Pozzo & Lucky’s Relationship

During the ii char hazarders appearance in act 1 we learn a lot about 2 characters finished the family relationship they have with each other. While easys inadequacy of speech under Pozzos domain makes it difficult to identify his personality, we butt still infer a lot about him.Pig, informer and swine. All abusive vocatives thrown at Lucky by Pozzo. An photoflash indication that the relationship among these two characters is far from friendly, and makes the relationship between Vladimir and estragon seem certainly pleasant. It is clear that Lucky acts as a type of servant to Pozzo and this is clarified when he attempts to describe their relationship in the quote He wants to mollify me, so that Ill give up the cerebration of parting with him.It is instantly clear that Pozzos character is extremely arrogant. He lords over the others, and he is decisive, powerful, and confident. When his character is introduced he refers to the other two as hu existence, but as inferior be ings then he condescendingly ac intimacys that thither is a human interchangeableness, stock-still though the likeness is an imperfect one. This send off reinforces his authoritarian god-like stance. Pozzos superiority is also seen in the manner in which he eats the chicken, and then casts the bones to Lucky with an air of complete omnipotence. insofar there be several quotes after he becomes acquainted with Vladamir and estragon for example Id very much like to sit down and referring to them as gentlemen which suggest that, due to his long and lonely journey, he seeks the approval of them both and to be, as he quotes old friends. This provides the audience with a hint that disrespect has vast knowledge he is lacking something which he cannot gain from Lucky which is a companion.Together the two characters represent the antithesis of each other. From one man who seems to be incapable of not contributing his input to someone who yet speaks a word. An inexhaustible amount of po larities can be applied to their relationship. However, Beckett has odd a lot of information unsaid Pozzo tells us that his profound knowledge was taught to him through none other than Lucky himself, whether this is simply a metaphorical term is undetermined however this does hint to the audience that perhaps the two characters were once not so dissimilar.Further enigma is created through pozzo exclamation that Lucky has become insufferable I cant bear it . . . any prolonged . . . the way he goes on . . . youve no idea. This leaves the audience estranged in terms of context, we are unaware of Lucky even address let alone driving someone to such an extent. This could also be seen as a malicious side to Pozzos character as he could potentially be lying as he sees Estragon and Vladimir warming to Lucky and is envious of that.Read also Intro to open Relations NotesSimilarities can be seen between Pozzo Luckys relationship in comparison to Vladimir Estragons, in a sense that, th e two relationships have an element of irascibility. Vladimir and Estragon fail to agree on things and a good deal find themselves in disputes, yet they are still bound by each other and depend on one another. This is, in numerous ways mirrored in Pozzo and Luckys relationship, although there is a much bigger gap in terms of authority. Despite this, the two still depend on each other and are even bound by a rope which could be representative of an umbilical cord cord which brings about references to religion, life and other mutual themes within the play.To conclude, the relationship that Pozzo and Lucky have is very significant in the play and when the tables are turned in act 2 with Pozzo losing his sight we learn a lot more about the two characters than in their introduction in act 1. The master and the servant have little in common but are bound to each other much like our main characters Vladimir and Estragon.