This blog serves as a public forum for you to post your reactions to a broad range of texts--from Shakespeare's really uncomfortable early play Titus Andronicus to Alan Ginsberg's "obscene" poem "Howl" to the latest album from Kendrick Lamar. The conversation revolves around notions of cultural influence and how popular "products" get us to react to them and to the things they endorse.
I feel as though I would go insane if I were in the Hell portrayed in “No Exit”. The biggest problem for me would be that there is no direction. The characters do not know how to get out of Hell, or even if they can at all. It is by chance that the philosophical discussion would lead to the opening of the door. However, discussion between three people who have never met could shoot into so many different directions that it seems quite unlikely they would fabricate a revelation. The stereotypical Hell has fire and the Devil. However, a real Hell would eliminate the elements a human relies on for security and therefore provoke anxiety and mental turmoil. The Hell in this play has no structure or direction. To eliminate structure, even day and night was eliminated. There is absolutely no activities to engage in besides ones generated by the people in the room, such as conversation. There is also no direction on how to get out of Hell. These people have no idea what to do. The only thing left they have is motivation to get out which becomes depleted and doubted at times. It can be seem from when humans are children that structure is needed. Children thrive on structure. Kids develop most securely when they go to day care or school and there is a schedule premade with planned activities. Children who lack structure often develop anxiety. Sometimes, when kids feel anxious a certain day, if they are told the schedule of the day they will calm down significantly. The Hell in “No Exit” is such a good Hell because it strips what human nature relies on.
Before I even get to the half way point of the story, all the characters have been very snippy toward each other. They obviously have no connection and they know nothing about each other yet they all seemed pretty judgmental based off of having no knowledge of all their backgrounds. If these three people have any intentions of living and making it out of the 'hell' they are living in alive they better learn to deal with the others. It seems they are all very different and have different upbringings and ways of living. As Veronica said in her response, that children need the proper socialization and structured life, I feel that so do adults in a way. Even though these three people are way past childhood and the special care of being young they can just as much lose it. Just like anything in life, you don't always know what you have till it's gone. The first couple days should be easiest. But as time goes on these people are going to go crazy, they will be lacking basic every day social skills people need. Their only thoughts will be about how to get out and the others. They won't be well rounded or active physically or mentally anymore. Though I am not really sure why these people are in this room if they are going to be kept there for long they won't come out 'normal'. As Inez puts on page 18, 'each of us will act as torturer of the two others.' The person who set this up understands the mindset they will be in after so long that no one needs to be in their to do the 'dirty work', they will all do it themselves.
Like Christina and Veronica, I also think this version of Hell was structured pretty well. The play in itself is interesting to me, as, like the others mentioned, the whole point of their existence together is to torture each other. Without direction, or structure, and just sitting in a room with two other people that you had no idea or knew nothing about—I’m pretty sure I would go insane rather quickly. In thinking about it further, I actually think that this is kind of the whole purpose of what Sartre is getting to. If no one really knows what Hell is or what is in it, (here’s the philosophical part Veronica mentioned), who is there to say that he is wrong in his portrayal? I really like the example of young children here, as it is totally prevalent when I teach a Karate class. If the kids know the structure and what I expect, they tend to listen better. If not, they are usually off the wall and I can’t get them to calm down. This is what Sartre is doing to his three characters in this Hell—making them go so insane that they will most likely damn themselves, if not each other. This idea is also prevalent in the conversation that takes on during the first half of the play, including the rather sarcastic and snippy dialogue that takes place between the three ‘residents’. Knowing nothing about people you are supposedly locked in a room with for eternity must have an effect on your conversation, and you would think the conversation would be friendly between these people. It will be interesting to find out why exactly it is so brash.
