Scan barcode
aubergenie_'s review against another edition
dark
mysterious
reflective
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? It's complicated
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.0
raybangoddess's review against another edition
funny
reflective
tense
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? N/A
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.75
hell is other people, so true !!
ultimate_helix's review against another edition
emotional
reflective
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.0
nookadri's review against another edition
ultimamente ando um becs existencialista
jess_esa's review against another edition
5.0
So to my taste, hysterical and brilliant. I truly tapped into something reading Estelle, she’ll never leave me. Looking forward to reading some more Sartre.
sidharthvardhan's review against another edition
5.0
Two is Company, Three is Hell
Oh my sweet Satan! this is one hell of a play. This definitely is scariest vision of inferno, and the vision is just too simple:
And who can be better torturer than brains behind holocausts and Abu-Gharibs?
Just as even the bigesst loners among us need some sort of company every once in a while, each one of us need some time alone, all by oneself. The three characters of the play are struck in a locked room where lights never go off and there is no question of sleeping. The dis-likable nature of these people, the uncertainty as to what punishments are to follow and visions of what is being said about them in their absence (after their death) is enough to create a tension that leads to differences between them, making them each other's nemesis. But what would you do if you have to live, okay correction, stay forever with two of your foes and none of you can kill each other?
You may argue that it is their inability to co-operate which created lead to those quarrels but really, being constantly seen by each other means that sooner or later you should find something to fight about - and, unlike while living, once you started fighting you can't have a moment alone or listen to music or something to calm down. The only item left in the place is a pen-knife, which is useless except to ensure that these people know how they hate each other by trying to stab each-other. Perfect. Forget Biblical authors, forget Hindu pundits, forget old wives, forget John Krammer, forget Dante; Devil himself needs to take lectures from Sartre.
Also one can't help but love the way Sartre keeps things simple whether it is time moving faster in hell (thus cutting drama to one scene) or fact that visions from Earth are narrated by character in question (instead of showing actual scenes - limiting play to only four characters and a single place). Genuis!
P. S. Now I know from where they got the idea for 'Big Brother'.
Oh my sweet Satan! this is one hell of a play. This definitely is scariest vision of inferno, and the vision is just too simple:
"You re-member all we were told about the torture-chambers, the fire and brimstone, the "burning marl." Old wives' tales! There's no need for red-hot pokers. Hell is—other people!"
And who can be better torturer than brains behind holocausts and Abu-Gharibs?
“As for me, I am mean: that means that I need the suffering of others to exist. A flame. A flame in their hearts. When I am all alone, I am extinguished.”
Just as even the bigesst loners among us need some sort of company every once in a while, each one of us need some time alone, all by oneself. The three characters of the play are struck in a locked room where lights never go off and there is no question of sleeping. The dis-likable nature of these people, the uncertainty as to what punishments are to follow and visions of what is being said about them in their absence (after their death) is enough to create a tension that leads to differences between them, making them each other's nemesis. But what would you do if you have to live, okay correction, stay forever with two of your foes and none of you can kill each other?
You may argue that it is their inability to co-operate which created lead to those quarrels but really, being constantly seen by each other means that sooner or later you should find something to fight about - and, unlike while living, once you started fighting you can't have a moment alone or listen to music or something to calm down. The only item left in the place is a pen-knife, which is useless except to ensure that these people know how they hate each other by trying to stab each-other. Perfect. Forget Biblical authors, forget Hindu pundits, forget old wives, forget John Krammer, forget Dante; Devil himself needs to take lectures from Sartre.
Also one can't help but love the way Sartre keeps things simple whether it is time moving faster in hell (thus cutting drama to one scene) or fact that visions from Earth are narrated by character in question (instead of showing actual scenes - limiting play to only four characters and a single place). Genuis!
P. S. Now I know from where they got the idea for 'Big Brother'.
spyralnode's review against another edition
tense
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
2.0
This short play by Sartre aims to demonstrate how Hell is other people.
The 3 protagonists are stuck together. There is no exit. Time doesn't pass and they can't even shut their eyes. They are forced to fully confront their surroundings and those present next to them. They refer to each other as their 'torturers', underlining even more clearly their tragedy.
I thought this read was fine, but not as eye-opening as I'd expect from a philosophical play. It's too much on the nose, it's all served to you on a platter, it's obvious and doesn't invite much reflection. I was also thrown off by the fact that two of the three characters are romantically interested in each other, and I'm not sure what that was meant to demonstrate.
This isn't to say that I disagree with the message that Sartre seeks to convey. But instead of presenting it as an idea that I can reflect on, here it was a lot more situational. It was these people, their dynamic and combination of traits that didn't work. Would it be the same with other people? Is this a hypothesis that transcends personalities? I don't know, and this read didn't spark my curiosity to even ponder it more, it was very much being stuck in this one room with these exact characters.
The 3 protagonists are stuck together. There is no exit. Time doesn't pass and they can't even shut their eyes. They are forced to fully confront their surroundings and those present next to them. They refer to each other as their 'torturers', underlining even more clearly their tragedy.
I thought this read was fine, but not as eye-opening as I'd expect from a philosophical play. It's too much on the nose, it's all served to you on a platter, it's obvious and doesn't invite much reflection. I was also thrown off by the fact that two of the three characters are romantically interested in each other, and I'm not sure what that was meant to demonstrate.
This isn't to say that I disagree with the message that Sartre seeks to convey. But instead of presenting it as an idea that I can reflect on, here it was a lot more situational. It was these people, their dynamic and combination of traits that didn't work. Would it be the same with other people? Is this a hypothesis that transcends personalities? I don't know, and this read didn't spark my curiosity to even ponder it more, it was very much being stuck in this one room with these exact characters.