To think that Emma Thompson is detached from reality

[ILIVEONBENEFITS]

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?

Message withdrawn

I think both do.

agree with UD here (blimey that's a first!) both important when it comes to choices.

Actually penniless people (like my grandparents) were being cleared out of flats in Georgian terraces in Islington which are now worth millions and sent to live in council houses in Loughton and other parts of Essex. And they thought they'd died and gone to heaven.

Even being able to fart about wanting to be actors shows that they had sufficient resources not to be genuinely penniless.

Message withdrawn

Pruners, surely you can accept that for Emma Thompson to describe her family as "penniless" is ridiculous. They could not have been penniless if they could afford an au pair (even on pocket money, penniless people don't have the money to feed an extra mouth) and afford to take the peaks and troughs of being a jobbing actor.

If they had been genuinely penniless her father would have been down the labour exchange every day looking for work.

Oh dear goodness- responding to the OP only. By today's prices, au pair= 34 or 40 quid a week + food. Average salary in London, about 400 quid. Weekly household income if one parent stays at home with children= 400 quid. Average weekly household income if both parents go out to work and employ an au pair= 770 quid. You do the maths. Your earning power is definitely more than what you pay an pair, so financially it makes a lot of sense. How is that detached from reality?

I like Emma Thompson. She stopped to talk to my ds when I was carrying him in the sling I think there are different levels of being 'poor' though. I can't imagine that she was poor, but it is entirely possible that they 'felt' poor. Just think of the railway cildren and sense and sensibility, where they are all supposedly in abject poverty while living in lovely country houses

I totally agree that they may have felt poor, compared to people that they mixed with, but that doesn't make them poor.

Is an au pair really only 40 quid a week plus food?

"If they had been genuinely penniless her father would have been down the labour exchange every day looking for work. "

But I fear the world would have not had so many of its well loved artist, musicians and actors if they all followed that line. Not to mention many of the businesses that were started from nothing, and started off as nothing but grew over the years. And now they certainly all didn't come from middle or upper class backgrounds. Some of them had a dream and followed it.

Some people take the view of short term struggling with the aim of long term benefits.

The friend I mentioned currently squatting in Camden - he's trying to forge his music career (without the aid of X-Factor/Pop Idol nonsense). He's a bright man - he could easily find a well paying job, but he's chasing that goal, and living in like he is in the hopes of one day getting something back from it.

Message withdrawn

anyhow - does anyone else think her "adopted" son is rather cute - in an odd sort of way

Well I have come across her in real life too and she is absolutely lovely so can certainly forgive her this.

Oh look ...

ET is an actress. A luvvie. They exaggerate. She would have used the word in a gushy way, without thinking, as thesps are prone to do.

Of course her family weren't penniless. Nor were they rich and being in showbiz there would have been cash flow problems. They probably had the odd struggle over how to pay the gas bill.

Let's just ignore her silly comments and worry about more important things.

jujumaman, if we did that, MN as we know it would cease to exist.

Mmmh, interesting one. To answer FAQ's earlier question, DH's parents had au pairs in the early sixties when they had two small children and were working full time (including night shifts). They say they were hard up, but it really was a (relatively) cheap option as the au pairs were Spanish students studying in London who just needed food, board and a little pocket money. So it made sense for my in-laws to both work, but they still struggled.

It's all relative though, innit?

PMSL Georgi - so true, what one earth would we talk about - there'd be nothing to waste our days talking about

Georgi, you're quite right!

Haven't been on here for a few weeks and almost forgot the point of mn.

So I revise my posting - Yeah! Insensitive bitch, she should go and live under a piece of plastic in a Caracas slum and then she can say she's penniless.

YABU - her desciption of her parents as "penniless actors" is not the same as saying she lived in "abject poverty"...to me the expression merely denotes that 'money was tight'...and perhaps it was. She was there - you weren't.

Moreover, I believe that it is possible to have au pairs and be hard up, my understanding is their pay is not a great deal since they are given bed and board.

Furthermore, they were actors - tends not to be much call for theatre between the hours of 9-5, treading the boards is largely a nocturnal affair so they had little choice but to have some live in childcare arrangement.

duchess i think if you do the maths and work out what what you can afford to pay someone to help out with the children then you are not penniless.where i came from penniless meant hiding from the rent collector and sometimes having absolutlely nothing in the house to eat.I had only one pair of shoes at one point and at school the buggers made me colour in the white stitching on the soles because they absolutely had to be black.I didnt have a choice of getting diffeernt shoes they were the only ones i could afford to get and that was that.that is why i think she is detached from reality.nobody i knew was poor and happy or even mildly well off and pretending to be poor because it was cool to do so.we were just poor and i dont see the sense in pretending that you were penniless when you were not

I reckon listening to DS screaming at almost 3.30 after not stopping for around 3 hours (why is he not tired) I should be able to find £40 a week for someone else to listen to DS scream...

Now that would be the life...
Oh and just to point out IM REALLY PENNILESS LOL But its £40 well spent for a good nights sleep!!!!!