Discuss how Sartre develops the characterization and tone (your favorites!) in No Exit. One comment will suffice, but it must be specific in terms of a device, and it must provide an example. Try to use something we DIDN'T touch on in class. AFTERWARDS, watch the BBC show about his philosophy.
34 comments:
Like I said in class the characterization is drawn out deliberately draw out to give the characters depth. This is similar to what Toni Morrison did for Beloved but for the opposite effect. Morrison wanted the reader to be slowly led towards the brutality of Sethe's crime so that they would be more lenient. Sartre wanted to lead you into hell with a cushion (Garcin’s gentle/scholarly manner and Estelle’s air of social grace, ditsy but harmless) that would make the ultimate reveal of their heinous crimes all the more shocking.
As for the tone it follows the basic pattern discussed in class (friendly get-to-know-you, frantic trying-to-escape then resigned to fate). But the last line “Well, well, let’s get on with it…” does sound resigned but I’m not sure to what. Is it to be tortured? Or to torture?
I was just sitting here in the mall at "work" doing my MWDS when I realized something about this characterization. The actual characters are so desperate for mirrors and a way to see themselves because they realize if they don't then the other two in the room get to shape how they look. So in a way Sartre characterizes them for us but the whole time they are worried about others characterizing them.
Chairo, perhaps being the torturer and being the tortured are not mutually exclusive of each other. In other words, maybe they are resigned to both. BUT WHAT ABOUT THE DEVICES HE USES TO ELICIT CHARACTERIZATION AND TONE??
I like your comments about the reason Sartre feeds us info about each character in pieces -- this speaks to how he uses Time as well.
It seems to me as though the characterization and the tone in this play are linked in a way. As the audience and fellow characters learn more and more about each character and the overall situation, the tone of the play shifts from one of skepticism but friendliness to one of angst, ennui, and discomfort and then to one of resignation. For example, when Garcin and Inez first meet they are somewhat friendly towards each other, but as the play progresses and they learn more about each other they begin to argue and call each other names and degrade one another. By the end, however, they take on more of a "let's get on with it" attitude and resign themselves to the eternity that lies before them.
The characterizeration is mainly developed through dialogue, since very little action takes place, and thus through characterization tone is developed. The more information the audience finds out, the worse the tone gets in terms of ennui.
For instance, when the characters starting admitting to their sins, the tone immediately starts on a downward decent toward tones such as melancholy, miserable, and dismal.
Sartre uses syntax to develop his characterization and tone. In the beginning of the play the sentences are shorter and more sticamithic in form. Example: “I don’t know. I am waiting.” It is almost like the characters are speaking short and fast because they have something to hide, which indeed they do. The tone is also somewhat friendly in the beginning and this is also because the characters are trying to put up a façade and hide how they truly are.
As the play progresses the sentences become longer in form as the characters realize that they have an eternity in hell to spend and that there is no use hiding who they truly are. The tone of the play also changes from one of slight friendliness to one of pure hostility; this is because the characters also realize that they are doomed to be each others torturers. Example: “I’ll endure anything, your red-hot tongs and molten lead, your racks and prongs and garrotes- all your fiendish gadgets, everything that burns and flays and tears- I’ll put up with any torture you impose.”
Along with what Ashley said about syntax, Sartre also incorporates a major shift in diction to make the change in tone even more intense. He moves on from things such as "Flowers? I love flowers", "we're going to live together", and "friends in common" to "keep quiet!", "damned souls", and devil-power". The words they use when talking to one another change dramatically towards the end of the play. Sartre uses this change from friendly, comfortable diction to violent, uneasy diction to change the tone from one that is hospitable to a very harassing tone.
Although we never addressed punctuation in class, I think Sartre uses punctuation to reflect characterization and tone. Before each of the characters confesses his or her sins, Sartre uses many question marks ("Where do you come from?" and "What's their job?") as well as hyphens ("I suggest we call ourselves -wait!-absentees." and "You looked so-so far away."). Both question marks and hyphens not only establish a skeptical and apprehensive tone at the beginning of the play, but also reflect each character's desire to withhold the truth of their situtation from each other. We see the development of the characters as they ask each other questions about their past and in turn are hesitant with their answers. After the characters finally confess later in the play, there is a transition from question marks and hyphens to exclamation points and commas. (Ex: "Don't I know it, and that I'm in a trap myself, up to the neck, and there's nothing to be done about it? And if it suits their book, so much the better!") The transition in punctuation marks a change in tone from apprehensive to utterly hopeless as the characters learn the truth and finally realize they will spend eternity together. The use of many commas in long, complex sentences is appropriate as the characters run through their entire past in their minds and wonder how they are going to last for eternity with each other.
Satre uses diction to develop the characterization and tone like Amber said. In the beginning of the play, Satre uses euphonic diction especially in reference to death. "I suggest we call ourselves-wait!-absentees." The characters wanted to hang onto their humanity and didn't want to accept that fact that they were dead. They literly couldn't bring themselves to say dead until the end of the play where Inez says "Dead! Dead! Dead! knives, poison, ropes-". In addition Garcin uses words such as "wickedness" and "evil" that were not used in the beginning of the play. The use of harsher diction shows that the characters have accepted the fact that they are in fact dead and accepting the consequences.
I also have something random...
As i was doing the MWDS i came across something Inez said, "Love's a grand solace,isn't it, my friend? Deep and darks as sleep. But I'll see you don't sleep" In class we mentioned how they lossed their humanity. We mentioned the toothbrush, makeup and mirrors which are all physical aspects of humanity. Love is as close to human nature as sleep and they also lost that in hell. I didnt realize that until today. Garcin said that he wanted Estelle but he could not love her. I also think the word choice of "friend" was ironic. Friend tends to imply some sort of love and most friends dont want to keep their friends from love. I dont know if any of this makes sense. Its just something i was thinking about.
Sartre uses earthy metaphors to help transition the tone from mannerly, yet uncomfortable to a hostile sense of ennui. These metaphors (for example, the ones referring to the characters inability to block out light and each other) emphasize for the characters the sense of loss that comes with their absence from the living world. It also helps to add to the tension, since they can not block anything out and are forced to be utterly exposed to their true selves all the time.
I think that Sartre emphasizes the tone of the play by the imagery that he chooses to use. All earthly imagery has more vivid and expresive words to describe them...unlike the imagery about hell. This reflects the tone because when the characters talk about hell it is usually depressing, "stuffy", and you get a sense of being drained of all hope. Some examples are, "two little tears are twinkling under the blacki veil" for an earthly image, and in hell they talk about how, "everything here's so hideous; all in angles, so uncomfortable."
Agreeing with what Kolacki said, the visual imagery does affect the tone. Only, I think the tone is also affected by the lack of visual imagery in Hell. If I was actually viewing the play, my eyes would probably immediately hit the bronze piece and sofas and then glance around the dreary room. It creates an empty-feeling when the surroundings are empty.
Sartre uses setting, or the lack thereof, to emphasize the characters in No Exit. He uses very little description about the room and the things in it, which causes the audience to really focus on the characters because there are few other things to focus on. The objects in the room the that he does mention and describe also lend to the developement of the characters. For example, the bronze, which is an alloy of metals, symbolizes the fact that the characters are not pure and incomplete without the others. Also the color of the characters respective couches reflects that nature of the character.
Sartre uses diction to help develop the characters. For example Inez is the most hostile one of the group, therefore she uses more hostile words. She's the first one that says dead, she points out that they are in fact all dead. Inez uses harsh words and metaphors such as the metaphor "like a sparrow fallen from it's nest" describing that they are far away from God. He uses this diction to characterize her as teh hars one.
^SORRY! had to reset my password
I think the absolute desperation that the characters feel wanting to be human sets the depressing tone through out the story. By the author not letting the characters have humanly things such as the small luxuries of changing seasons or anything to see them in it makes them questions their very existence. When they start to do this, I as the reader thought about my life and what accomplishments I have or don’t have and about my very existence. By the lack of elements, the tone of the story and characters developed nicely making them odd, but in a scary way relatable.
The way sartre shows characterization is simply by using the way the tone changes. Although it sounds like im just saying the question again he actually does do this. As we all know the tone of the drama changes from the friendly "hello, why are you in hell" to the more sinister feeling of doom for all eternity. By doing this he shows how the characters themselves change alongside their environment; he shows us how they normally act by putting them into situations where they have to act as themselves. For example when Estelle stabs Inez, she was put into a hard situation, and as we know from the story whenever she is put in a hard situation she feels she can put it right by killing something.
I agree with ashley c.'s view of Sartre using syntax to emphasize characterization. Beyond the fact that he uses the short, stichomythic sentences in the beginning to show that the characters are hiding something, they display an attitude towards their situation as if it was a temporary one. Their 'small talk' consists of pleasantries and formalities not expected to be discussed in hell:
"Inez: Did you hear, Mr. Garcin?
Garcin [with a slight start]: Oh-the sofa, you mean. So sorry. [He rises.] Please take it, madam.
