As a director, what aspects of Vladimir and Estragon's interactions would you emphasise, in order to enhance the sense of the Absurd in Beckett's "Waiting for Godot"?

Theatre of the Absurd owes it existence, to an extent, to the aftermath of World War II. Playwrights and theatre practitioners, experiencing the fright and existentialism that was caused after the destructive war, created Theatre of the Absurd as a reflection of the insignificance that people of the world had started to feel. A disbelief in religion and governments, and an overbearing weight caused by mass deaths and environmental destruction are elements that Theatre of the Absurd is saturated with. Beckett's "Waiting for Godot" is one of those plays, where the main characters, Vladimir and Estragon, spend their time waiting for Godot, who is going to save them. Their interactions are filled with repetitions, cyclical dialogues, wordplays, physicality and black humour, all of which are characteristics of the Theatre of the Absurd. The play has acquired a certain universality, due to the fact that the time and place of the play are not clear, therefore the situation presented could happen anywhere and anytime. For me, the most important element in the two characters' interactions are the prolonged silences. Therefore, were I to direct a performance of "Waiting for Godot", the way in which I would enhance the Absurdism of the play is by emphasising the pauses in the dialogues of Vladimir and Estragon.The play implies (and clearly states) the question that could easily represent the post-1945 atmosphere: who will save us? In the play, Godot is supposed to save Vladimir and Estragon (we do not know who Godot is, why they are supposed to save Vladimir and Estragon, or what from; hence the universality) yet they never come. The two characters are obliged to act on their own, taking initiative, therefore eventually deciding to stop waiting and to leave; yet, they never do, as the end of the play finds them standing still in the place where they have spent the entire play. In my opinion, Becket suggests that no-one will ever save humanity and that humanity shall save itself. Prolonging the silences between the characters during their convesrations would make the audience reflect on what is going on in the play, while also allowing them to even make connections with the outside world. Taking advantage of the play's universality, were I to direct a performance of it in 2020, I would definetely turn it into a commentary of the times we are living, more specifically, the rapid rythms of life and the rash decisions made for humanity and the environment. Providing long, silent pauses would be my way to "Slow things down", offer the audience some "extra time" to think, decide and evaluate. If Beckett stated, through the play, that the solution will only come form us, then this would be a part of my statement too. The fact that the characters eventually stand still and do not take initiativyat the last moment of the plat would be the critique on the currect habits (that people do not try enough), therefore the "What not to do", but the long pauses would underline the absurdity of cush habits and thus the need to change them.