Althouse: "There was always an air of smugness about the way Kate Winslet portrayed her life and relationship that rankled slightly."

March 17, 2010

"There was always an air of smugness about the way Kate Winslet portrayed her life and relationship that rankled slightly."

"She paraded her happiness and her marriage was routinely held up as a paradigm of perfection. Now the truth is out, it’s hard for ordinary people not to feel a tinge of schadenfreude."

29 comments:

From Inwood said...: Some deemed that she had it all.; 3/17/10, 9:40 AM
Hoosier Daddy said...: She paraded her happiness and her marriage was routinely held up as a paradigm of perfection. Now the truth is out, it’s hard for ordinary people not to feel a tinge of schadenfreude."

Hey that works for Tiger and the Viking chick too!; 3/17/10, 9:41 AM
rhhardin said...: Ordinary people never heard of her, let alone cared.; 3/17/10, 9:43 AM
Triangle Man said...: If I don't feel schadenfreude does that mean that I am not ordinary people? Maybe it only applies ordinary Brits.; 3/17/10, 9:46 AM
chickelit said...: Like vbspurs once said:
"I picked a bad week to give up Schadenfreude"; 3/17/10, 9:47 AM
chickelit said...: Except for the New York Times--I'll always feel Schadenfruede for them.; 3/17/10, 9:49 AM
knox said...: Winslet, 34, has a history of craving public approval; she bizarrely pretended that she had a wonderful, natural birth with Mia and spoke about it effusively, when in fact the baby was delivered by emergency Caesarean.

Ew. If you're a beautiful and famous actress and you still feel the need to engage in this sort of Women's Magazine posing, then I just don't know what to say.; 3/17/10, 9:57 AM
Fred4Pres said...: I think Kate Winslet is attractive and a very good actress, although I would not necessarily go to a movie just because she is in it. I really did not invest a lot of thought in her marriage. That she is getting a divorce just is another sad statistic on how marriages in Hollywood, as a rule, tend not to last that long (with some notable exceptions).; 3/17/10, 10:00 AM
traditionalguy said...: She just wants someone to take care of her. Why all this jealousy of her for her beauty and talents?; 3/17/10, 10:01 AM
Fred4Pres said...: Is that Obamacare monstrocity going to pass? Just asking, there is no Althouse thread on that subject.

Does Kate Winslet know?

Is it doomed like her marriage to Mendes?; 3/17/10, 10:02 AM
ricpic said...: Winslet beautiful? More like a stevedor in heels.; 3/17/10, 10:05 AM
John said...: I think Winslet is gorgous. And like many beautiful women, she has lousy taste in men. And is probably bark at the moon insane to go with it. You can count on one hand the number of beautiful Hollywood starlets who had happy marriages and lives. Being that beautiful does something wierd to a women's mind. And it rarely leaves them happy or well adjusted.; 3/17/10, 10:08 AM
NotWhoIUsedtoBe said...: It lasted a long time in celebrity years.

All celebrity corrupts. Absolute celebrity corrupts absolutely.; 3/17/10, 10:09 AM
William said...: She had it all. Now she will have it all again. Other than inertia there is no reason for wealthy, attractive people to remain married. If you're rich, you do not winter in Montreal.; 3/17/10, 10:11 AM
John said...: "She had it all. Now she will have it all again. Other than inertia there is no reason for wealthy, attractive people to remain married. If you're rich, you do not winter in Montreal."

Harder for women though. Winslet is getting close to her sell by date in Hollywood. There are very few parts for women between the ages of 35 and 60. The tract for most big name actresses is big success in their 20s, followed by a few "serious roles in their erly 30s, followed by a complete dirth of parts until they can make their comeback in a some supporting role playing the older "I used to love her" actress. Actually marrying a director was a pretty good idea for someone in Winslet's position. A successful director can give you parts in his movies you wouldn't otherwise get. Look how long Woody Allen extended Mia Farrow's career?; 3/17/10, 10:17 AM
ricpic said...: Marriage is the equivalent of wintering in Montreal? Quel dommage!; 3/17/10, 10:19 AM
Henry said...: Just makes me appreciate Paul Newman and Joanne Woodward all the more.

Here's a great article on their 50th anniversary.

