nell’s death
by Douglas Messerli
Samuel Beckett Endgame
/ Los Angeles, Sacred Fools Theater / the performance I saw was on April
15, 2011
hamm: We’re
not beginning to…to…mean something?
clov: Mean
something! You and I, mean something!
(Brief laugh.)
Ah
that’s a good one!
hamm: I
wonder.
(Pause.)
Imagine
if a rational being came back to earth, wouldn’t he be liable to get ideas
into his
head if he observed us long enough.
Beware poor viewer (or reader),
Beckett seems to warn, of putting too many of your ideas into the often quite
meaningless actions of Clov and Hamm of the playwright’s marvelous Endgame. But of course Beckett is also
suggesting, perhaps, that the play—carefully looked at—does mean something, a great many things! Beckett’s equivocation
about several issues are at the heart of this play.
Seeing it again, this new performance at the Sacred Fools Theater in
Los Angeles directed by Paul Plunkett, and reading it again soon after, set me
to thinking and rediscovering all sorts of meanings, some new, some old, some
likely chewed up by many of the hundreds of Beckett critics over the years—but
perhaps most worth mentioning.
By accident I saw this play soon after seeing Benjamin Britten’s setting
of the medieval miracle play, Noye’s
Fludd, so that I recognized in Endgame
this time round far more suggestions and references to Noah and his family.
Noah’s son Ham(m) (wonderfully played by Leon Russom)—shamed and cursed
by his father to be the servant of his brothers for having seen him naked—is at
the center of Beckett’s work, enduring his seemingly endless life on earth.
Noah lived three hundred and fifty years after
the flood, a total of nine hundred and fifty years according to the book of
Genesis. And each of the sons lived for hundreds of years also. So Hamm’s
crying out for death is obviously no small thing. In the post-holocaust world
in which Hamm lives, where life has been completely blotted out—there are no
tides, no waves, all is gray—the end is certainly to be longed for.
Hamm’s father, living out his old, old age in a ashbin beside his equally displaced mother, Nell, is called in Beckett’s play, Nagg, suggesting both his propensity to “nag” or scold (he, after all has cursed his own son) and the fact, clearly, that like an old “nag,” an old horse, he has been put out to pasture, so to speak, locked away in a covered ashbin. If one wanted to go further, and Beckett certainly does encourage this, one might play a game of anagrams, transforming Nagg into something like “Noah after God’s grievance,” or “Noah after God’s gift,” depending upon which side of the coin from which one sees oneself. But this is, after all, only a game.
There is no question, however, of both Nagg’s, Nell’s, and Hamm’s
memories of rain, water, sails, fins, and other flood-like images which Hamm
insists that Clov inspect through the windows high above normal placement, with
a ladder and telescope in hand. It is as if they live still in the ark, attempting to spot signs of some
vestiges of new life or survival. Nagg and Nell, moreover, remembering before
the flood, retell the story of how they almost drowned on Lake Como.
Clov (Barry Ford) seems the only misplaced figure in the play. Hamm
treats him, occasionally like a son, but none of his Biblical sons, Cush,
Mizraim, Put and Canaan suggest the name Clov. Perhaps he is the son of the old
man of his fiction which Hamm retells day and after day, adding details as he
goes along? Whoever he is, he serves, like Lucky in Beckett's Waiting for Godot, as an overburdened,
maltreated slave to Hamm.
More likely, Clov is a manifestation of the cleaving process that daily
occurs between the two, his name resembling the past-tense of the cleavage
which may or may not occur at Endgame’s
close. But he is also the matching opposite of Hamm. Both are red-complexioned,
but the blind Hamm can only sit while the thin Clov can only stand. Yet despite
the abuse that Hamm heaps upon him, Clov has no choice, it appears, but to
serve his master.
I think Beckett here is also playing with a wonderful pun, suggesting
the perfect relationship of clove to ham, the two generally used in Easter
dinners, one all plump asquat the platter with the other neatly studding it (on
thinks of Clov’s constant orderliness). In that sense, Beckett has moved away
from the intricacies of Noah’s story, but has brilliantly portrayed their
lifetime relationship, and hinted at a new hope symbolized by any Easter
dinner.
With no immediate possibility of death, trapped in a world beyond the
end where, as Clov reminds us again and again, all they can see is “zero,” it
is no wonder that these two so suffer the pains of everyday life. Nearly
everything around them has disappeared and provisions, including food and
pain-killers, are fast running out.
As many critics have agreed, theirs is a world of repetition, a day by
day recitation of their sufferings that apparently have no end. As Hamm keeps
suggesting, however, it will someday, must
someday end, as Nell’s death—if it is truly a death—foretells. Like a bell
announcing a funeral, or as in the knelling of a disaster, Nell’s demise
demonstrates that despite the “game of dying” Nagg, Hamm, and Clov play each
day, a real end is imminent, even if hundreds of years off. Clov’s glimpse of a
young boy, a potential Christ (?)—which Hamm immediately describes as a
possible “progenitor”—hints at a new world beyond the dead one in which they
are trapped.
New York, May 6, 2011
Reprinted from USTheater (May 2011).