ندارد

Despite the fervent interpretations on Beckett's later works, this fact is usually ignored in his studies that he escaped representation and mere expression in his writings. The question of the relation of representation and tracing the variations of this relation can involve Beckett interpretation with the problem of interpretation itself (and not merely its object). Thus, an approach to Beckett's text can be taken in which the text is directly experienced on the borders of language. Beckett's text can be treated as performative where language remains on its surface and insists on its materiality instead of going any deeper in representation. Following such a resistance to interpretation in Lodge's reading of Beckett's 'Ping' shows how textual approaches based on mere representation (and ignoring the performative sides of language) will necessarily fall into undecidability and are justified only by the plurality of possible meanings in Beckett's texts. Discerning a latent narrating 'eye' running on an undifferentiated homogeneous surface (in Beckett's 'Ping'), one may witness the performance of an eye in Beckett's text that is involved with its 'unseeing' and a language involved with its 'unsaying'.