The play did a really good job of making it difficult to fully agree with or be on the side of any one character. While watching the play I felt that I could see both sides to any argument. The main character at times came off as extremely strong and resourceful and at other times irrational and selfish.

While watching the play I could feel myself being easily convinced of different character’s opinions and views on marriage and at times my allegiances would change so quickly that at one point I felt confused and frustrated at the whole discourse. This I believe is a success because that allowed me to feel the same confusion and frustration that the characters in the play felt, for example when the wife was on the floor with the ripped contract and the husband was on the chair with a bashed in the head.

The play to me didn’t serve to answer any questions but really raised many and sort of went on to say is there an answer? Then they sort of made some jokes about it shrugged it off and said “well if there is one it sure is hard!” Then laughed it off and said “Life goes on”.

That kind of frustrates me but at the same time I think that works in this case because the play is almost I would say about frustration.

The part that stuck with me the most was when she said “Just being with people is so hard.” I liked how she made it so general as to refer to relationships with other conscious beings and not just marriage. It kind of highlights that the problem isn’t as much a matter of gender or society or all sorts of other potential sources of blame, but rather just a part of being human.

We enjoy company but to be in company with someone is to compromise with each other to varying degrees. Difficult even without a binding contract!