Howard’s End was on the tube last evening – a film I love, among other things, for two of my favorite British actors. Emma Thompson and Anthony Hopkins.
Released in 1992, we see a lovely Thompson at age 33, and Hopkins, then 55. But I was bothered that I hadn’t seen her in many films lately, so I hopped on the Internet for more information.
Having seen this versatile actress in 2009’s Last Chance Harvey (delightfully paired with Dustin Hoffman), I couldn’t come up with anything other than Love Actually that I could recall. So where has Emma Thompson gone? Now 51, has she aged out of the film biz? What 50+ actresses other than Meryl Streep, Helen Mirren and Diane Keaton are working in films that reach American audiences?
“Older” woman?
Fishing for more detail, I came across several articles in the British press and read – about Emma Thompson’s split with actor Kenneth Branaugh years ago, her bouts of depression, her fertility issues and (unsuccessful) rounds of IVF, and the appalling lack of quality material available to this talented woman who is, among other things, a writer.
Hopkins, meanwhile, was working steadily at 55, at 60, and how old was he when starring opposite Nicole Kidman in The Human Stain? 65? And speaking of which, now that she is 43, does this mean that Kidman only has a few “good” years left?
Then there is the issue of older motherhood, not quite addressed in the article. And yes, Ms. Thompson has a slightly younger husband with whom she shares a 10-year old daughter and an adopted teen son. Her husband is seven years her junior, something we would take no note of at all, were the roles reversed. Instead, nearly every article mentions them as an older woman younger man pairing. Will we ever get past this particular cultural prejudice?
And?
The IVF issue (What is an “older mother” anyway?)
And – this brief article on Thompson, IVF, and depression unleashed an ample flow of topics (in my mind) – each worthy of discussion.
- There is the issue of IVF and enforcement of the age guidelines.
- Among “related articles” was the 2009 announcement of Britain’s oldest mother, then 66 and pregnant via IVF.
- She gave birth later in that year, as mentioned in this Telegraph article.
- There is the matter of government intervention in a woman’s reproductive choices, period.
And I will say that when it comes to a woman giving birth in her 60s, I am decidedly against. For that matter, in my opinion giving birth in your 50s is nuts. Might we remember that babies become children, and then teens? Shouldn’t we be thinking of the child? And all the children already on our planet in need of parents?
Is this the one instance when “aging out” is a reality we ought to accept, rather than twisting what medical science can accomplish to suit (selfish) purposes?
Fertility
We remain a culture with conflicting feelings on motherhood. We neither exalt it nor appreciate it, yet we seem to expect it. An unmarried woman with a child? Not the stigma it once was, but frowned upon. A married woman who chooses not to give birth? We find her odd. If a woman is unable to bear children (and wishes to), we pity her. Yet women who want large families are often the subject of much clucking of tongues.
When it comes to procreation, we can’t win these days.
As for IVF, I’m all for it – and its responsible usage by women and physicians both. As an “older mother” and on my own, I know how difficult it is rearing little ones beyond the baby stage. Sleep deprivation and diapers are one thing. Children and teens? A whole other (grueling, complicated, serious) matter. Presumably, if you can afford IVF you can afford a nanny. And might we add one more prejudice to the mix – the snarky remarks about women with domestic assistance?
I don’t believe that women with nannies are any less motherly than those without. What busy mother – single or otherwise – wouldn’t happily accept help?
Talent, Skills, Contributions
Let’s talk about opportunities for a moment. Opportunities to live fully, and to contribute.
How is it that a gifted actress at 50 finds herself with no appropriate roles when her male counterparts have plenty? This was a problem 20 years ago, 30 years ago, 40 years ago, and so on. I thought we were making strides, but apparently not. Instead we’re accepting cosmetic surgery as a “given” and ignoring the underlying issues: our discomfort with aging, and our continued judgment of women based on (impossible?) standards of beauty.
Is it time to put the female writers of Mad Men on the task, while on hiatus from their regular duties?
And aren’t we the worse off for not taking full advantage of talent, skills, and valuable experience at any age? Not just our performers, but all of us? Are you ready to be put out to pasture as soon as you hit an arbitrary number, or when the Oil of Olay stops working its magic? Don’t you still have much to contribute at 50? At 60? At 80?
Debunking the notion of “having it all”
Incidentally, the Telegraph (online) also ran this story, with Ms. Thompson commenting on her notions of women having it all – referring to it as a “revolting concept.”
