Benedict Cumberbatch’s wife and baby-mama Sophie Hunter gave an interview to the Guardian and while the interview itself isn’t so bad, the headline is worthy of a massive eye-roll: “Sophie Hunter: the opera director who has to dodge paparazzi.” Ah, yes. The Brits are so cultured that their opera directors are major celebrities, don’t you know? Of course it has nothing to do with the fact that she got knocked up by and then married to the thirstiest Oscar campaigner of the past two years. Anyway, The Guardian piece is about her work as an “opera director” and how she’s going to be doing a million things this summer, just after she gave birth to the Cumberbaby. Some highlights:
Sophie’s focus: “At the moment my focus is on opera and classical music,” said Hunter this weekend. The director and former performer is about to stage a unique immersive production of Benjamin Britten’s baroque-style cantata Phaedra, based on a translation of Racine’s tragedy and set near a deserted castle in Northern Ireland as part of Happy Days, the Samuel Beckett festival in Enniskillen.
She worked throughout her pregnancy and in the first weeks after the baby: “It has been a combination of music rehearsals in London and hard graft building in Enniskillen prior to the performance. It’s a very technical piece and it’s on a large scale, so the entire creative team are setting up camp in an equestrian arena to build it.”
Future plans: Later this year she is to mount an equally adventurous production of another Britten work, The Turn of the Screw, working again with Staples at Snape Maltings for Aldeburgh Music. “This time we are working with Aurora Orchestra,” she said, “but it’s another case of bringing a team of collaborators together from film, fine art, theatre and opera. We are writing the experience out there so we are heading out for a research residency at Snape. Until then it’s model boxes, meetings, poring over the music and the text and getting increasingly excited at the prospect of another Britten adventure.”
Her interest in avant-garde art: “Going on to train with Lecoq in Paris meant I discovered European theatre at a formative moment growing up. Seeing the work of directors like Romeo Castellucci, Ivo van Hove, Thomas Ostermeier, and Simon McBurney and Théâtre de Complicité, was, and continues to be, hugely important to me. To my mind these are artists who are forging new languages of performance and storytelling, and their constant reinvention is very inspiring.”
She loves the avant-garde art scene in NYC: Her own recent work in New York “in the context of a truly experimental and independent ‘downtown’ theatre scene” confirmed her path, she said. “New York was incredibly fulfilling and exciting.”
She doesn’t see a difference between her work and Benedict’s work: “My job now is to make work, to tell stories…There is still a critical need for a new audience and for new ways of thinking about the presentation and accessibility of opera and the concerts. The work I am making with [music director] Andrew Staples aims to shake up the status quo a bit. Taking the work out of the opera house and the concert hall is just the beginning.”
I’ll admit it, I kind of glaze over when she’s talking about her art. It reminds me of her Vogue interview, where she went on and on about bringing some opera-theatre-directing-drama to her wedding or whatever. She always comes across as pretty pretentious, but whatever. Her relationship with Benedict has helped her career enormously and I guess Sophie is so amazing that she can do it all – be a wife, mother, successful avant-garde opera director AND be smug and pretentious in print interviews. She’s living the dream.
Photos courtesy of WENN, Getty.
They remind me of the couple in the film Exhibition, which I don’t encourage anyone to watch as it is quite tedious, but they remind me very much of that couple
lmao
I’ve had that movie in my Netflix queue for a while now, haven’t gotten around to watching it. It only has 1 star but it does have Tom Hiddleston so there’s that.
I really really like it!
He’s in it for two very brief scenes. It’s about an artistic couple plotting art in their artsy house, all very high art and pretentious
A very, very *wealthy* artistic couple of course. And living in a house that looks like a carefully maintained work of art in itself.
The artsy folks I know are all living in shabby, messy, insanely cluttered art-filled studios in Eastie. Rooms littered with works in process and apple crates filled with collage materials. My own art life is all in a small studio and I do battle to keep my cats out of my materials (if I have to clean up another array of gold and silver kitty footprints, I’m not sure what I am going to do.)
Your home sounds just like those of all my artist friends, Miss J. I love going over there and being immersed in their creativity.
Awww thanks, NB! Of course i would rather swoon about in a nice Arts and Crafts period bungalow by the see with vast rooms and lots of wall space and shelf space for art and books, but I think I have finally figured out that real life happens in spit of all that.
That’s the only Hogg film I didn’t care for. The other two are much better, though Archipelago is a slow burn so not everyone will enjoy it.
