ENDGAME there is no longer the sense that help is going to arrive. There is

nothing to wait for. The closest we come to anticipating an event in ENDGAME is

the question of whether Clov will leave or not. But whereas in GODOT there is

some suggestion that the arrival of Godot would be a form of salvation, it is unclear

whether Clov's leaving would be a good thing or a bad thing.

Structurally the two plays are an interesting contrast. In GODOT, Beckett

created a circular structure with two acts which repeat each other. ENDGAME's

structure is more subtile in that there are motifs which repeat, creating a circular

sense to the work, but it is accomplished in one act. In early drafts ENDGAME also

had two acts and was closer to Godot structurally, so it seems valid to conclude that

the one act is a clarification or development of the two act structure.

The writing of FIN DE PARTIE was a very different process than GODOT.

Beckett embarked on the new play in response to a request from Roger Blin to write

a vehicle for him and Jean Martin.¹⁵There is every indication that Beckett wrote

FIN DE PARTIE with the intention of it being a "perfect" play. He was going to use

everything that he had learned from the inspired WAITING FOR GODOT to

consciously create a work that would be tighter and structurally flawless. FIN DE

PARTIE was written off and on over a period of almost nine years. The translation

that became ENDGAME took almost another year. Despite his fame, the new play

was radical enough to present problems in getting it produced. These sorts of

troubles were not new to Beckett but in this case it seems that it was even more

painful for him because he believed that he had at last written something from a

standpoint of control. He felt that the play was not only a carefully crafted vehicle

for the stage but that it represented his view of humanity and life. When he sent

the script to Roger Blin he appended a note which read: