By Maria Padhila
If you think I’m a snarky bitch now, you should have known me a decade or so ago. I was an early snark adopter — and one of the very first Gwyneth Paltrow snarkers. That latter art has become both a cottage industry and a throwaway line, but this was back when her Goop website was just a gleam in her eye, before the (undeserved) Oscar, even.
I had just been paid to sit through a movie called Sliding Doors, which reduced some interesting questions about time, choices, and alternate realities to a couple of pop music montages. One of those horrid rom-cons that turns all the friends of the main character into robot minions who exist only to have chats about the main character’s fascinating life and all the straight men into mere smiles perched on a set of shoulders who exist only to indicate her “success” at roping them in.
The lesson of all such movies is that you don’t have to change your life, your loves, your goals, your society, or your environment — just change your haircut, girl! And put on a little blusher. There you go.
So her patented moue of humblebrag had driven me mad with irritation for more than 90 minutes, and I had to do the other thing I got paid for then, which was write about the movie, and that’s pretty much what I wrote. While some rose to her defense, I was surprised how many people commented that they agreed with me — just couldn’t stand her!
She was in the news again this week, and thanks to the spread of the Internet, the pile-on has increased to petabyte proportions. But this time, I come not to bury Gwyneth, but to praise her.
Here’s the story. She was married to a rock star, Chris Martin of Coldplay, and they had two children. In addition to acting in films, some good, some bad (I thought she made a beautifully apt Sylvia Plath, for instance — the ambition, the glossed-over resentments, that greyhound-like pursuit of prizes), she runs a magazine-like website called Goop, which is full of her personal tips for living a wonderful life if you’re incredibly rich and privileged. It’s like O, Oprah’s media world, drained of all likeability or relatability. The current issue, for instance, features a pair of black leggings for, holy crap, $450, and what looks like a really fine recipe for huevos rancheros. (Rich people are so weird. They need a recipe to make huevos rancheros? )
This week, on her site, she made an announcement under the headline Conscious Uncoupling:
“It is with hearts full of sadness that we have decided to separate. We have been working hard for well over a year, some of it together, some of it separated, to see what might have been possible between us, and we have come to the conclusion that while we love each other very much we will remain separate. We are, however, and always will be a family, and in many ways we are closer than we have ever been. We are parents first and foremost, to two incredibly wonderful children and we ask for their and our space and privacy to be respected at this difficult time. We have always conducted our relationship privately, and we hope that as we consciously uncouple and coparent, we will be able to continue in the same manner.”
This was followed on the site by an article by Drs. Habib Sadeghi and Sherry Sami, explaining the term and the different perspective:
“Divorce is a traumatic and difficult decision for all parties involved — and there’s arguably no salve besides time to take that pain away. However, when the whole concept of marriage and divorce is reexamined, there’s actually something far more powerful — and positive — at play.
“The media likes to throw around the statistic that 50% of all marriages end in divorce. It turns out that’s accurate: Many people are concerned about the divorce rate and see it as an important problem that needs to be fixed. But what if divorce itself isn’t the problem? What if it’s just a symptom of something deeper that needs our attention? The high divorce rate might actually be a calling to learn a new way of being in relationships.”
“…Conscious uncoupling is the ability to understand that every irritation and argument [within a marriage] was a signal to look inside ourselves and identify a negative internal object that needed healing …. From this perspective, there are no bad guys, just two people … it’s about people as individuals, not just the relationship.”
A Washington Post article further explains the origins of “conscious uncoupling”:
“The term was coined by a Los Angeles therapist and author, Katherine Woodward Thomas, who has created a five-step ‘Conscious Uncoupling’ online process — to ‘release the trauma of a breakup, reclaim your power and reinvent your life.’
“Speaking by telephone Wednesday from Costa Rica, where she traveled to write her second book — called, not surprisingly, Conscious Uncoupling — Thomas explained that her goal was ‘to create a map for a couple to consciously complete a relationship — to have an honorable ending.’
“Thomas said that the assumption that people will have only one lifetime partner, and that anything else is a failure, comes from a time long ago when the lifespan was much shorter.
‘I’m a fan of marriage, but I recognize that most people in their lives will have two to three long-time relationships — which means one to two breakups. And so we need to learn how to do this better,’ she said.
“Thomas said she doesn’t know Paltrow, but applauded what she called her and Martin’s courage in the way they announced their breakup. ‘They’re modeling this for the world,’ she said.”
Then the pile-on started. The tsking! The taking to task! The din of requests that we “think of the children”! The parodies! The snark! The affirmations of affronts to decency that a couple of rich celebrities didn’t have the decency to be ashamed of splitting up!
Maybe it was the word “consciously” that put everyone over the top. Because you’re not really supposed to make conscious decisions when it comes to relationships — you’re supposed to be swept away by your soul mate, and if the union does dissolve, it’s supposed to be in anger, jealousy and recrimination.
And shame. I never got so mad at a girlfriend as I did when she offhandedly referred to her “failed marriage.” This is not the SATs. This is life. Relationships grow, change, and live. They live in all kinds of forms and circumstances. For me, there’s nothing to be ashamed of or feel like a “failure” for when a relationship changes. It’s like being ashamed of autumn. It just happens. It always is happening.