In the story, I was confused as to where the setting was. I had to look it up and the setting took place in hell. With the three people that came together—Garcin, Estelle, and Inez—and are there because they have done something wrong. It is shown in the text that they do not know who each other are and come from different backgrounds, but are all there for a specific reason and purpose. This reminds me of the Saw movies, where different individuals who have never met come together because they all share something in common. In order to get out of the rooms that are in, they go through “tests” and then they need to figure out how they are all connected to each other and figure out how this is going to get them out. Unfortunately for the people in the story, the title, “No Exit,” shows that it is not like Saw, and cannot leave this room in hell. It is like they are put there to make each other miserable and have a discussion as to why they are in this room together. They are nervous and wondering as to what will happen to them because they picture hell as torture devices. One element that I am not sure how to talk about, is the use of seeing/sight. It is used a lot through the story. Just curious as to how it connects.
In Jean-Paul Sartre-No exit, I loved the interaction between Valet and Garcin when Garcin first arrives in hell. The valet explains everything to Garcin in a board like way because he says everyone asks the same questions based off of what they assume hell is like. He makes a good point when he says everyone speaks about hell but who are they to say anything if they have never stepped foot down there. I loved the part where they talked about having eyelids. I never thought of eyelids the way they spoke of them as refreshing and a piece of relaxation. After reading for a bit the scary movies saw kept coming to mind where the people are trapped and had to do these challenges. For example the people had to figure out how they all were connected to each other in some way. This was supposed to get them out. The title no exit infers the reader from the beginning that no one will be leaving. But if you’re in hell why should it be pleasant you obviously did something to deserve to go there. Hell isn’t supposed to be a relaxed place. I think that’s the whole idea of this Sartre to speak out on the fact that people may not take religion seriously or take the consequences of their actions seriously. These characters all seemed to be sarcastic to each other and snippy which shows they have bad attitudes which I believe is one of the reasons they might be there in the first place.
Like always this story was strange but it was interesting and not too bad. The way hell was portrayed is not what we think it is. Nowadays people assume that hell is a fiery pit of death and torture, but in this story, it was just a dark place with nothing at all. There was no direction and nothing to do except for the three people stuck down there to talk with each other. These three individuals were all put down there because they had done something wrong. They had all come from different backgrounds, but all had something in common. What that was they didn’t know, and that part reminded me of the saw movies. Back to the story, the three people that ended up in hell had to entertain themselves and the only thing to do was to converse with each other. For the most part, the majority of the conversations were trying to figure out why they were stuck in hell and also brainstorming ideas on how to get out. Since they are stuck down there in hell and they are trying to figure out why, that might be why they are so short and almost aggressive towards each other. Another reason could be that there is nothing there and they are upset. There is no direction and no structure which is one of the most important aspects of life and everything a person does. I’m excited to see how this plays out.
Reading No Exit was very interesting and kind of showed me a different view of what Hell could be like. I agree with the characters in this story because they all wonder why they are in a random room instead of being surrounded by torture devices, pits of fire or even a dungeon master. They all enter a private room by a valet with no windows, random furniture and different items in their like a toothbrush. I feel I would go crazy if I stayed in a place like that forever because you would never know what time of day it is or if time even passes. Also, I caught that they keep “looking down” on the people in their lives but they’re in Hell. So wouldn’t they be looking up? Just something to think about. As the story moves along the three roommates eventually realize something interesting; that they are each other’s “dungeon master.” They all have things they don’t like about the other. Like Estelle has feelings for Garcin but not for Inez, who likes her, causing a love triangle. Also, Garcin wants to be told he’s not a coward by Estelle but Inez insists he is just so he can’t live with the satisfaction of thinking he’s right. Finally, Garcin doesn’t like that he’s confined in a room with two girls at first because he says he’d rather have peace for eternity rather than hear the sound of Inez’s and Estelle’s voices. Whoever put those three together had a devious but very intelligent mind. What’s more irritating than being stuck with someone in a confined space who is the opposite of you? Being stuck with them forever. No matter how far you go if you were to escape, there’ll be no exit from those other two people.
No exit was a very interesting read. The title tells you the result of the story. While reading it I was thinking it was very similar to the saw movies. They are all together for a reason but have no idea what that reason is. This is just like those movies. Also the person who put them down there seems to be incredibly intelligent. This punishment sounds worse to me than many other ideas of hell. I was confused about why the characters were being so rude to each other. While thinking about that when someone is put in a life or death situation who they really are presents themselves. There is no time for the characters to sugarcoat things and make their conversation sound nice. The three “residents” end up torturing each other through their conversations. Even being with someone you liked forever with nothing to do would be unbearable. Spending an eternity with someone you didn’t know or dislike would be even worse.
