Part 2 is the longest section of the novel, and correspondingly describes the longest section in Anna and Tom’s lives: Their time living as expats in Berlin. It is written in past tense, suggesting that they (or the dispassionate narratorial voice) are looking back on the memories of a previous time.

The contrast between Part 1 and Part 2 is stark for several reasons. First, the tense shifts from present to past. The use of past tense and past perfect tense creates a distant tone and disconnect between past experience and present reality. The reader knows that Anna and Tom eventually leave Berlin from the apartment listing in Part 1, so past tense contributes to a retrospective analysis of what happened first, and why they chose to leave. Part 2 also contrasts Part 1 because it includes increasing descriptions of reality and actual experience, rather than curated images. The shift into the second part of the novel suggests the difference between appearance and reality in the case of Anna and Tom’s apartment, which appears to suggest an ideal life, but which really has a number of problems and can be the site of discontentment as well as “perfection.”

Even though the narrative moves from the description of photographs in Part 1 to a description of the couple’s life together in Part 2, the tone remains similar, reflecting The Complexities of Detachment and Authenticity. Latronico focuses primarily on external descriptions: Anna and Tom’s thoughts and emotions are present, but they are almost always represented collectively rather than individually. Except for a few isolated instances, thoughts and experiences are assigned to “Anna and Tom,” not one or the other. This lack of detailed inner states reflects how Anna and Tom struggle to be in touch with a more genuine, instinctive part of themselves, and to know one another deeply as individuals.

Also importantly, the couple’s experiences are generally positioned in comparison to the experiences of others. They compare their life favorably to those who never left their hometown, and are highly influenced by what they see on social media instead of cultivating their own authentic tastes and experiences, reinforcing the sense of emotional detachment in their lives. The primary metric for their experiences and happiness is how it compares to other people or how other people view it, suggesting a lack of genuine conviction or personal preference in how they live or what they choose to do.

Figurative language is used sparingly, but tends to describe important thematic content by connecting seemingly disparate concepts to introduce The Negative Effects of Social Media on Intimacy. Latronico describes the influx of social media as being “like walking through the world’s most hectic street market on cocaine. It was like channel-hopping an entire wall of TV sets. It was like telepathically tuning into the thoughts of a stadium packed with people. But really it wasn’t like anything else, because it was new” (54). Anna and Tom understand that they find it difficult to disengage from social media, but fail to realize just how negatively it affects them to spend too much time on it. The text gives the example of their sex lives: Instead of trusting their own preferences, Anna and Tom turn to social media for guidance and seek to imitate what they think others are doing. This leads to dissatisfaction with their sex life, but they do not come to the conclusion that they should trust their own feelings or experiences more—instead, they remain convinced they must be missing out on something.

Anna and Tom’s involvement in the humanitarian crisis is a central event in the novel, deepening the text’s engagement with social media and its negative impacts on a social and political level. The chapter describes the real-world migrant crisis in 2015, including numerous references to real events and contemporaneous viral reels on social media. The narrative, however, also offers a critique of how social media can both inform people of current events, and yet make their understanding or engagement with the crisis superficial and ineffective. For Anna, Tom, and their social circle, their involvement is driven by social media and partially motivated by self-interest:

Overnight, the activism on their social media had trickled down to the real city, and Anna and Tom let themselves be carried along by it. They were driven by the urgency of the humanitarian crisis, of course, but also by the feeling that something was taking place around them that they didn’t want to miss, an outstanding rendezvous with the city. (74, emphasis added)

While their personal investment in activism is inspired by something as stark as images of a drowned child, their response to it is depicted as largely passive ("let themselves be carried along by it") and superficial. Their fear of missing something their friends are experiencing is a motivating factor, which suggests that they treat their activism as no different than the club-hopping and consumerism that they similarly pursue in an attempt to stay trendy. Latronico also implicitly critiques social media activism by representing Anna and Tom’s lack of true commitment and their inefficiency. They feel they are doing the right thing when they see the “likes” and “comments” on their social media posts, but feel ineffective when they are actually attempting to volunteer and help the refugees.

The migrant crisis also emphasizes Anna and Tom’s insular experience within Berlin, invoking The Problem of Expatriate Exploitation of Local Cultures. While the migrant crisis throws their adopted home of Berlin into crisis, Anna and Tom realize they are not integrated enough into their surrounding society to meaningfully contribute, such as when they concede that their language skills are not good enough to take on any serious volunteer role. Their quick loss of interest in the crisis and shift back into political apathy reinforces how insulated they are from the socioeconomic effects the locals experience during a political crisis. Since Anna and Tom do not feel truly a part of German society, they regard their involvement with it as purely optional and dependent largely on their own whims and preferences. Their position as detached, privileged people forms an important contrast to the desperation of the vulnerable migrants and refuges: While the migrants and refugees from the Middle East are treated with distrust and even hostility, European middle-class expats like Anna and Tom can move in and out of desirable cities at will.    

The novel never explicitly includes the name of the country Anna and Tom came from, but it includes extensive use of Berlin place names. This initially suggests the couple’s disconnect from their home country (Italy), compared to their affinity for their new city. However, they do not really understand Berlin’s history on a deep level: “[T]heir awareness didn’t exceed a few anecdotes rattled off to make it look like their life there had more substance” (25). Their attempt to make their life look like it “had more substance” speaks to how superficial their connection to the city really is.

Despite the centrality of Berlin to Anna and Tom’s life and identity, they fail to fully understand it. Expatriate culture is Anna and Tom’s sole community, but they do not necessarily categorize themselves under the term. They tended to use the term “expat” “either ironically or judgmentally. And yet that term did apply to them” (77). Thus, instead of seeking to connect with the locals and commit to their adoptive home, Anna and Tom prefer to remain apart, sticking to the society of other expats and refraining from becoming too committed to any one place.