@ MissJupitero, photograph the gold and silver kitty footprints, frame them, sell them. I’ve encountered artists on both ends of that spectrum and in between. Some take themselves way too seriously, like the couple in the film and the Cumberbatchs, while others make the best of and have fun with what life offers. Just like every other profession.
One of my most beloved original paintings is of a table full of Dunkin’ Donuts along with a DD coffee by a good friend in Chelsea. He gave it to me when he was decluttering one day after I had raved about it — too poor to buy it from him. It still hangs in my kitchen, reminding me of him, his lovely wife who also paints and my wonderful 8 years in Boston. It’s not a Renoir, but it captured a moment in time in their life and I love it.
I say make some art out of those curious cat adventures, Miss J.
I don’t understand why the baby isn’t her main focus. She didn’t mention the baby once. A new mother and not saying anything about him/her is kinda strange to me.
Sophie has the expression of someone who knows she’s hit the lottery.
The first paragrapgh almost cured my insomnia.
To use the expression LOL. Is an understatement @Qwerty!!!!!
My reaction is personified equally by the faces of the boy behind Sophorific, er, Sophie’s shoulder, and the man next to Ben. Big piles of MEH.
I have a theatre degree, studied experimental theatere, and spent a healthy chunk of my off-season summers up to my elbows in pretentiously weird crap all over North America and Europe. But good lord, woman…give it a break!
I say we all conduct a large-scale Artaud-inspired theatre of the absurd performance piece. I’ll rattle ball-bearings in a Boston cocktail shaker and fire off bottle rockets…anyone joining in to mask the pretension?
Maybe we could Brecht it up. Bring in some smokers. This whole relationship has seemed like an obvious performance from the start… 😉
I don’t mind her. Somehow I find him more pretentious, at least she’s frank about being pretentious.
yes!
Very fair point.
Why is she pretentious? Does working in high culture automatically make a person pretentious? It is depressing that any person who isn’t making an effort to appear dumb & uncultured is immediately trashed on these blogs. Not everybody is into the dumbed down morass of contemporary culture like hip hop & bubblegum pop. There are many people, rich or poor, for whom opera/classical is the most exciting & beautiful music one can listen to.
Cause if you listen to great Opera directors they don’t sound pretentious or like they invented Operas.
I was with you up until this…. “Not everybody is into the dumbed down morass of contemporary culture like hip hop”. I dont know what hip hop you are listening to but maybe you should stop confining your choices to the crap that white college guys blast out of their cars in their desperation to be cool. You are ignorant. That is all.
Also, in case you havent noticed, it doesnt matter whether a female celebrity is laid back (Jennifer Lawrence), pixy-like (Zooey Deschanel), outspoken (Zoe Saldana) hipster (Kirsten Stewart), or hippy (Shaileen Woodley), she WILL be torn down. To me thats the bigger problem here. I dont know why its so hard to just let people who are female, be.
Speaking in general terms, I don’t think anything is automatically pretentious (a job, an favorite movie or type of music, a hobby, etc). The pretentiousness arises from the way a person speaks about their interest or career: If they act as though it makes them inherently superior to someone who likes what they consider a “lesser” art form that’s a problem. Or if they act as if it’s their job to educate the unwashed masses. I get the distinct whiff of that off both people in this coupling (the former for her based on this interview, and the latter for him).
I love and occasionally work in opera & theatre, and she is basically talking shop.
(I also indulge in silly gossip and speculation on websites, and feel no hypocritical need to trash any denizens there, either.)
Is she now getting interviewed because of whom she shtupped? Probably.
What’s not very elucidating or fun – for me, at any rate – is a knee-jerk reaction from any point in the spectrum of culture and art, directed at another; there is so much room for everyone in which to participate and play, and no point in that spectrum is best defined merely by its misplaced pride and insistence upon not appreciating the other.
It’s tricky; I admittedly don’t have much use for the Kardashians & their ilk, for instance, whilst someone else may think of opera-loving enthusiasts as useless toffs. And I didn’t tune into NPR the other day to hear Kim interviewed… much the same way I wouldn’t go to the Met expecting the purest poetry slam to be found.
But there are quite useful areas between not having much truck with each other and a sort of Venn diagram in which these worlds may collide and mix and even inform the other. They all do still exist simultaneously, and do not necessarily derive their importance or relevance or definition by some false bifurcation of comparing and contrasting and deriding what they are not.