The second half of “No Exit” was almost completely just the three characters still trying to figure out why they were put together, and how they can beat hell by getting along, or ignoring each others existence. In the first half Garcin first comes up with the idea for the three of them to each choose a corner of the room and just pretend they are alone and that no one else is with them. It seems as if he believes that this will help them believe they aren’t in hell. Only moments after all agreeing upon this plan the silence was broken and then from there they all get into why they are in hell. Each has their own twisted and frightening stories to tell, but they all still don’t know why they are there together. The fact that they can’t figure out why they were placed together seems to be what drives them even more insane. Eventually it seems as if they give up on why they are placed together and just start driving each other crazy on purpose. Estelle begins to tell Inez she wants Garcin, but Inez wants to be with Estelle so Garcin pretends to want to be with Estelle just to drive Inez crazy. The ending of this play was very strange. Although they all know they are dead, Estelle still tries to kill Inez, and then when she realizes she can’t, she begins to stab herself. Inez mockingly says that they are all stuck together forever. Both Estelle and Garcin join her laughing and saying “forever, and ever, and ever.” This scene seems quite frightening because they all don’t want to be stuck with each other forever, so them all laughing about it and saying “forever” is creepy. To close the play Garcin just says, “Well, well, let’s get on with it…”. Ending it that way seems strange because we don’t know how they are going about spending the rest of eternity together. Are they going to try and pretend they are alone again, or continue to torture each other on purpose?
I think that the beginning discussions in class where we drew upon the idea that the torturers were each of the characters was correct. I think that each of these characters makes their situations worse by trying to ignore the fact that they are in hell for a reason, and when they finally admit to it, it just makes them hate each other more. Sometimes honesty is not the best policy especially when they are already in hell for eternity. I think that the characters were just trying to escape what they have done wrong by focusing on other people's sins. Also, the fact that they acknowledged that they were going to be there forever and ever, it seemed like they were going through the stages of grief, like denial and finally acceptance. I think that this would also be a form of torture is to be with the same people for eternity, eventually you're going to run out of things to say and do and it will all just turn into vague stories made up of mostly lies and memories will fade and the characters will have no way of making new ones. I think the ending of this play is more depressing for the reader because since the beginning we have seen these characters face their destiny and there is nothing that they can do about it and eventually it consumes them like it was meant to all along.
In Jean- Paul Sartre’s “No Exit” the hell that is portrayed is not the typical hell that is envisioned by society. When most envision hell they think of flames and the devil and other unappeasable things. I found this version of hell to be very interesting because this group of people were strategically placed together because it was known that they would inflict torture on one another. In this version of hell they do not sleep nor have eyelids. They can never escape from each other or the reality of the situation. Also, there is nothing to look forward to because there is no direction, as others have mentioned. For the rest of eternity they are just going to sit on their separate sofas in a room that has nothing to do. I found this story to be kind of frustrating; for example, when Garcin finally got the door open but did not leave. It almost seems as if he enjoys being tortured. It seems that this group of individuals were placed together because they enjoy inflicting pain and torturing others. I am still questioning the significance of the paper knife. I understand that Estelle used it to try to stab Inez but when Inez called her crazy for trying to stab her because she is obviously already dead, Estelle states “Dead?” I am wondering if Estelle in the end finally comes to the realization that she is dead and they will be trapped in this torture room forever.
The ending of No Exit was depressing. The end didn’t feel right to me. They have an opportunity to walk through an open door but don’t take it. They possibly give up this chance because of the fear of the unknown. The characters are presented with a distorted chance at freedom but do not take it. The torture of each other is intensified by the advances they make on each other. Garcin shows the most how knowing one’s self can affect ones actions. He refused to enter the doorway unless he is reassured by Inez. This shows his true self as a coward and is his demise for possibly a second time. The knife was confusing as there seemed to be no point in it, except to show the characters that they were in fact dead and trapped forever. Inez and the others seem to become completely mad as she laughs in the face of Estelle as she stabs herself. All three characters laugh madly. Garcin states that hell is-other people. I was not sure how to interpret this but possibly it means that hell is a creation of man and how man acts towards one another. Possibly it is a way of saying that humans are inherently evil toward one another.
