| 
After seven years together, we have decided to formally separate. For those those who follow these sorts of things, we would like to explain that our separation is not the result of any of the speculation reported by the tabloid media. This decision is the result of much thoughtful consideration. We happily remain committed and caring friends with great love and admiration for one another. Jennifer Aniston and Brad Pitt released this statement to the press on January 7th, leaving newsstands abuzz with speculative cover stories. “Is he in love with Angelina?” asks Star, displaying photos of “tender moments” between Pitt and Angelina Jolie which made Aniston “seeth.” In a “Who Should Jen Date Now?” survey, Star readers chose George Clooney among eligible bachelors like newly-divorced John Stamos and, if she feels “ready for a younger man,” Jake Gyllenhaal. What went wrong? Citing a close source, People speculates that “it became really difficult for the couple to balance work and family.” Unable to coordinate their working schedules, indecisive about having children, and making little progress with marriage therapy, Jen and Brad decided that a separation would be best. “The separation is a step back to see if their relationship is going to be forever or if it’s not,” reports a source. The absurdity continues. Movie columnist Martin Grove and Us Weekly remark, in summary: “All this free publicity? ‘The breakup could be her [Jennifer’s] big break!’” “We’ll miss Brad and Jen,” in Touch reports. “They were the ultimate ‘golden couple,’” the writers wistfully add, a title the pair have deserved for their “great hair,” “sparkling smiles,” “fairy tale” story, and “fabulous chemistry.” How shallow, the well-educated reader thinks, to think that looks are enough to sustain a long-term relationship, as the gossipdripped magazine draws him irresistibly closer. In the scope of normal family life, Brad and Jen’s reasoning certainly does seem shallow. How hard can it be to sit down and coordinate two conflicting work schedules or to prioritize time at home above one’s work? Was it the lack of a daily planner that drove the two apart? Perhaps an inability to decide when to have children? Despite an off-andon enthusiasm for the possibility, neither could bear to reject movie offers in order to raise a family. At 37 and 41, how much longer do they expect to postpone that goal? Pitt and Aniston’s is a case in point of a radical change in marriage culture. The weakening of the marital contract over the past 30 years by laws promoting “no-fault divorce” has transformed the formerly binding, “till death do us part” commitment of romantic vows into a “revocable contract.” Such an oxymoron defies contractual obligation and makes a mockery of sustained, committed love. Our culture teaches us that romance constrained by a long-term bond is unexciting, unsexy. This utopian worldview squares poorly with the reality that imperfection prevails in all relationships; we cannot avoid working through our obstacles by walking away from them. Advocates of no-fault divorce argue that it gives men and women more choice, empowering them with the freedom to leave an unfulfilling relationship. After having loved and left (or been left) several times over, Brad and Jen will return to their respective single lives: childless, family-free, and rapidly Lonely approaching middle age, seeking that elusive Mr. and Ms. Right until the next Mr. or Ms. Right Now comes along. Is this empowerment? After giving their romance a four-year chance and abandoning it so quickly, their lives seem more lonely than empowered. At its essence, no-fault divorce has trained us to believe that “empowerment” means abandoning those closest to you, that breaking a vow is an assertion of freedom. How much more fulfilling it would be to work through life’s difficulties and continue through life together through thick and thin—but Hollywood does not care for such possibilities. Instead, Tinsel Town glorifies the high-speed, impulsedriven approach to romance; the cultural implications of this new vision are both tangible and dramatic. While Desperate Housewives takes third place in TV ratings and cleans up at the Golden Globes, more than one million couples sign divorce papers every year. The Hollywood style of relationships has become a pervasive social trend. In interviews last spring, Pitt expressed doubts about his ability to endure the constraints of marriage. “Jen and I don’t cage each other with the pressure of ‘happily ever after,’ he said. “I despise this two-becomes-one thing where you lose your individuality.” Good luck finding your individuality with the next girl, Brad—we hope it works out for you. | ||||||||||||
As Aniston’s
Friend Chandler would say, could this be more formulaic? A gesture of
affection with another woman casts doubts on a longstanding (read: more
than 2-3- year) marriage. Tabloids murmur: affair! betrayal! divorce!
The duo denies the accusations, reaffirms their love, and seeks answers
in therapy. Months later, the honeymoon is over; the separation fuels
shocking headlines. Man and soon-to-be-ex-wife reassure their adoring
fans that the time apart will be good for them—they will discover,
at last, if each is “the one” and, when the time is right,
they will rekindle the romance and start a family. That, or they will
just move on to the next, better romance—and claim, yet again, that
this one is different.