Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To think that Emma Thompson is detached from reality

72 replies

ILIVEONBENEFITS · 02/04/2009 00:06

Emma Thompson says that when she was a child her parents were "penniless actors" and so there was no suggestion of her and her sister being sent away to boarding school.She says her mum and dad worked because they needed the money and they were raised by their parents not by strangers thank you very much.But she also mentions that she and her sister had au pairs to help look after them.I think its a little odd to suggest that you were brought up by your parents who worked because they needed the money which they then presumably paid to the au pairs who also brought you up.
My mum and dad worked because they needed the money which they used to pay the household bills and as far as I know we didn't have one au pair let alone two.
I know poverty is all relative but for pitys sake isnt it a bit silly to suggest your parents were penniless and brought you up themselves if you go on to admit that they employed two au pairs to "help" raise you and your sister?
Is "I was raised in abject poverty" going to be the new celebrity admission now that "I was abused as a child" and "I have/had dyslexia" seems to have fallen out of fashion?

OP posts:
cremolafoam · 02/04/2009 00:08

she's doolally

mrsblanc · 02/04/2009 00:11

YANBU

FAQinglovely · 02/04/2009 00:12

I think when she was growing up Au Pairs were literally given "pocket money" - not the sort of money they get today.

She certainly had nothing like a privileged childhood (had a friend a few years back who went to school with her).

Northernlurker · 02/04/2009 00:15

Actors working in the theatre have to have domestic help or they won't be able to both work. You can't do 6 night shows a week with small children to put to bed without one - unless one of you is turning down jobs or your child is living in a trunk in the dressing room! You are also I believe likely to be crap at the school run if you've been out giving your all in Ibsen till the early hours. Poverty is all relative and I assume that what she means is that when her parents had paid for the help that allowed them to work (which for many and complex reasons they both liked doing) there was bugger all left.

dittany · 02/04/2009 00:15

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Northernlurker · 02/04/2009 00:22

Oh come on Dittany - how much do you think the BBC paid for the Magic Roundabout?? Also - just looked at Phyllida Law on wikipedia and the only tv work they credit her with prior to 1972 was Playschool! Emma Thompson was born in 1959 so I think her assertion that they weren't bought up with a lot of cash around is borne out by the facts.

Pruners · 02/04/2009 00:22

Message withdrawn

FAQinglovely · 02/04/2009 00:26

but neither of them were "known" actors when she was born they both became more famous (or as famous as people became in those days for usch things - which wasn't very )

Of course she wasn't living in poverty - but they certainly weren't well off either (but apparently she is (or was when at school and Uni) as mad as a hatter LOL.

Northernlurker · 02/04/2009 00:31

Indeed Pruners - this is where the story of the 'famous' actor bursting into a bar comes from. He shouted 'Quick, quick auditions at The National for spear carrying work' 'But' protested one of the penniless thesps gathered there ' you're used to having a part, why do you want a spear carrying job?'

'Can't pass up the chance old boy' says famous thesp 'there's a practical cake in Act two'

dittany · 02/04/2009 00:47

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

UnquietDad · 02/04/2009 00:49

Acting is very poorly paid at first and most actors are out of work most of the time.

So they need either quick success followed by steady work, or another job (waiting tables etc.) or a private source of income. It's fun to speculate who has which.

I am reminded of the Fiennes woman (forget her first name) being interviewed in the Grauniad a few years ago, claiming they had a "hand to mouth" existence growing up, and in the next paragraph describing how they just took off to go and live in Ireland. And she has two nannies. Why? asks the interviewer perfectly reasonably. Fiennes woman looks at interviewer as if she is deranged. "Because I've got two children."

Well,of course... Doh! Now you put it like that...

kickassangel · 02/04/2009 01:00

camden used to be really quite a cheap area of london, i once remember lying to my mum, saying that of course i hadn't been there to visit a friend, but met her somewhere safer.

so, she had working parents, a dad who died young , lived in a bit of a rough area & had cheap au pairs to enable her parents to work. whilst not penniless, that doesn't make her rolling in it either. nor does it mean that her parents didn't bring her up. so, perhaps playing up the 'rags to riches' tale a little, but nor a massive exaggeration either.

