"Hell is just—other people."

As a misanthrope, I know that's true!

My friend recommended this quick play to me when I told her that I had (unexpectedly and surprisingly) enjoyed The Stranger. Both works are by French authors and deal with the philosophical concept of existentialism and absurdism: That there is no inherent meaning in the world, that we acquire meaning from our choices, and that we must face the consequences of those choices, good or bad. This is a concept that I was introduced to from Camus's The Stranger and then, I felt, expanded on in No Exit.

tl;dr Three people are trapped forever in a room together after death in hell. With no way to make meaning of themselves and their lives, each must depend on the other two for validation, identity, and judgement, leading to the famous line I quoted at the beginning of this review.

Much of this play deals with the characters trying to figure out what they look like, either physically, or through another's eyes more theoretically. Estelle is overly concerned about her physical appearance, bemoaning the lack of mirrors in the room ("Whenever I had to talk to anyone, I always arranged it so that I could see myself in one. I talked and could see myself talking. I could see how I looked to other people and that sort of kept me awake.") Her existence was defined by her seeing herself and she hates giving up that control to others, as now, she can only see herself by how others see her.

On the other hand, Cradeau is concerned about people thinking that he is a coward and the legacy that he left behind with his death ("They won't forget. They may die, but others will come who'll take their place. I've left my life in their hands...If there was one, just one soul who would say with all his might that I didn't run away, that I couldn't have run away, that I have some courage, that I'm a man—I-I know I'd be saved.") He derives meaning through how others see him and is desperate to prove that he is not at coward.

Inez, on the other hand, seems to be the most fully recognized. She knows who she is, speaks her truth, and recognizes the consequences of her actions in life. At the same time, she defines herself by others' attention on her. Still, out of the three characters, she seems to be the one who most accepted her actions—which is the core of existentialism. Choices are permanent and identity-defining. They can not be changed or erased. In the case of these characters, they are all dead and have absolutely no power over the choices they made in life or the way that others still alive may speak of them. Estelle and Cradeau continue to struggle with this, as they continue to peer into the living world to try and determine how others are speaking/thinking of them (or not speaking/thinking of them), while Inez appears to be over it.

In this way, Sartre is suggesting that hell is not only other people, but also an inability to change who we are in the world or the legacy we leave behind via our choices. In the end, the characters appear to accept their eternal fate and the absurdity of the never-ending misery that they will continue to impart on each other. It is inevitable; something that one of them does will affect the other two in the room. Sartre's belief that death is the ultimate absurdity is highlighted here in the hopelessness of eternity that this play leaves off on.

"It's already done, you understand? And we're together from now on, forever." "Forever, oh my God, it's so funny! Forever!"

I would recommend this book to anyone interested in following up on The Stranger or interested in reading a play informed by existentialism in general!