Might I nod in (worn, dulled, nanny-less) agreement? Not so much that it is revolting; more precisely, it is impractical, rarely achievable, and one more myth among myths foisted upon women – ironically – by women. The article references an interview Ms. Thompson gave to Good Housekeeping, categorizing the “perfect work-life balance” concept as “false.”
She [Thompson] said: “I don’t want your readers ever to think they have to have it all.”
The Oscar-winning actress claimed it was possible to have a good career and excel at motherhood but not necessarily at the same time.
Go figure. Common sense. Any of us who have ever attempted know this, don’t we? No matter where we’re directing our energies at a point in time, most of us suffer conflict over the areas we (feel we) are neglecting. It’s not that women want fewer choices; only that the complexity of those choices be viewed more realistically. And quite possibly – supported more constructively.
So thank you, Emma Thompson. You’re a breath of fresh air. Might you write a few screenplays that deal with these issues?
I love Emma Thompson, I love Meryl Streep, Helen Mirren, Sally Field and Diane Keaton. Although they are older than I am, I feel I relate to them.
I love your views on women and the challenges faced. Others deciding what is best for us.
I think that men and women both feel stretched between the workforce and the home front. I am not sure that anyone can multi task and do them all to the highest level. However, some who only face work OR raising children dont necessarily do a better job.
We are always critical of ourselves and yet, the kids turn out better than we had expected because they have not lived a perfect life.
I have never had to face the agony of my woman parts not giving me the child I wanted. Actually the opposite. I was aptly named fertile Myrtle. However I have been on the other side of that realm as is explained in this post on my page. http://asmymotherbeforeme.blogspot.com/2010/03/my-story-part-1.html
I know what it is like to be in the situation -pregnant, alone, scared, unprepared, and thoughts of ‘ending it’. I understand the importance of a woman’s freedoms of choices.
Writing screenplays is one thing, getting movies made is an entirely different order of business.
If Hollywood could make money on movies about assisted living we would have “End of Life Issues” at the top of of the box office. But instead we have movies targeted at children and young adults because they fork over the money (and time) to watch.
While we have an ageist society, we also have a bluntly capitalistic society as well as a narcissistic society. Even maturing people seem not to want to see this mirrored in their media experiences.
Perhaps if we, as a society, actually look at the inevitability of death (which we so adamantly deny, as evidenced by the ridiculous way “life” is prolonged at the expense of actually living when it comes to the terminally ill) we might be less phobic about middle age, and be ready to benefit from great acting rather than pretty actors.
While I’m not up on what the wonderful Ms. Thompson may have been up to in the way of theater in recent years, I do believe that live theater can provide a magical (albeit fairly expensive) experience and is a place where maturing actors can often shine (and even prosper).
As for parenting, I think end of life issues and beginning of life issues are completely intertwined; thus if we start to see “success” as being present to whatever is while remaining generally kind, then it’s not that special people need to “have it all” to prove their specialness so much as “all people deserve to have it.”
Namaste
I wondered if you might weigh in, Bruce. 😉 And I do like the way you think. However, I wonder if we looked at demographics and potential profitability of the aging Baby Boomers, if we wouldn’t still find a good market for more “real” pictures of growing older – even if via Indie films? And I did make a distinction between the American marketplace and (by default) the big bad rest-of-the-world. Europe seems far more comfortable showing us real faces and telling us real stories that have to do with the millions of us over 40.
And what a lovely thought – not “have it all” but “all deserve to have it.” You’re a virtual (literal? literary?) rebel, Bruce. If only…
Emma was in the recent “An Education” which is shot beautifully in the 1960’s style (good if you are having a “Mad Men” withdrawal) along with the Harry Potter series.
I will have to look for these, batticus. Thank you! (And yes, the Mad Men withdrawal is tough tough tough! And do note how Blankenship managed to hold our interest (amusement) even though the cast is predominantly 20-something to not yet 40. (Burt and Roger being the exceptions.)
Love Emma Thompson — and Anthony Hopkins too. I imagine you’ve also seen them together in Remains of the Day?
I’m so glad you brought Thompson’s quote to my attention. She’s so right; the idea of “having it all” is indeed impractical. I wish the limits of human biology didn’t force us to have to prioritize our energies for parenthood within that same window when our careers are often in important stages of development. (At the moment, as I focus on neither, I feel like I’m really getting behind!)