"Joanne," Newman once said, "is one of the last of the great broads."; 3/17/10, 10:21 AM
jamboree said...: I think she's beautiful in a classic way that you rarely see in Hollywood. To the degree I paid attention, I suppose I was routing for her because A. She reminded me of my college friend/dormmate and so B. She actually seemed classically sturdy and non-glamorous to me, but still gorgeous.

Anyway, does divorce even hurt when you have all that $? Come on. The real terror in threat of divorce, when I was a kid, was that my mother, siblings, and I would end up in a hovel since she had been "traditional" and had no real earning capacity.

I know people will disagree, but even as a child, the emotional stuff is easy compared to that. A relief even. (They didn't divorce until later - I wish my mom could have had the financial luxury to do it earlier. She was blissfully happy later.); 3/17/10, 12:04 PM
A.W. said...: You know what, i am not bitter enough i guess to be bothered if she had a perfect marriage. and the only time i cheer for divorce is when the man is abusive or something awful like that.

Of course my view of divorce is quirky. I say it like this. There is a sin in every divorce. But that doesn't mean every divorcee has sinned. You have to think of it like the death of a person. It is rare when a person can die no one is at fault. if it is an accident, it is very often negligence. If it is intentional, it is either murder or self defense. And in the case of self defense, it doesn't mean the death is no one's fault. it means it is the fault of the person who died, but he ain't exactly around to be punished for it.

Likewise, if a man beats his wife and she divorces him, the sin in the divorce is all on him. Usually it isn't that lopsided. Like if a woman cheats on her husband leading to divorce, most of the blame goes on the cheater, but maybe some of the blame goes on the person cheated on because they did something to drive them away. Then again in the case of Tiger Woods, if he ends of being divorced, I would guess its all on him, that there is something in him that just wants to cheat. But i am just guessing, looking from the outside.

And if no one is at fault in all in a divorce, then i tend to say you should have stuck it out, and so both people are at fault.

i have almost 6 years under my belt in marraige and no, i guess i am not some kind of sage, but you really have to be committed. you have to dig into yourself and find the ability to give in when needed to. and you have to be adult and not hurt the other just because you are mad and you can. and the word "divorce" should not cross your lips. you found something to love in that person once, and there is no reason why the two people can't figure out how to share the same space together, in the vast majority of cases. and in the majority of cases if you can't work it out, it is due to a moral failing on your part.

Then again, i don't think the divorce rate is half as bad as claimed. for instance, i constantly hear that 50% of all marriages end in divorce. People mistakingly think that means that half of them will get a divorce. But that doesn't follow. For instance, imagine four women get married. then one gets divorced, then marries someone else, gets divorced again, marries a third time, and then divorces a third time. Out of those four women there were 6 marriages and 3 divorces, but obviously the problem is really localized to one person.; 3/17/10, 12:38 PM
Anonymous said...: "...it’s hard for ordinary people not to feel a tinge of schadenfreude."

Only if you mean "ordinary" as "obsessed with celebrities."; 3/17/10, 1:00 PM
KCFleming said...: "...it’s hard for ordinary people not to feel a tinge of schadenfreude."

Really?
Most people have a limitless capacity to endure the unhappiness of others.

It’s hard for ordinary people not to show they enjoy it.

That's half of the subscribers for People magazine.; 3/17/10, 1:13 PM
Freeman Hunt said...: Most people probably didn't know she was married.

I would guess that virtually all people had no idea that she "paraded her happiness and her marriage was routinely held up as a paradigm of perfection," if that's even true.; 3/17/10, 1:28 PM
Freeman Hunt said...: Whether we like it or not, celebrities are our modern role models. In purely Darwinian terms they are the most “successful” members of the species; they have a lion’s share of resources (money),...

This writer thinks that celebrities are the world's richest people? Hardly. Celebrities are the world's most famous living people. This writer seems to both love and loathe them with unwarranted intensity.; 3/17/10, 1:56 PM
Synova said...: I think that paying enough attention to have noticed how Winslet portrayed her life shows that somebodies life is unbalanced, and it's not hers.; 3/17/10, 3:10 PM
TWM said...: Never got what was so special about this woman as an actress (or in general for that matter). Her and Renee Zellweger are both ugly and overrated.; 3/17/10, 3:25 PM
Blue@9 said...: I don't get the schadenfreude. What was she supposed to do, air her dirty laundry in public interviews? Go on Leno and tell everyone "Yeah, my marriage is real tough. Sometimes Sam is a real dickhead and I can be a real bitch"?

