Can it be stated so categorically that marriage for convenience has no future? The invention of marriage for love was supposed to be a response to the ills of traditional marriage: to reestablish equality between spouses, to value feelings over obligations. However, for decades, the number of marriages has been declining, divorce rates have skyrocketed, celibacy has spread, and the number of children of separated parents has multiplied. Based on years of research, Pascal Bruckner's *Did the Marriage for Love Fail?* offers a philosophical analysis of the issues surrounding marriage for love. One of Bruckner's points is that the current valorization of enjoyment, performance, the senses, and feelings is supposedly at a standstill, proving to be more harmful to couples' lives than the alliances of the past. This is because reason now takes a back seat. In *Did the Marriage for Love Fail?*, one also feels the anguish of this current and trivialized drama that separation has become. Contemporary marital practices, based on singular love, have multiplied it exponentially—without making it any less painful. According to the author, the refusal to be an adult and the fear of being cruel by abandoning the other keep people inert in life. Pascal Bruckner, part of a literary tradition, notably French, illuminates the dark side of love. Without adopting a sarcastic tone, he emphasizes the threats of love and caprice in these permissive times, and the limits and consideration each person should impose on themselves. The result is definitely convincing.