Estelle: Thanks." p.11
Not only is Sartre using syntax but also diction in this case. When imagining a typical scene in hell, one expects cursing, screaming, and sounds of despair. In fact, Sartre's use of the syntax and diction flow with the change in tone towards the middle to end of the play when the 'exemplary' aspects of hell are shown. Like ashley c. said, the sentences tend to be more dramatic and lengthy, reflecting their profound understanding of their true situation. Before ashley c.'s quote on the "red-hot tongs" this shift in tone is displayed in the part of the play where Estelle is convinced to admit her sin; one character uses foul, drawn-out language while the other is attempting to remain civil, in short phrases:
"Inez:...Look here! What's the point of play-acting, trying to throw dust in each other's eyes? We're all tarred with the same brush.
Estelle [indignantly]: How dare you!
Inez: Yes we are criminals-murderers-all three of us. We're in hell, my pets; they never make mistakes, and people aren't damned for nothing.
Estelle: Stop! For heaven's sake-
Inez: In hell! Damned souls-that's us, all three!" p.16
The final example of this tone shift that I found was after the door finally opens and Garcin does not choose to leave. The tone has shifted from a violent, demonic one to the characters speaking in a nonchalant, practially submissive tone, shown by the soliliquy-type passage spoken by Garcin:
"Garcin: This bronze. [Strokes it thoughtfully.] Yes, now's the moment; I'm looking at this thing on the mantelpiece, and i understand thatt I'm in hell. I tell you, everything's been thought out beforehand. They knew I'd stand at the fireplace stroking this thing of bronze, with all those eyes intent on me. Devouring me. [He swings round abrubtly.] What? Only two of you? I thought there were more; many more. [Laughs.] So this is hell. I'd never have beleived it..." p. 45
So these three quotes show the start of simple diction and formal syntax, to the cursing and dramatic phase, to the final apathy that is displayed by Sartre.
One effective method of developing tone is setting, and Sartre uses it quite well! By setting up a minimalistic, cramped room in hell, he gives off a very cramped, restrictive feeling. Along with the solitary room, allusions to Dante's "Inferno" are abound with hot, firey, painful implications. So by shoving these to locations together it makes it all the more obvious that an agonizing or despairing tone is proper for the work.
I think that references to nature are large part in setting up the tone, by serving to emphasize the bleakness of the setting. Talks of flowers, to welcome Estelle, or fields, by Garcin, only bring to the surface the unhuman and unreal quality in this room. When reading about the outside world and the outdoors, the reader is struck by a fact that has been looming in the background the entire play, the unrealness of the setting. The fact that the room is so sparse, the furniture is 2nd Empire, etc, at first adds to the awkwardness of the tone and then the the hopelessness of this unreal setting that cannot exist in the real world because there are no mirrors, windows, beds, and the door doesn't open. This is what ultimately makes the tone so depressing.
I agree Drew McWorter (if you are puma3739, ha ha) about the thing with mirrors. I think Sarte's usage of very sparse setting and props tells us so much about each character because we are then forced to see what they don't have and feel that they need (especially Estelle) instead of looking at what they do have. An example with Estelle: from the start, we learn more about her due to the fact that she doesn't have her compact mirror and how she reacts than if we saw her look into a mirror. Ironically, Sartre is creating the substance within each character through absenses in the room.
1st off i'd like to start out by saying i hate lap tops and blogs, and together they are my hell. Now... The thing that intriques me most about the characterization in this play, is how none of them really freak out about being damned for all of eternity...they argue it nonchalantly at the beginning but as the play progresses the characters become more and more resigned to facing eternity in hell which speaks to their character by saying; they know they lived a poor enough live to be condemned and their kind of ok with that (i don't really know if that is characterization) this ridiculous concession of eternity plays to the tone of hopelessness, as does pulling for NC State. (That was my specific example). But anyways i definately left my book in my locker, not realizing a specific example was required for this thing so on page 32 line 11 is my example... the face that the question did not say a RELEVANT example was needed just saved me... GO me.
As far as tone goes, I think Sartre paid a lot of attention to the section where the characters finally confess what actions condemned them to hell. I don't know how anyone else felt, but I gathered that there was more of a suspenseful tone in this particular part. It's the moment of realization, and for me, it elicited a sense of "What are they going to say? What could have possibly caused them end up here?" And sure enough, the syntax adds to the tone. When each character is telling their story, the sentences are shorter and pass by rather quickly. For instance, when Garcin is talking, his phrases include: "That's all. For five years...Only her eyes spoke. Big, tragic eyes. I don't regret anything." Then Inez talks about "A dead men's tale. With three corpses to it" and how "It was a clean sweep." Finally, when Estelle tells of her pregnancy, she says that "No one knew anything. It was a girl." She concludes with her reactions: "It didn't please me! I hated him then."