The best line in this play was when Garcin says "Hell is other people". I've heard this expression before but I never knew where it came from, and now that I finally understand the context it makes more sense. It's ironic, thinking about how hell is other people, because wouldn't that mean we're all already living in hell? Sure, the one that Sartre wrote about is amplified, because they're all trapped in a room together with no way out. But our lives aren't much different. We are always around other people, and don't we often antagonize one another frequently without even realizing it? I think this is why Sartre made hell "other people". It takes the worst parts of your life and forces them on you by trapping you with people who are designed to point out your flaws, and you literally have to stay with them forever, hating yourself. Doesn't that sound awful? No peace, no bedroom that you can retreat back to at the end of the day to sleep in, just constantly being awake and tortured by your own mind and the minds of others. Like we talked about in class, physical pain can only go so far. Mental torture doesn't break your bones, it breaks your spirit... Which is sometimes irreparable.
No exit was one of my favorite text from the semester, it included death and drama all the juicy things needed to grasp the reader’s attention. At the beginning of the play I was thoroughly confused with what was going on but as the story progressed everything seemed to fall together. I was very shocked when I discovered that the setting was in hell because none of the characters seemed like evil people, people who deserve to spend eternity in hell. I like that the author takes a different approach on what happens in hell it was very clever and seems as something that can actually happen. The characters needed no torturer because they slowly tortured themselves. I think one of their biggest mistakes was overthinking what would happen to them and constantly being concerned with when the torturing would occur, these are some of the things that drive people crazy. Overall I thought it was a great story and if you ask me I think Estelle was the torturer in disguise, she constantly got under the skin of both the people there with her.
I feel as though I would go insane if I were in the Hell portrayed in “No Exit”. The biggest problem for me would be that there is no direction. The characters do not know how to get out of Hell, or even if they can at all. It is by chance that the philosophical discussion would lead to the opening of the door. However, discussion between three people who have never met could shoot into so many different directions that it seems quite unlikely they would fabricate a revelation. The stereotypical Hell has fire and the Devil. However, a real Hell would eliminate the elements a human relies on for security and therefore provoke anxiety and mental turmoil. The Hell in this play has no structure or direction. To eliminate structure, even day and night was eliminated. There is absolutely no activities to engage in besides ones generated by the people in the room, such as conversation. There is also no direction on how to get out of Hell. These people have no idea what to do. The only thing left they have is motivation to get out which becomes depleted and doubted at times. It can be seem from when humans are children that structure is needed. Children thrive on structure. Kids develop most securely when they go to day care or school and there is a schedule premade with planned activities. Children who lack structure often develop anxiety. Sometimes, when kids feel anxious a certain day, if they are told the schedule of the day they will calm down significantly. The Hell in “No Exit” is such a good Hell because it strips what human nature relies on.
ReplyDeleteBefore I even get to the half way point of the story, all the characters have been very snippy toward each other. They obviously have no connection and they know nothing about each other yet they all seemed pretty judgmental based off of having no knowledge of all their backgrounds. If these three people have any intentions of living and making it out of the 'hell' they are living in alive they better learn to deal with the others. It seems they are all very different and have different upbringings and ways of living. As Veronica said in her response, that children need the proper socialization and structured life, I feel that so do adults in a way. Even though these three people are way past childhood and the special care of being young they can just as much lose it. Just like anything in life, you don't always know what you have till it's gone. The first couple days should be easiest. But as time goes on these people are going to go crazy, they will be lacking basic every day social skills people need. Their only thoughts will be about how to get out and the others. They won't be well rounded or active physically or mentally anymore. Though I am not really sure why these people are in this room if they are going to be kept there for long they won't come out 'normal'. As Inez puts on page 18, 'each of us will act as torturer of the two others.' The person who set this up understands the mindset they will be in after so long that no one needs to be in their to do the 'dirty work', they will all do it themselves.