@belle I really like what you’ve said here. I remember an interview where Dave Grohl said he didn’t like the concept of “guilty pleasures” (in music, but I think it applies to all areas of entertainment/culture/art), because you should just like what you like and be proud to say so. Music, movies, and art are meant to entertain and/or create an emotional response – who knows what will speak to each individual person at a particular time, but if something makes a person happy, there’s value in it for them which shouldn’t be judged by another person.
I don’t think she’s pretentious here, but I wouldn’t use hip hop as a form of low culture. Like opera, hip hop is a complex and varied genre.
Belle du jour, exactly! Personally, I’m a self-professed philistine with traditional tastes. But my horizon of appreciation could not possibly encompass all the cultural product out there, and my tastes should not be THE tastes. Besides, staid as I am, even I recognize the need for experimentation in the arts. So avantgarde away, folks.
I don’t think she’s pretentious because she likes opera. I think she’s pretentious because the way she talks, maybe not in this interview, but in others, like the way she described her wedding for an example.
Hip-hop is a “dumbed-down morass” of culture? Wow. Racist a little much?
@Tristan, +1
I’m a huge fan of opera and I’m far from being a rich (sadly : P ) and smug person. Also there are a lot of myths around opera and the people who attend it. I once read an article of how popular, as in liked by everyone, opera was until the early XX century, when it began to be percieved as truly elitist.
About Sophie, although she has done some pretentious crazy talk (like about her wedding gown), but this time she is just talking about her job. Her slang is common among stage directors, especially the contemporary-type, so no outrage from me.
Clapping for Belle du jour
I get tired of the automatic assumption that intellectualism or an interest in “high culture” automatically makes one “pretentious,” and that ignorance is somehow more sincere and real.
Yeah yeah, I know, you are all going to say this only applies to SH who is “sooooo faaaaake”(why? because she is not as famous as this person or that person? because you don;t persoanlly like her work?), but actually the word seems to come out anytime anyone talks about or shows an unabashed interest in high culture. There is a lot of pressure to dumb down, play stupid, feign ignorance, apologize for your interests, qualify your opinions– and the pressure is especially heavy on women, and I am having none of it. Girls aren’t supposed to do this, blah, blah, blah.
I agree with Saks. SH is talking about her work in the same way anyone in her field would do, which is exactly what she should do. I’m not comparing her to Peter Sellars as a director, but I think her pursuits are worthy and she should thrown her heart into it and not make any apologies.
BTW, I love both opera and hip-hop.
I don’t think enjoying or talking about opera makes her pretentious. I think it’s the way she talks about it that comes off that way. I have a friend who’s a professional opera singer and she and several other friends sang in the Nashville opera chorus, allowing me free tix to see their shows. While it’s not a genre I understand well — mostly boils down to a whole lot of bad decision-making and someone dies in the end — I really appreciated the musicianship of the vocalists. When my friends explained to me how difficult it is to sing opera well — like “Sempre libera” from La Traviata — to hit every note on pitch in the trills and sliding down the scale, I came to appreciate it as an art form.
It’s too bad that it’s so expensive, since it used to be available to and appreciated by the masses.
I side eye the whole ‘bring opera out of the opera house’ angle (not just SH, the whole current – long time opera buff here and… IMHO, it just doesn’t work, it’s a simplistic way of addressing the supposed elitism of the art form) – but she sounds only committed to her work here, not amateurish or bloviating.
@Belle – I so agree! I don’t find her pretentious at all. And I love how she is so passionate about bringing attention to various forms of theater and Opera not just the classical and traditional presentations. Theater, Opera and Art like music change and new forms pop up from time to time. BTW – I also love hip hop and don’t think its a lower form of music at all. Just different.
I agree with everyone saying they don’t get why she is being called pretentious for talking about what she likes and what she does. I guess all celebrities get torn down, but people have derided her from the start. I’m not an opera fan, but I’m always interested in reading about people looking for new ways to be creative.
Well, if you actually read an interview with a *real* theater like Diane Paulus, you don’t pick up any hint of pretentiousness. She specifically targets people who wouldn’t normally go to the theater by making shows – gasp!! – entertainingly fun. She also sounds like an awesome person that anyone would love to go out for a drink with.
So, I am sorry. I stick to thinking of Sophie – along with her husband – as being insufferable snobs.
