for Godot (2008), and Samuel Beckett (Bloom's Modern Critical Views) (2010), and so did a quick ctrl+F for keywords (reverb, barebones, bare bones), but came up empty. I'm unsure of where to look next, and how long to look before removing the quotes. Any and all thoughts welcome Librarian of Sand (talk) 21:08, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

I think I found the origin of the (turns out not-so-)direct quote! On page 503 of Bloom's The Western Canon (1995) he writes-

"It is difficult to find an equal to Beckett among the best dramatists of our Chaotic Age: Brecht, Pirandello, Ionesco, Garcia Lorca, Shaw. They have no Endgame; to find a drama of its reverberatory power, you have to return to Ibsen. [....] I cannot think of any other twentieth-century work of literature composed as late as 1957 that is nearly as original an achievement as Endgame, nor has there been anything since to challenge such originality. Beckett may have forsworn "mastery" as not being possible after Joyce and Proust, but Endgame reaches it. After he turned fifty, in 1956, Beckett had five extraordinary years of creativity, a span that starts with Endgame and includes Krapp's Last Tape and How It Is, which with Endgame set a new standard that even he never quite touched again."

I'll take a swing at rewriting the Bloom section of the lede a little later when I have more time, since it seems the claim that he called Endgame the greatest prose drama of the 20th century is also not quite accurate. Still no luck on the idea that he couldn't bear to read it in his old age, but I'm not giving up yet. Librarian of Sand (talk) 20:36, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

Alright, I corrected the quote, added the source, and removed the unsourced quote (which I'm still looking for, but I'm growing less hopeful about, additional pairs of eyes still very much appreciated). I went back and forth whether to introduce the context of the quote as -

"saying of other dramatists of the time that "They have no Endgame; to find..." or

"saying that "[Other dramatists of the time] have no Endgame; to find..."

Obviously I went with the latter, but don't feel strongly about it. Let me know if there's a better way! Librarian of Sand (talk) 06:34, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Analysis

I've removed the analysis section which is unsourced, and potentially OR. No criticism of its accuracy or erudition, but we need sources for things like that. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 19:59, 16 May 2024 (UTC).

"Written before but premiering after Waiting for Godot,"

Is there a source for this? Many other sources on the web use this article as their citation. Vinson Cunningham's 2023 review of Endgame for the New Yorker makes the same claim but a biographical/academic source would be stronger. 129.74.34.157 (talk) 16:32, 1 October 2024 (UTC)