ReplyDeleteLike Christina and Veronica, I also think this version of Hell was structured pretty well. The play in itself is interesting to me, as, like the others mentioned, the whole point of their existence together is to torture each other. Without direction, or structure, and just sitting in a room with two other people that you had no idea or knew nothing about—I’m pretty sure I would go insane rather quickly. In thinking about it further, I actually think that this is kind of the whole purpose of what Sartre is getting to. If no one really knows what Hell is or what is in it, (here’s the philosophical part Veronica mentioned), who is there to say that he is wrong in his portrayal? I really like the example of young children here, as it is totally prevalent when I teach a Karate class. If the kids know the structure and what I expect, they tend to listen better. If not, they are usually off the wall and I can’t get them to calm down. This is what Sartre is doing to his three characters in this Hell—making them go so insane that they will most likely damn themselves, if not each other. This idea is also prevalent in the conversation that takes on during the first half of the play, including the rather sarcastic and snippy dialogue that takes place between the three ‘residents’. Knowing nothing about people you are supposedly locked in a room with for eternity must have an effect on your conversation, and you would think the conversation would be friendly between these people. It will be interesting to find out why exactly it is so brash.
ReplyDeleteIn the story, I was confused as to where the setting was. I had to look it up and the setting took place in hell. With the three people that came together—Garcin, Estelle, and Inez—and are there because they have done something wrong. It is shown in the text that they do not know who each other are and come from different backgrounds, but are all there for a specific reason and purpose. This reminds me of the Saw movies, where different individuals who have never met come together because they all share something in common. In order to get out of the rooms that are in, they go through “tests” and then they need to figure out how they are all connected to each other and figure out how this is going to get them out. Unfortunately for the people in the story, the title, “No Exit,” shows that it is not like Saw, and cannot leave this room in hell. It is like they are put there to make each other miserable and have a discussion as to why they are in this room together. They are nervous and wondering as to what will happen to them because they picture hell as torture devices. One element that I am not sure how to talk about, is the use of seeing/sight. It is used a lot through the story. Just curious as to how it connects.
ReplyDeleteIn Jean-Paul Sartre-No exit, I loved the interaction between Valet and Garcin when Garcin first arrives in hell. The valet explains everything to Garcin in a board like way because he says everyone asks the same questions based off of what they assume hell is like. He makes a good point when he says everyone speaks about hell but who are they to say anything if they have never stepped foot down there. I loved the part where they talked about having eyelids. I never thought of eyelids the way they spoke of them as refreshing and a piece of relaxation. After reading for a bit the scary movies saw kept coming to mind where the people are trapped and had to do these challenges. For example the people had to figure out how they all were connected to each other in some way. This was supposed to get them out. The title no exit infers the reader from the beginning that no one will be leaving. But if you’re in hell why should it be pleasant you obviously did something to deserve to go there. Hell isn’t supposed to be a relaxed place. I think that’s the whole idea of this Sartre to speak out on the fact that people may not take religion seriously or take the consequences of their actions seriously. These characters all seemed to be sarcastic to each other and snippy which shows they have bad attitudes which I believe is one of the reasons they might be there in the first place.
ReplyDeleteLike always this story was strange but it was interesting and not too bad. The way hell was portrayed is not what we think it is. Nowadays people assume that hell is a fiery pit of death and torture, but in this story, it was just a dark place with nothing at all. There was no direction and nothing to do except for the three people stuck down there to talk with each other. These three individuals were all put down there because they had done something wrong. They had all come from different backgrounds, but all had something in common. What that was they didn’t know, and that part reminded me of the saw movies. Back to the story, the three people that ended up in hell had to entertain themselves and the only thing to do was to converse with each other. For the most part, the majority of the conversations were trying to figure out why they were stuck in hell and also brainstorming ideas on how to get out. Since they are stuck down there in hell and they are trying to figure out why, that might be why they are so short and almost aggressive towards each other. Another reason could be that there is nothing there and they are upset. There is no direction and no structure which is one of the most important aspects of life and everything a person does. I’m excited to see how this plays out.