The same section can be used with characterization, where Sartre uses incredibly vivid imagery when the characters are describing their pasts. By giving us such detail about their actions, we can see how flawed each character truly is (...was?). For a bit of olfactory imagery, we can turn to Garcin, who came home night after night "stinking of wine and women." This phrase alone can tell us what kind of a person he was in life.
Briana said... Sartre uses diction to develop Garcin, Inez, and Estelle personalities. He uses hellish words that the characters say to describe them. For example: Inez says, "In hell! Damned souls - that's us, all three"! Estelle says,"Keep quiet! I forbid you to use such disgusting words" (p.17). The choice of words Inez uses shows that she accepts her punishment and Estelle is in denial.
Julia said...
I thought it was really interesting how Sartre develops characterization throughout the play. He is able to create very sharp, clear images of each characters that we can easily understand and related to, but he does it through "sparsity" and vagueness. He continually drops hints that gradually increase our knowledge of the characters (carefully placed tidbits that let us know that, for instance, Inez used to be a postal clerk or that Garcin spent most of his life feeling insincere.. see his conversation with the valet at the beginning) but he also leaves a lot of "blank space" that allows us room to form our own interpretations based on our own experiences. I think this is why we are able to relate to the characters surprisingly well, and that amazes me.
Lore said...
I can't think of anything else to say about characterization or tone that hasn't already been said, so I'm commenting on how Sartre uses Setting. The one act and the one room focuses the attention on the characters and their internal struggles. By having all the action take place in one room Sartre further traps the characters in a place in which they can't escape. The action takes place in one place, however throughout the play we see the characters looking down at their previous life. To have the characters trapped in one room while still seeing action in another setting further tortures the characters.
Ashley, Allison, and Amber: Great specific comments on Sartre's use literary devices to depict tone and characterization! Allison, in effect what you're saying is that Sartre uses those commas to link the past to the present eternity! Talk about use of Time!!
Ashleigh, I like your "random" comment. Love reperesents the best of human nature, and it fits that they would lose the ability to love with the rest of their humanity. It is tied to hope, and it a perverse kind of way, Sartre is showing that love is part of what's good and virtuous about us, what we can do to combat Hell. Hell then, could just be the absence of even the possibility of Love -- or humanity.
When you first see Estelle and Garcin, they seem like good people; they are concerned with manners and politeness. This made it all the more shocking when we found out what they had actually done to end up in hell. As the story goes on, it turns out that Estelle had an affair, got pregnant, and killed her baby by throwing her into the lake. Garcin is a coward who has mistreated his wife. Inez is the only character that starts out the play just as she is. She is the only honest character, and is up front about her actions. Sartre does not give much description of the characters, we find out the most about them when they tell the stories from their past. This fact shows how now that they are dead, there personality now does not really matter anymore. There are very few physical descriptions of Garcin, Estelle, and Inez which helps take them farther away from humanity. The tone of the play starts with fake conversational politeness, moves to anger, and then ends up with numb acceptance. It moves from bad to much worse.
By stripping the characters of many of their human characteristics,Sartre lets the audience view the characters in a way that's so very raw. This forces the audience to concentrate on the dialogue, which is a key factor that Sartre uses in developing the characterization. Also, he makes the shift in tone very evident to the audience, so that (even for someone like me who isn't very good at identifying tone)everyone can catch the changes. The change is most definitely a dark one everytime the characters refer to their past actions on earth. Sartre creates the characters first as someone in the audience's mind that everyone can relate to. He then allows the formation of our opinions, and then forces the audience to question everything they ever knew about the characters once the devastating secrets are revealed. By letting the audience in on the secrets of the characters' pasts, Sartre brings to mind people that we all know, and we soon wonder about secrets that others hold. I believe this above all else emphasizes Sartre's concept of us all being hell and torturers to one another.
i would like to start by thanking all the people that have helped me get this far....God, my parents, Mrs. harder.....hahaha yea right, but gettin onto the blog is a great accomplishment and i hope only a stepping stone in what we will achieve together....anyway....the way sartre developes the melancholy tone of the play is really deceptive due to the point John(uncfag33) made....the dialouge is very laid back and casual between the characters...so with the dialouge being the main focus of the play the beginning of the play and what we know about the characters seem unconcerned about their position....giving the reader a false sense of comfort in the tone....but as the play moves on and the dialouge becomes less cordial and a little more focused on the gravity of the situation the tone obviously becomes more serious. one example of the more light hearted tone to begin with is their discussion about who is to have which couch, and why they are roomed together, they talk about their possible connections to each other as people who meet at a party would....then the tone changes when they start to get into why each one is there and begin to grate on each others nerves
ok if that didnt send im done with this bloggin junk
Post a Comment