FAQinglovely · 02/04/2009 01:01

do you really think that Au Pairs in the 60's got the same sort of money (equivalent) as they do now?

Did they actually own a house in Camden - my understanding is that her family had roots in Scotland where she spent a lot of her childhood - where they did indeed own property in Dunoon.

DSM · 02/04/2009 01:01

Whilst I wouldn't describe my personal financial status as 'penniless', but we are by no means well off. I don't own my own house, I have no assets and no savings.

But I have help with childcare because I have to do shows at night. And Au Pairs cost nothing like nannies cost.

DSM · 02/04/2009 01:03

Oh, and I would be horrified for someone to suggest that my son is being 'brought up by someone else' because I work, and need him looked after when I am at work.

Shells · 02/04/2009 01:10

I hate this kind of shit. I think a lot of people have NO idea what 'penniless' really means. I had a friend from a very upper middle class background who used to go on about how 'poor' they were as children and how they could only go to Portugal on the boat for holidays.

Not a clue....

ScottishThistle · 02/04/2009 01:16

I doubt they were well off, two actors (hardly major film stars!)

I dare say most families with two incomes coming in could afford an Au-Pair, even nowadays they don't cost a lot!

FAQinglovely · 02/04/2009 01:17

Shells - Emma Thompson spent most of her holidays in Scotland - so hardly a boat in Portugal

Still - is a shame that a certain celebrity couldn't have taken a leaf out of her books with her wanting to help people and adoption......

Original poster
ILIVEONBENEFITS · 02/04/2009 01:20

I don't think the sort of people who employ au pairs do so only when they are at work and when they are home from the hard toil in the theatre, tell the au pair to go and do their own thing until their next foray into the bright lights.
Equally it doesnt really matter whether wages paid to au pairs were pocket money or not the fact is that they a were paid something and in my book that is spare money.
I'm not having a go about class or moaning about being poor I just think people who werent poor shouldnt keep trying to pretend they were.Count yourself lucky that you had parents who were able to provide and employ people to look after you when they couldnt and accept that whilst you werent rich you werent bloody poor either.
Being poor..really poor, means not having the choice to decide that you'd quite like a career in the theatre and might have to employ some german girls to look after your kids while you go to work.My mum washed up at the hospital during the night while we slept and could never have afforded to live somewhere big enough to house two members of "staff" let alone pay them

OP posts:
FAQinglovely · 02/04/2009 01:25

so if I go out to work and pay a childminders - is that money "spare money" that I could choose to spend on something else??

I know someone who hires an au pair - she sleeps on the sofa in the lounge, her 2 DC share a bedroom and the au pair has the 2nd bedroom.

In those days Au Pairs were treated not as staff - they weren't allowed to be under the Au Pair programmes that were set up - they were the literal sense of the term "equals"

ScottishThistle · 02/04/2009 01:26

Sorry am I the only one who thinks "Au-Pairs" means they had more than one in their childhood and not two at the same time?

My Father was a miner and if my Mother had also worked (SAHM) I'm sure they would have managed to pay an Au-Pair £30pw.

FAQinglovely · 02/04/2009 01:29

Scottish - no you're not

I doubt they'd even have got £30 in the 70's - that was a lot of money back then!

FAQinglovely · 02/04/2009 01:31

and actually reading the article I think the OP read it from - it would appear it was only one at a time - including a horrible one that used to steal her sweets

Original poster
ILIVEONBENEFITS · 02/04/2009 01:33

she got sweets? she was lucky..i got half a handful of cold gravel.............

OP posts:
FAQinglovely · 02/04/2009 01:36

oh come on - you must have got your half penny sweets - oh I was always so excited when I'd get my 1p pocket money each week - I'd save it up for a few weeks and then buy lots and lots of sweets with it.