ReplyDeleteReading No Exit was very interesting and kind of showed me a different view of what Hell could be like. I agree with the characters in this story because they all wonder why they are in a random room instead of being surrounded by torture devices, pits of fire or even a dungeon master. They all enter a private room by a valet with no windows, random furniture and different items in their like a toothbrush. I feel I would go crazy if I stayed in a place like that forever because you would never know what time of day it is or if time even passes. Also, I caught that they keep “looking down” on the people in their lives but they’re in Hell. So wouldn’t they be looking up? Just something to think about. As the story moves along the three roommates eventually realize something interesting; that they are each other’s “dungeon master.” They all have things they don’t like about the other. Like Estelle has feelings for Garcin but not for Inez, who likes her, causing a love triangle. Also, Garcin wants to be told he’s not a coward by Estelle but Inez insists he is just so he can’t live with the satisfaction of thinking he’s right. Finally, Garcin doesn’t like that he’s confined in a room with two girls at first because he says he’d rather have peace for eternity rather than hear the sound of Inez’s and Estelle’s voices. Whoever put those three together had a devious but very intelligent mind. What’s more irritating than being stuck with someone in a confined space who is the opposite of you? Being stuck with them forever. No matter how far you go if you were to escape, there’ll be no exit from those other two people.
ReplyDeleteNo exit was a very interesting read. The title tells you the result of the story. While reading it I was thinking it was very similar to the saw movies. They are all together for a reason but have no idea what that reason is. This is just like those movies. Also the person who put them down there seems to be incredibly intelligent. This punishment sounds worse to me than many other ideas of hell. I was confused about why the characters were being so rude to each other. While thinking about that when someone is put in a life or death situation who they really are presents themselves. There is no time for the characters to sugarcoat things and make their conversation sound nice. The three “residents” end up torturing each other through their conversations. Even being with someone you liked forever with nothing to do would be unbearable. Spending an eternity with someone you didn’t know or dislike would be even worse.
ReplyDeleteThe second half of “No Exit” was almost completely just the three characters still trying to figure out why they were put together, and how they can beat hell by getting along, or ignoring each others existence. In the first half Garcin first comes up with the idea for the three of them to each choose a corner of the room and just pretend they are alone and that no one else is with them. It seems as if he believes that this will help them believe they aren’t in hell. Only moments after all agreeing upon this plan the silence was broken and then from there they all get into why they are in hell. Each has their own twisted and frightening stories to tell, but they all still don’t know why they are there together. The fact that they can’t figure out why they were placed together seems to be what drives them even more insane. Eventually it seems as if they give up on why they are placed together and just start driving each other crazy on purpose. Estelle begins to tell Inez she wants Garcin, but Inez wants to be with Estelle so Garcin pretends to want to be with Estelle just to drive Inez crazy. The ending of this play was very strange. Although they all know they are dead, Estelle still tries to kill Inez, and then when she realizes she can’t, she begins to stab herself. Inez mockingly says that they are all stuck together forever. Both Estelle and Garcin join her laughing and saying “forever, and ever, and ever.” This scene seems quite frightening because they all don’t want to be stuck with each other forever, so them all laughing about it and saying “forever” is creepy. To close the play Garcin just says, “Well, well, let’s get on with it…”. Ending it that way seems strange because we don’t know how they are going about spending the rest of eternity together. Are they going to try and pretend they are alone again, or continue to torture each other on purpose?