Thompson just completed a movie with Maggie Guylenhall, the second Nannie McPhee (my spelling may be wrong) movie. I love her, and put her in the same category as the other very talented actresses you’ve mentioned (Streep, Mirren, etc.).
As to IVF, I think it’s fine, I think having a Nanny is fine (as long as you still spend time with your kids), but I do think there should be a limit to the age at which women try to conceive. All I can think of when I hear about a woman in her late 40s or up having a baby is “do you realize how old you’re going to be when this child is a teenager?” Kids take energy and patience; both decline with the years.
Funny to see this post today, Emma Thompson was in the Sunday Times just today. I think her adopted son is about 22 now.
I don’t have anything against nannies, I can’t imagine my life without having one as a little girl. She was a very important part of my life, along with the extended family. No chance of a nuclear family upbringing in my family, I think we’re the better for it though.
We are both taking time off work (we are very lucky with our work, and that’s partly our age, though we would have liked to start earlier) when our two chicklets hatch (fingers crossed), but we are also doing a nanny share with a close friend.
As for IVF, I’m divided on it it depends on where you draw the line (people use it to cover everything from Clomid to multiple embryos), but whom I am to say. I have no experience of it. Perhaps 40 seems a natural cut off. Saying that, I know people who did IVF from their 20s with no success for years (and then finally had success with it or conceived naturally) and I also know people who’ve had BIG surprises in their 40s, even late 40s.
Emma Thompson’s son was already a teen when they adopted, wasn’t he? Thank you for the clarification. And you raise a good point around IVF and the age issue. Certainly, what might make sense for one person might not for another. I have also known some women in their (early) 40s who had a first child. The issue is what happens when you hit your 50s or 60s as the child grows up, and the sort of parent you can be to that child. I wouldn’t want to be the one to set a cut-off age, but it seems like common sense ought to strongly advocate against women seeking IVF after a certain age. And to me, it’s surely not over 50.
Yes, he’s a refugee from an African country. I always read anything I see about her as I have a foster son (though he’s British) in case there is anything useful to be gleaned.
Maybe 45 would be a cut off for IVF? But also in the same paper yesterday was a story about Jacqueline Gold (she runs Ann Summers) and she tried IVF for many years & then her last try at 48 worked (she went to the US for it, perhaps it’s better there) and I do know women who have had babies at 48 naturally.
But you know, Emma Thompson did have one baby with her hot husband (who is also younger) and she was married for years before so she did have the opportunity. We all have choices and we have to live with the consequences. Life has not been so bad for her. As my granny would say, she should have a stiff upper lip and count her blessings.
Looks from the link that she had a long history of depression though.
I appreciate this post. It makes me think, though, why we women and mothers are so hard on each other. What purpose does it serve? Are we so wrapped up in our own pride that we judge others because they made different choices that we did? We do ourselves a disservice. Why not appreciate that we have choices and trust that what works for some may not work for others. So what if some women want to work, some want to stay home with the kids, some need nannies, some need ivf, some adopt. why not accept that the choice each woman makes is essentially right for them, or if not reach out and lend a hand, we are all in this together!
“We’re all in this together.”
Yes! The women and the men – trying to do right by our children.
How wonderful of you to write about Emma Thompson. Always a favorite of mine and I miss not seeing her as often in starring roles (I don’t care much for the Nanny McPhee movies). But when she does show up, even in a smaller role such as an Education (which is a brilliant if slightly disturbing movie) she just plain shines with talent and gravitas. I only loved her more for writing the screenplay for Sense and Sensibility for which she won an Oscar.
Helen Mirren, Meryl Streep, Emma Thompson – if they are in the movie, I will be going to see it.
As for “having it all” – I’m exhausted just thinking about it. It’s an impossible myth.
Thanks for writing about one of my favorite actors, BLW!
About the IVF, surely there are different issues at play here. For a national health service to pay for it, as in Britain, they could impose an age limit, to prevent a, let’s say, 66-year-old from deciding she needs to have a baby. As far as women who may be paying for their own procedures, to me that should be a personal decision and left between a woman and her doctor. Do I think it’s a good idea to have children so late? Of course not. But do I want fertility regulated? I guess it just brings to mind John Travolta and Kelly Preston and the fact that she’s delivering her baby at either 47 or 48 and that’s what their family needed after the death of their older child.
I can say that, as a person who had a baby at 39 1/2 (so now I’m 50 and have an 11-year-old!) it is a little out of step. I can’t even imagine what it would be like to add 10 years onto that.