On page 81, Aimee comments: “Maybe loving someone long-term is more about.. deciding whether to go through life unhappy alone or unhappy with someone else?” This assumption that life is composed of misery is echoed by sentiments from Erik later in the play. However, Aimee statements begs question into why people engage in relationships or families to begin with- is it to avoid social criticism? Do we engage in relationships out of the comfort of presence, not because of love? So that our actions do not feel as minuscule as they realistically are, but hold an impact over at least one other individual? Do we marry, have children, embark on ‘life’ because it is expected of us at a certain time? Does this theoretical timeline thereby give us purpose- that with having a family or partner, there is reason to strive?
This also reminded me of “Catcher in the Rye,” when Holden Caulfield remarks that, if he could, he would save all children before they fall off the ‘ledge’, before they become burdened with expectations and can act on a freedom based on blissful ignorance.
I also thought these two comments were particularly interesting; both Aimee and Erik are clearly very dissatisfied with their lives. This made me wonder if these two characters in the play haven’t, at least yet, achieved their version of the American Dream? It’s interesting because we don’t necessarily know what the American Dream means to either of them, so we don’t exactly know what’s leaving them with such intense feelings of sadness and emptiness.