ReplyDeleteI think that the beginning discussions in class where we drew upon the idea that the torturers were each of the characters was correct. I think that each of these characters makes their situations worse by trying to ignore the fact that they are in hell for a reason, and when they finally admit to it, it just makes them hate each other more. Sometimes honesty is not the best policy especially when they are already in hell for eternity. I think that the characters were just trying to escape what they have done wrong by focusing on other people's sins. Also, the fact that they acknowledged that they were going to be there forever and ever, it seemed like they were going through the stages of grief, like denial and finally acceptance. I think that this would also be a form of torture is to be with the same people for eternity, eventually you're going to run out of things to say and do and it will all just turn into vague stories made up of mostly lies and memories will fade and the characters will have no way of making new ones. I think the ending of this play is more depressing for the reader because since the beginning we have seen these characters face their destiny and there is nothing that they can do about it and eventually it consumes them like it was meant to all along.
ReplyDeleteIn Jean- Paul Sartre’s “No Exit” the hell that is portrayed is not the typical hell that is envisioned by society. When most envision hell they think of flames and the devil and other unappeasable things. I found this version of hell to be very interesting because this group of people were strategically placed together because it was known that they would inflict torture on one another. In this version of hell they do not sleep nor have eyelids. They can never escape from each other or the reality of the situation. Also, there is nothing to look forward to because there is no direction, as others have mentioned. For the rest of eternity they are just going to sit on their separate sofas in a room that has nothing to do. I found this story to be kind of frustrating; for example, when Garcin finally got the door open but did not leave. It almost seems as if he enjoys being tortured. It seems that this group of individuals were placed together because they enjoy inflicting pain and torturing others. I am still questioning the significance of the paper knife. I understand that Estelle used it to try to stab Inez but when Inez called her crazy for trying to stab her because she is obviously already dead, Estelle states “Dead?” I am wondering if Estelle in the end finally comes to the realization that she is dead and they will be trapped in this torture room forever.
ReplyDeleteThe ending of No Exit was depressing. The end didn’t feel right to me. They have an opportunity to walk through an open door but don’t take it. They possibly give up this chance because of the fear of the unknown. The characters are presented with a distorted chance at freedom but do not take it. The torture of each other is intensified by the advances they make on each other. Garcin shows the most how knowing one’s self can affect ones actions. He refused to enter the doorway unless he is reassured by Inez. This shows his true self as a coward and is his demise for possibly a second time. The knife was confusing as there seemed to be no point in it, except to show the characters that they were in fact dead and trapped forever. Inez and the others seem to become completely mad as she laughs in the face of Estelle as she stabs herself. All three characters laugh madly. Garcin states that hell is-other people. I was not sure how to interpret this but possibly it means that hell is a creation of man and how man acts towards one another. Possibly it is a way of saying that humans are inherently evil toward one another.
ReplyDeleteThe best line in this play was when Garcin says "Hell is other people". I've heard this expression before but I never knew where it came from, and now that I finally understand the context it makes more sense. It's ironic, thinking about how hell is other people, because wouldn't that mean we're all already living in hell? Sure, the one that Sartre wrote about is amplified, because they're all trapped in a room together with no way out. But our lives aren't much different. We are always around other people, and don't we often antagonize one another frequently without even realizing it? I think this is why Sartre made hell "other people". It takes the worst parts of your life and forces them on you by trapping you with people who are designed to point out your flaws, and you literally have to stay with them forever, hating yourself. Doesn't that sound awful? No peace, no bedroom that you can retreat back to at the end of the day to sleep in, just constantly being awake and tortured by your own mind and the minds of others. Like we talked about in class, physical pain can only go so far. Mental torture doesn't break your bones, it breaks your spirit... Which is sometimes irreparable.
ReplyDeleteNo exit was one of my favorite text from the semester, it included death and drama all the juicy things needed to grasp the reader’s attention. At the beginning of the play I was thoroughly confused with what was going on but as the story progressed everything seemed to fall together. I was very shocked when I discovered that the setting was in hell because none of the characters seemed like evil people, people who deserve to spend eternity in hell. I like that the author takes a different approach on what happens in hell it was very clever and seems as something that can actually happen. The characters needed no torturer because they slowly tortured themselves. I think one of their biggest mistakes was overthinking what would happen to them and constantly being concerned with when the torturing would occur, these are some of the things that drive people crazy. Overall I thought it was a great story and if you ask me I think Estelle was the torturer in disguise, she constantly got under the skin of both the people there with her.
ReplyDelete