In these lines, Hamm and Clov discuss the current state of nature, including the famous line, "There's no more nature." While this line feels bleak, it is very matter of fact, almost devoid of emotion. In Lavery and Finburgh's article, they write about this line, arguing not that nature is no more, but that the concept of nature is not the same: "that nature was always already an idea, a trope or cultural construct produced by humans for their own purposes" (Lavery and Finburgh 18). In other words, that while nature is physically still there, the human concept of nature is no more. This interpretation is interesting when considering how the characters understand nature. However, I was intrigued less by Clov's statement that there was no nature, than by Hamm's conclusion that "Nature has forgotten us." There is a wistfulness which I read into this line. While Clov seems to view it as humans out-living nature, Hamm's line sounds as though nature will make it though, but humans will not; that nature resilient in a way humans are not. It questions whether we are merely a player in nature's game, or if nature is simply a concept that revolves around humans.