People would have heaped scorn on her for being a drama queen and talking crap about her marriage. It seems like she did what most people do when asked about such things:

"How is your husband?"

"Oh, he's great! He's really happy with his new job."

How many people tell the truth to complete strangers, much less to millions of people in the public: "Oh, he's a rotten jerk and my marriage is on the rocks. I think we've fallen out of love."

Maybe she should have said nothing, but that's not what the public wants out of celebrities. She has to go on these PR stints to publicize her movies--it's part of her job as an actress and a star-- and people want to know about her happy and perfect marriage to another celebrity.

She'd be a dumb businesswoman to go on a PR tour to sell her movie and then answer such questions with some negative psychodrama babble about her unhappiness. The same people who revel in her unhappiness now would have heaped scorn on her for being truthful. OMG, do have to hear her whine? She's rich and famous and beautiful--how dare she complain when poor kids are dying in Africa! Africa!; 3/17/10, 6:19 PM
Unknown said...: As Fred notes, I'm a lot more concerned with the fate of BarryCare than who's married to, or boinking, whom.

As to Miss Winslet's/Mrs. Mendes' looks, I am in the camp of those who think she is a rare beauty.

As to the article, I've always been reminded, when reading something like this, that envy is one of the Seven Deadly Sins. The author, like most of the people who do this 'dishy' stuff (think Andy Sullivan), is probably a lot sicker than the people about whom she writes. What happens to Miss Winslet/Mrs. Mendes, I cannot say. I do know that, 20 years from now, schaudenfeude may be more applicable to Judith Woods than the subjects of her work.; 3/17/10, 8:03 PM
Janette Kok said...: “There was always an air of smugness about the way Kate Winslet portrayed her life and relationship that rankled slightly,” says relationship therapist Jacqui Marson. “She paraded her happiness and her marriage was routinely held up as a paradigm of perfection. Now the truth is out, it’s hard for ordinary people not to feel a tinge of schadenfreude.”

I never heard anything about Kate Winslet's marriage. If she was happy at first, I don't find that smug, and it doesn't rankle. If the marriage became unhappy and she's getting a divorce, I don't feel schadenfruede, I feel sorry for her because divorce is a drag.

Whether we like it or not, celebrities are our modern role models. In purely Darwinian terms they are the most “successful” members of the species; they have a lion’s share of resources (money), can have their pick of virtually any mate and effortlessly command our attention, if not our loyalty.

Celebrities are not my role models. I don't think or evaluate in purely Darwinian terms. Celebrities and other rich people are welcome to the money they earn. Celebrities don't command my attention. Certainly not without an effort.

These couples flaunted their connubial bliss, yearned for and basked in our dazzling approval and let’s face it, weren’t above rubbing our noses in their unalloyed joy. They appeared to have everything on their side (everything we could possibly want); power, glamour, a property portfolio, yet it transpired these sour little fairytales were penned by Grimm rather than Disney.

Maybe this author, Judith Wood, was rubbing her own nose. No celebrities or actors have everything I could possibly want, as I don't want power, glamor, or a property portfolio; apparently those are what Judith Wood wants.

She actually doesn't reveal much about either fame or marriage in this article, but she does unknowingly reveal her own jealousy and unhappiness.

I've always liked Kate Winslet. She's beautiful and talented. I'm sorry she's going through a tough time. I hope she comes through okay. And I hope Judith Wood learns to enjoy her own life instead of envying others'.; 3/18/10, 12:17 AM
Tibore said...: "There was always an air of smugness about the way Kate Winslet portrayed her life and relationship that rankled slightly,” says relationship therapist Jacqui Marson. “She paraded her happiness and her marriage was routinely held up as a paradigm of perfection. Now the truth is out, it’s hard for ordinary people not to feel a tinge of schadenfreude."

Huh? Smugness?? I never perceived that. Perhaps that's more projection on the part of Ms. Marson than it is accurate description. Modern day celebrity reporting seems hellbent on following one procedure: Build them up so you can tear 'em down. Winslet was built up over the years, so now they feel the need to tear her down.

That article reveals much more about celebrity gossip reporting than it does about the longevity of entertainer relationships. One feels as though the purpose of gossip reporting is to be slavish in constructing myths behind celebs so they can later indulge themselves and be self-righteously savage when they decide it's time to demolish them. I think the lesson is that early praise is setup for the later fangs and verbal stabbings.; 3/18/10, 9:32 AM