REVELATIONS AND REVELRY

Firstly, apologies for the vast length of time that I have allowed to pass since my last ‘personal’ blog. The only excuse I can offer is that half term hijacked my brain and it hasn’t been until now that I’ve managed to lure it home. Funny how you need a holiday to recover from school holidays isn’t it? It’s all very nice in theory – not having to get up, not having to iron uniform, plenty of opportunity – nay, need – for trips to the zoo, swimming pool, cinema, etc. However the reality of hearing the word “Mummy” 57 times a minute always takes me by surprise. But the one that really gets me is  “Mummy, can you watch me do XYZ?” For everything. It may not be a watchable activity, I’m talking about searching for crayons, choosing clothes, etc., but my eldest daughter will want me to watch her do it. Or better still is the often-asked question: “Did you watch me?” I’m her parent, not her personal spectator. Although that may not be how the school judge me; no sooner is she back in the place then they announce a new initiative whereby you can come in and ‘observe’ (or ‘watch’ as it’s otherwise known) their individual music lessons. Which of course prompted the inevitable question this morning: “Mummy, can you watch my violin lesson today?” It was unfortunate that Sainsburys conspired against the school by restricting their available delivery times and thus prevented me from doing so. Shame.

One thing that has really caught my interest  recently is the spate of articles that have appeared over the last few days as the Harry Potter films come to an end and Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint and Emma Watson are released from their time as Harry, Ron and Hermione. It was quite fascinating learning about how the films were made, and where and how long it all took. And in addition quite how much money the three main actors have earned. Millions, needless to say. I think Daniel Radcliffe alone is worth £40 million. Great, in theory. He’s barely in his twenties and yet he need never work again. He has more money than he could ever spend in his lifetime. And probably those of the children he may go on to have. Emma Watson and Rupert Grint are in a similar position. But is this a good thing? Is it really so wonderful for an individual to be in the position where they need never work again so early in their life? Most – if not all – people in these economically straightened times would probably say yes, it is a wonderful thing and how lucky they are. But I suspect otherwise. It will take an enormous amount of self-discipline for those three people to maintain focus on their lives, to have a structure to their week and not drift into any of the temptations that will inevitably fall into their paths. They need never get out of bed again, they can spend their lives on the slopes of Gstaad or the beaches of the Seychelles – they could probably buy their own slopes and beaches – but I don’t think this is necessarily a good thing. Is it not far better for a person to be anchored by the demands of life? The Government clearly agree with me  (which is always nice) judging by the scheme they’ve just announced  whereby those who have opted for a ‘life on benefits’ are to be forced to work for set hours each week to teach them the self-discipline and skills required to hold down a job. Interesting juxtaposition between being entirely dependent on state welfare and having more money than you could ever spend, but the risks are potentially the same.

The problem that I see for these three actors, and for anyone else in a similarly privileged position, is that there’s nothing left that they need to achieve in life. Professionally and financially – they’ve made it. Of course they will all have their individual aims but whereas most young adults are forced into making sensible decisions by the pressure of having to work, whether that be purely in terms of earning money or by gaining qualifications for a career, the risk for the Harry Potter crowd is that because they don’t have this they will drift, make unwise decisions and suffer personally as a consequence. Examples of this flood into the media all the time; Macauley Culkin – who went from being a celebrated and revered child actor to being an extremely troubled adult. The socialites who become drug-dependent.  Emma Watson is the only one of the three to take A-Levels and go on to University. She was also the only one of the three who did not have her parents on set with her. And she wasn’t told until she was eighteen how much she was worth. She now comes across as a focussed, driven person and a potential success story for having spent ten years as a child, teenager and young adult locked into a pretend world. Which is of course the other issue which could be argued to be a bad thing. The social aspect. If you remove a normal school routine, normal peer groups and essentially normal life and replace it by teenage years spent in draughty aircraft hangars, fighting dragons, that must have enormous and lasting consequences for a child. Daniel Radcliffe and Emma Watson both experienced bullying-type behaviour and Emma has now opted to study in the USA to avoid recognition, and speaks openly about struggling to know how best to make friends.  None of these things are a substantial argument against taking the Harry Potter kind of roles that catapault children into superstardom, but I do think it’s important to recognise the negative aspects as well. Whether this will bother any of them as they buy their fourth home on Mustique is an entirely separate question.

But there is of course another benefit to starring in these films. Quite aside from the worldwide fame and the millions of pounds lodging with Coutts, there is something else which is a truly amazing thing to have. And this is that when Daniel, Emma and Rupert ask their parents “Did you  watch me?” – the answer will be a resounding YES.