Correct me if I’m wrong – I don’t have children – but is it not strange that she says her main focus is opera and theater and not her kid? She has a newborn, screw the opera, I would be all over that chub-a-wubby.
That was my first thought too. You just had a baby 6 weeks ago and all you’re thinking about is work??
In all fairness, she might be deliberately keeping the Cumberbaby out of the conversation for privacy reasons, but for PR purposes, perhaps she should have made it sound more like she was juggling new motherhood with work instead of sounding like she handed the kid off like a relay baton in order to work.
I call shenanigans (read, concern trolling) on your interest in the celestial motherskills of the Comet. Or if it’s genuine, careful too much judgement gives you wrinkles.
I wouldn’t answer or entertain any questions about my kid in an interview about my work because men NEVER get asked that, so no, she’s good.
Oh jeez. She’s the kids mother, is political correctness more important than a child? We’re becoming too self-important for words.
Although I roll my eye at artsy-fartsy types like this (just because I personally simply don’t GET this stuff) I take off my hat to her.
I think if she’s working her ass off and be successful, juggling being a mother and a professional in her field, then good for her, she can be as smug as she wants.
I don’t think we’d criticise her as much if she was with another guy.
I agree! I’m 100000% sure that ALL opera directors talk like this, and if she goes back to work after having a baby good for her. Wouldn’t we all be a lot more judge-y if she hooked up with someone famous and quit working/ just lived off them? (Although that would be their choice too)
If she goes back to work after having a baby? If she can juggle a career and a baby? We are not talking about an everyday person here. She has plenty of time to pick and chose her projects. This women has very few credentials to her name in the last few years. She also clearly has money/assistance. This woman is not super woman. Stop slapping the real working hands on mothers in the face.
Amen- she is talking her trade, is may be a different language for us but good on her.
I’d be taking my hat off to her too, if she had worked regularly and steadily on her craft for a long time, but this is the first job she’s had for years. And this is the first time the press has given her the time of day, thanks to her marriage.
You should check her resume before calling her hard working cause she didn’t do much in her Opera directing career.
I’d die to have her resume (what i can see on wikipedia) – OK there was a lull between 2011 and 2014, but she got lots of experience, it seems.
Be carefull with her Wikipedia resume cause there’s few false things.
IMdB can be more interesting, even if she never had any lead role, except her Seat tv ad.
You can’t really blame her, the job is useless.
Not really Fran. A number of the projects she’s attached to (like the Opera for Change tour) have never actually happened. She’s never directed an opera.
This is a great example of women destroying women for the sake of it – and just because she’s married to a guy people like and don’t even know.
Jeeeez
As a philistine I probably would still eye roll..the art world in the UK is very pretentious ..I won’t speak for other places….but the crude expression would be she is so far up her own..a**se….
There is something about this whole Art School type,especially the monied who never really have to earn a crust ..and just so far removed from regular folks…
Now more than ever she has his money and name so she will be even more full of it….!!
As a British art graduate, I have to say you’re completely right. My university course was 95% based around people talking complete bollocks.
No disrespect to you…I am sure you have major talent!!!
It is just the verbiage that comes out !!
I did an Art based course at college too and I never related to this stuff!!
It’s pretentious in the US too. I’d imagine it is everywhere. Art school types are theeee wooorst
I don’t have any problem with her, but I have to admit that if I met her at a party I’d probably be doing a lot of nodding and uh-huhing and looking to make my escape as quickly as possible.
Not being British or in the Arts (capital A intended) I am mostly eye rolling at the expressions “the work I am making” and “the artists forging new languages of performances”… maybe the former is an accepted British idiom that just sounds truly affected, and the latter is her usual over the top, look at me being part of a truly avant-garde group… but I eye roll. And I have no clue what recent NY performance she put on, because I don’t follow her schedule, but if she really thinks any of this new found fame for a person with a truly slim resume and education has to do with her talents, she is truly deluded.
And yes, I do actually love opera and theatre (not so much avant garde) but do not hang out in these circles, so maybe they all are snobbish and over bearing. The problem I am having is with people whose laurels are less earned and more the result of a fortuitous marriage.
I live in city where there’s a university that’s big and for the middle class, but their art and music programs are top notch (not just saying that, they’ve been recognized internationally for those programs) and yeah, they talk like this too. I get the hipster college student version on a daily basis and they talk like this too. Not all, but most.
She’s getting gigs because at this point, her name would attract viewers (her husband’s fans, lots of whom will show up hoping he’s there to support here) and she most certainly has a nanny for the baby and all the resources to make it work, so I think calling it “juggling” is a bit of an overstatement.
