Is Waiting for Godot a "slice of life"?

In an interview Ian Mckellen called Waiting For Godot a "slice of life." Is he correct?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=D7zXy57O7bc
youtube.com/watch?v=M4LDwfKxr-M
m.youtube.com/watch?v=dyKnLGT74TQ
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

What's your opinion on the matter, OP?

ian mckellen as faggoty old walt whitman when?

It's basically the Seinfeld of literature.

Not a horrible comparison

Waiting for Godot can be thought of a stripped down and completely distilled version of existence and the questions that inevitably come with it

I dont think I liked it too much. I liked endgame and this, and I havent read any of Becketts novels but I am sure they are interesting:

This is amazing imo:

youtube.com/watch?v=D7zXy57O7bc

This is cool too I think:

youtube.com/watch?v=M4LDwfKxr-M

>Waiting for Godot can be thought of a stripped down and completely distilled version of existence and the questions that inevitably come with it
That's a really eloquent description, well done.

I don't think it can be categorized as slice of life simply because it deviates too far from life on a superficial level. It really depends on your definition, though.

I suppose I'd agree with him, because Godot does explore a seemingly arbitrary sample of these characters' lives and lacks a coherent/conventional plot, conflict, and ending.

Any existential literature is necessarily slice of life really in a figurative sense.
In a literal sense obviously not, but he's obviously just trying to be clever

I don't really know if he was speaking about the storytelling technique or if he was literally saying this play resembles something that could occur in reality.

Here's the interview for context
m.youtube.com/watch?v=dyKnLGT74TQ

Why must people like you always shit on people actually answering someone's question by trying to show how great you are by sniffing out what you think to be a pseud. Every time people like you taint this shit

Hey man, everything in my life is shit ok, I have one chance to make myself feel better by shitting on others, cant you just give me that?

a slice of life
phrase of slice
1.
a realistic representation of everyday experience in a film, play, or book.

figurative slice of life is an oxymoron moron.

The momentary joy you receive from shitting on others is a hollow sort. Find joy in somewhere less fleeting. The pain of others shouldn't be a well with which to draw joy,too much harm has come from that

>figurative slice of life is an oxymoron moron.

Only if you're an even bigger moron that can only comprehend that as an expression of genre and not the emotional content.

Oxymoron
Noun.
a figure of speech in which apparently contradictory terms appear in conjunction (e.g. faith unfaithful kept him falsely true ).

Oxymorons only appear contradictory and aren't necessarily contradictory moron.

What the fuck is the inherent "emotional content" in "figurative slice of life?" Please, misappropriate more phrases to back yourself up.

Vega in the Lyre very green

Mate your autistic beyond my level to tolerate autism, have a nice day

New addition the the diagnostic criteria for ASD in the DSM VI: Not using haphazard, sloppy and incorrect wording.

A slice of life, is a representation of everyday experience.

Why would someone not be able to use such a 'tool' figuratively?

It depends on how you define slice of life... The dictionary definition I read explicitly states the representation must be realistic.

>refers to a dictonary as an authority on a complex semantic problem

You're seriously too dumb to be posting here, please go back to /v/

(slice of life: realistic)

So it's fucking god-tier?

You're all redundant.

Well yeah, its the greatest play ever written since Hamlet

they were hopefully being sarcastic

>distinguishing correct nomenclature is a "complex semantic problem"
2tricky4dictionary

>in metaphorically
OP's question was whether one could correctly call Godot a slice of life. As it is a storytelling device that precludes unrealistic stories, you can not. To say a story is figuratively a slice of life would make the term meaningless. Neuromancer is figuratively a slice of life.

no u

Holy shit, it'd be perfect

>To say a story is figuratively a slice of life would make the term meaningless.

What would you call someone portraying a slice of life, unrealistically?

Like: "I am aware of the slice of life concept, I will create a work that depicts the slice of life concept, but it will not purely be just an actual slice of life, but using the format of slice of life, to be a bit weird with"?

Is that impossible?

Like having a scene that is absolutely exactly textbook definition slice of life, but then one little subtle thing occurs that would not happen in slice of life, totally voids the overarching set of slice of lifeness?

Did you actually come from /v/? Its ok you can tell us

He is referencing Jean Julienne. Its only one of the most famous statements about theatre ever made. Put the dictionaries away.

I've been posting here for years and never once experienced such a concentration of dunce. I guess it's understandable coming from a thread about a play taught in high schools.

In the broadest sense I would call it fiction. Slice of life is a distinct storytelling device, deviating from it precludes it being a slice of life.

>Like having a scene that is absolutely exactly textbook definition slice of life, but then one little subtle thing occurs that would not happen in slice of life, totally voids the overarching set of slice of lifeness?
It doesn't void the slice of lifeness at all, it could be a powerful device. I would happily say the text was written in a slice of life style until the deviation, but the deviation itself removes the possibility of it being correctly lumped into the "slice of life" category.

>I've been posting here for years

Well some good that did

Answer is "yes".
Why? Because Beckett's theatre of the absurd can be understood as a form of radical naturalism.
Slice is of life is of course the mission of naturalistic theatre.

Ignore people babbling on about realism.

I wouldn't totally dismiss perspectives on realism.Beckett does an interesting tie-in with a lot of the ideas in both realism and symbolism; he'll satirize human elements not so much via deconstruction but by identifying invariant characteristics--which in turn become incredibly symbolic or at least evocative by nature.

It's sort of how if you have distinct objects A and B, and after preforming a similar reductive process you arrive with C for both objects. C can then be thought of as a sort of convergent digression on a more broad and diverse class of objects.