The tragic, empty lives of former child stars
Sometimes i wonder if the gods of celebrity take a mischievous delight in bestowing the wrong gifts on the right people (dull Brad) and the right gifts on the wrong people (mad Angelina). then someone like emma Watson comes along, who seems to be the right person in every way, but has been capsized with the wrong gifts at the wrong time in her life. And has yet to recover.
since appearing in the Harry Potter films, 26-year-old emma has carved out an unusual identity for herself as an actress-activist; a self-appointed global feminist and a crusader against . . . well, whaddya got? Yet it is clearly all becoming a bit much.
in an interview with elle magazine, she has claimed that being an international activist is so tough, sometimes she struggles to get out of bed.
this came after her work as a UN Women Goodwill Ambassador and a passionate campaigner for the HeForshe campaign, which aims to promote gender equality, was gently mocked. Critics called her the worst kind of ‘white privileged feminist’, whose male-focused drive actually furthered the oppression of women.
And while she had factored centuries of female oppression into her role and her conscience, emma clearly never thought that she would be the one to end up feeling oppressed. she admits that she struggled to cope with the backlash and sulked instead.
Never mind. one of her feminist friends — Laura Bates of the everyday sexism project — sent her a care package of sequins and glitter, notes of encouragement and chocolate.
OH God. And this was something the pair of them boasted about. sometimes, one despairs of modern feminists, whose love of portraying themselves as victims seems to be an important part of the struggle; an indicator of how they measure their worth.
think of the original suffragettes, remember the Pankhurst women and those who were imprisoned, chained themselves to railings, went on hunger strike or were force-fed and beaten by police. Would a tube of smarties and a pack of glittery face stickers have eased their burden?
What would Germaine Greer make of a gift of such girlish rubbish? No doubt, she’d throw it on her bra bonfire and tell everyone to grow up.
Yet i don’t think emma is a terrible person, even if she is yet another tiresome millionaire celebrity lecturing everyone else on how we should be living our lives. she cannot seem to decide if she is an actress who is an activist, or an activist who sometimes acts — but perhaps the choice is no longer hers.
the former Harry Potter star accepted, then turned down, the lead role in musical La La Land, which was then taken by emma stone and looks likely to win her an oscar. she is not exactly washed-up, but where does she go from here? it all goes to underscore my theory that nothing good comes of being a child star.
VerY few of these preternatural protégées successfully make the transition into adult celebrity — and they all reach a crossroads where their potential seems to be stuck in the past. And realising in your mid-20s that you might have already peaked cannot be easy.
other Potter stars have fared little better. daniel radcliffe had a battle with alcohol and is shortly to appear on the West end stage in a tom stoppard play. rupert Grint struggles to weed out genuine friends from hangers-on and has done some film and theatre work, but nothing spectacular.
each has earned more than £50 million from the Harry Potter films, and need never work again — which can be a burden and a curse, instead of a blessing.
For, just at the exact moment in life when their prospects should be soaring, the shutters are rolling down on their hopes and expectations. it must be hard to find the motivation and the hunger when you are already filthy rich.
No wonder so many young stars grow up and struggle for meaning and purpose in their world.