Although traditional sin doesn’t seem to be portrayed by Gracin and Inez, if one was to take a closer look they would see that both Garcin and Inez were in grasp of being existentialist; just like Estelle. Firstly, Sartre's strong association with the existentialism philosophy is exemplified in No Exit. It is a portrayal that life in Hell is just the same as life on Earth, perhaps the only difference being that their sins are magnified. As the lives of Inez, Estelle, and Garcin continue in Hell, their main torment is the one thing that they were never able to achieve on Earth. So due to the consequences of their actions, they eternally suffer in Hell. This presents a contrasting view to one tenet of existentialism, something which Sartre was heavily affiliated with. If there were no ill consequences, on what grounds would people be sent to Hell or Heaven for that matter?
This new view brings to light the absurdity of life. What did Garcin do in order to be sent to Hell for all eternity? He was just a coward who claimed to be a Pacifist. And that is something he chose to do in life; an action that relied on his free will. The dramatic irony is that he must endure the embarrassment of his mortal life all over again in his immortal life, merely for exercising his free will. Through this, Sartre not only insinuates the absurdity of life, but also the bleakness that humanity serves. By incorporating such views, he sets up a condition that horrifies the reader, yet inspires satire. At the beginning of the play, Inez asks Garcin if he is the torturer, from which Garcin replies that he no such thing. From this, Garcin is blind to realize that she is the torturer, merely mistaken for a casual human being. Such dramatic irony enriches the existentialist views inspired in the play, and it works for both lovers and haters of the philosophy. It creates the perspective that you're damned if you do, and you're damned if you don't.
The effects of No Exit may cause a reader...