Exploring the notion of 'L'enfer, c'est les autres' in Sartre's 'Huis Clos'

Philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre used Huis Clos as a tool to investigate existentialism and the ways in which it presents itself in society and personal life. The claim that ‘L’enfer, c’est les autres’, proposes ideas of hell which reject traditional Christian stereotypes, and instead suggests that human suffering is a result of the existence of others and their thoughts (Bering, J. M. 2008). In this essay I will consider a variety of viewpoints to explore this claim and its relation to the passage, as well as the play as a whole. I will begin by discussing the theme of existentialism in relation to the claim that ‘l’enfer, c’est les autres’. Then, I will go on to analyse the ways in which the claim can be explored through the structure, style, and imagery of the both the passage and the wider context of the play.

The quotation ‘L’enfer, c’est les autres’ proposes a vision of Hell that is vastly different to common notions and ideas of what Hell is perceived to be. Upon initial reading, it infers that Hell is the mere presence of other people, which Sartre has explored as an idea in the context of existentialism (Mahdi, S. M. 2020) However, in the context of the play, we learn that it is less about people themselves, but rather their perception and judgement of us, often referred to as le regard (Aho, Kevin (2023). It is le regard of the other protagonists that acts as a source of suffering. In the extract, we see Ines - the most cynical amongst the group - come to this realisation when she says ‘Le bourreau, c'est chacun de nous pour les deux autres.’. Her character aligns with Sartre’s philosophy of existentialism whereby true freedom is achieved by accepting responsibility for your actions (Guignon, C. (1998). She appears calm and seems to have accepted her fate whereas Estelle and Garcin have a harder time coming to terms with the idea that they are confined to this room with just each other forever. The thought is both unbearable and completely possible, which is exactly the effect that Sartre wanted to give (Mahdi, S. M. 2020). Estelle, for example, says ‘quand je ne me vois pas [...] je me demande si j'existe pour de vrai.’ (my omission). This quote seems thoughtful, as if the prospect of this Hell isn’t new to her. She struggled with her sense of self when she was alive, feeling that she only existed when she could see herself, yet she now finds herself in a situation where this is the reality, and she exists solely through Ines and Garcin.

In the extract, Garcin presents himself as a hero. Instead of confessing to his misdemeanours, he says ‘Je l'ai tirée du ruisseau’, implying that he rescued his wife, rather than abusing and cheating on her. Estelle is quick to reassure him unlike Ines who understands that they are here for a reason. He is more concerned than the others about how he is perceived on Earth and whether he is remembered as a hero or a coward. Whilst he wants others to believe he is a hero; he now exists solely through le regard of Estelle and Ines who deem him as a coward. He is forced to take responsibility for his actions and succumb to the fear of seeing himself for what he truly is, rather than how he wants to be perceived.

Responsibility is a key factor of existentialism. In a world where existence has no meaning, it is essential to take responsibility for the actions and choices we make. Failure to do so is to live in mauvaise foi or ‘bad faith’ (Cline, A. 2019). Estelle and Garcin are both examples of such. In the extract, Estelle is adamant that she does not understand why she is in hell and wonders ‘‘même si ce n'est pas une erreur!’. Likewise, Garcin defends his actions and refuses to accept criticism, begging ‘Où est la faute? Où est la faute?’. By blaming others for their actions, they avoid seeing themselves for who they truly are, they live in mauvaise foi to defend themselves from the judgement of others. They feel that they still have control over their self-image. Therefore being condemned to a  Hell where they lose their self-identities and exist solely through the judgement of others is torment, and we come to understand the idea that punishment doesn’t have to be external and physical, nor is it the presence and relationships that we have with others, but the idea that it is opinions and perceptions of others that shape who we are. 

Furthermore, despite no longer being a physical part of society, the characters are concerned with how they will be remembered on Earth now that they are dead. This is another example of Hell being the judgement of others, because they cannot do anything to change how they are remembered, they simply must accept it. Garcin in particular struggles with this notion, and questions whether he will be remembered as a hero (the way he wants to be perceived) or a coward (the way that others should perceive him based on his actions).

The play takes places in a hotel-style room, sparsely furnished and decorated in second-empire furniture. The description of the room is provided entirely through dialogue between Garcin and le garcon. This setting of Hell contradicts traditional notions of Hell such as fiery infernos and devils, instead delivering a picture of normalcy, where at first glance, it could be a real hotel room. This insinuates that Hell is less of an exact place but more of a concept. The idea that ‘l’enfer, c’est les autres’ is not specific to death, but can be viewed as a reflection of society, where we live under the constant gaze and judgement of others. However, the difference is that in this portrayal of Hell, the protagonists are trapped. There is no way to escape the judgement of others and there is no way to change their minds. Another feature of the room is the bright electric light that never turns off. This is important to the play because it reinforces the fact that the protagonists are trapped. They cannot hide from each other, they cannot be alone, they cannot sleep. This gives them no escape from the others and their judgements.

...