I’m one of those poly people who never want to break up with anyone or let anyone go. I’m always clinging to relationships in some form, even if that can only be in memory. I want the people I love to keep growing and changing and moving along, even if that means I’m not part of that anymore. It’s a paradox, but the relationships, for me, continue, and I’m not talking about stalking them on Facebook. I’m talking about the same kind of invisible connection that allows me to find pleasure in the people I love being with other people.
I know that in a way it’s silly to take seriously anything celebrities do, but like it or not, they’re visible and they have positions from which they can send out some valuable messages. Not a week goes by that several celebrities don’t show up in Washington, and guess what? They get to testify to committees, they get access, they host events, and they shine their reflected glory on issues from women’s rights to international health. Good job using your powers for good, Ironman’s boring girlfriend!
So go ahead and make fun of the $100 hand cream or the organic salt. But when it comes to a woman exploring another way to look at her relationship, to preserve some kindness and connection to her children’s father, to make it visible to others far and wide that we don’t have to end our relationships in a pile of broken glass and bills? When there’s someone out there who’s using her power and visibility to consciously uncouple all the negativity from divorce and point out that all relationships evolve, that none are impervious to change? You won’t hear a bit of snark from me.
—————–
Have you tried the Planet Waves premium membership? Sign up for a six-month membership and receive weekly and monthly horoscopes by Eric Francis, plus more. Eric’s horoscopes offer perspectives on your relationships, family dynamics, career and creativity like no other horoscopes online.
@Eric, I love the idea of “conscious coupling.” 🙂
Call it “conscious coupling” — please don’t call it marriage.
I’d never quite gotten why so many disdain Gwyneth, except that pretension is tiresome, and, as you expressed last week, the “holier than thou’s” can work yer nerves. I never cared enough about this to hunt up blog opinions, so I appreciated your take on it.
Inclined to file Gwyneth in the Goodie Two-Shoes folder, I ran across this article today and decided that if this actually reflects her lifestyle, it’s way too cruel and unusual for general public consumption. I now “get it.”
When I read about the conscious uncoupling last week, I thought that was a pretty cool concept, if it meant that BOTH partners were ready for such an uncoupling. That’s not always the case. Still, bless this “uncouple” … for the kids’ sake, especially … and any others who make a commitment to parent first and pout later. Thanks for another interesting piece, kiddo.
“I never got so mad at a girlfriend as I did when she offhandedly referred to her “failed marriage.” This is not the SATs. This is life. Relationships grow, change, and live. They live in all kinds of forms and circumstances.”
AMEN. i’ve never really gotten the “failed relationship” concept, though it seems to make sense to my mother when relationships of mine (especially the first couple “serious” ones in college and in my 20s) have not resulted in marriage.
she stayed married for 40 years, until my father passed away. while i would never say their relationship “failed” in the way she has often thought mine did (that is, mine ceased to be “couplings”), i am now aware of a number of aspects of their marriage that essentially stopped really growing and evolving.
i’ll take the evolution, please and thank you — magical “goalposts” be damned…
“Sliding” was an interesting concept, but it just got so twee! Think it was the fault of the director that turned it into one of those in a long line of “hey girl, get a makeover and start a cupcake business and life will be great! you just have to BELIEVE in yourself (and new shoes)!” i really liked a recent romantic comedy that shows how fear and the restricting sense of what’s “appropriate” can contract life and relationships: “Enough Said.” a film can work in the issues of feminism, female identity and economics/class as part of the characters without it having to be primarily about those. good portrayals of the uncoupled realities in it, too. you might be crying by the end, tho, cause James Gandolfini is so great in it. Such a loss.
I, too, enjoyed that movie, abc123, suggesting that the rewards of transformation are worth the risks. And despite the silver-spoon world into which she was born, I have always loved Gwyneth. As she’s just a couple of months younger than I am, our charts have some similarities, and through her website it’s been obvious that she’s been on a deep spiritual dive this past year, as well. I don’t get the way women in particular love to hate her, but to each their own, I guess. I appreciated her “conscious uncoupling” note, and the accompanying essay by the Drs Sadeghi & Sami. In particular I loved their final paragraph, addressing how one “uncouples” consciously when one’s spouse is unable to do so.
Thank you for bringing this up, Maria — it’s always helpful to see examples of people living in greater love and awareness.
I remember Sliding Doors about two possible realities. One was doormat, as Gwyneth’s character lived in limbo, suspecting but lacking proof that her relationship was not what she thought, and was too afraid to leave either her man or her boring job. The other was that she arrived a second or two earlier (thanks to the sliding doors on the subway) only to catch her man in the act of betraying her — which for her character was horrible but freeing at the same time. In her anger and disappointment, she became clear on her worth and priorities, quit her job, and started her own business. In scenario one, her choices are based on fear. In scenario two, her choices are based on embracing life’s risks in order to truly live.
But, I will admit, I was jealous of her hair in the scenes that showed her achieving her goals and enjoying her life.