I’m absolutely not the one to judge a mother going back to work so soon after having a baby, however, knowing how many mothers out there don’t have the luxury to spend time with their babies, I do feel like her timing is quite unfortunate, and this summer is perhaps the first time in her life when her energy would be better spent away from her work. So, I wonder if she pursues all these projects because she, too, realizes that this won’t last (not the marriage, the level of interest and exposure), and then she will have the time, but not the opportunities to work?
She is striking while the iron is hot.
No question – she is pretentious. What I find annoying is all the PR hype that suggests it is her spectacular talent that is getting her work and name recognition.
The truth is we all know – Sophie included – that it’s because of whom she married. New York was done for her or she would have stayed and continued working there. No one would have known or cared about her. There would not have been Vogue, Bazaar or newspaper write ups. Let’s get real. She is celebrated as fabulous because she is his wife, and he is one of the “it guys” of the moment.
She reminds me of Trudie Styler in that regard.
She hasn’t worked enough to support herself in ages, and what she did when she did have work wouldn’t have paid the bills either. So if she is finding some gigs heading her way because she birthed the Cumberbaby, so be it. She knows the gravy train will end if her marriage does.
Good luck to her. And hats off for capitalizing on her situation.
“She’s getting gigs because at this point, her name would attract viewers”
The budget of an Opera house does not rely so much on the number of tickets sold, it’s mostly private donations and public funding… if I remember correctly, having 1/3 of your operating budgets from ticket’s revenue is considered quite high.
And in such a snob-filled environment, being married to a TV actor could be an hindrance rather than an advantage.
I apologize to all the “cumberbitches” out there, but I find him so awkward and unattractive. I really don’t see the appeal!
Please don’t yell at me 😖
I’m with you, I don’t get the attraction (although I like him as an actor and thought he was robbed of the Oscar).
Also, I don’t think he was the thirstiest (and WHEN is that phrase going to be extinct? So bloody annoying). Not when you consider That Renner married his skeevy hook-up and then divorced her when it became clear he wasn’t going to get a nom. That’s thirsty (ugh).
I’m a huuuuge Benedict supporter, like, massive (aside from this freak show of a marriage/baby), and I have to disagree, he was not robbed of an Oscar. Eddie’s performance was hands down phenomenal. Like, cannot be beat, amazing. Cumby was great too – really amazing movie and really great acting but he did not deserve that Oscar over Eddie.
He wasn’t robbed. He didn’t deserve it at all in comparison to Eddie’s and Michael’s performances. I do like him as an actor, though (even with this eye-rolling marriage)
I think Benedict is one of the ugliest people I’ve ever seen. I won’t apologize for feeling that way.
Can’t see why you’d have to apologize for feeling that way.
It’s saying it that’s what anyone over the age of 6 shakes their head at.
Wow. At times, I wasn’t even sure what she was saying. Come on, comet.
I always had the same problem in church. I understand every word but put together, they make no sense and halfway through the second sentence I start to blank out.
I don’t care much about her either way but I must say it’s refreshing to see a new mother allowed to talk about her work and her art, rather than the completely dull and expected marriage and baby stuff: it’s beautiful! It’s magical! It’s changed me in every way!…really? Wow! You’re the first woman ever to feel or say that! 😉
So from that perspective, nicely done Guardian.
Well said! I am also a new mom with a music background and I would love to just talk about choral music for a few hours or arrange a concert instead of feeding a baby that thrashes around like a hungry shark.
The only reason she’s being allowed to talk about her work is due to her marriage. Without that, there would be no press interest in her latest job.
Would anyone care about her if she were not married to him? No.
Seriously. At least she’s not yammering about how pregnancy is the ultimate beauty of womanhood or whatever that nitwit Jaime King was on about yesterday.
Yeah, I actually like that she didn’t say anything about Benedict. People who go on about their SO make me want to hurl.
Of course she is not going to talk about Benedict, she wants the spotlight on her.
Don’t get why she’s featured here – clue me in, please. What are her accomplishments or what has she done that’s controversial? She’s not what you’d call a great beauty, so what’s left?
Her husband.
This^^^
LOL!
“Of course it has nothing to do with the fact that she got knocked up by and then married to the thirstiest Oscar campaigner of the past two years.”
Spot on, Kaiser. Her fame comes from attaching herself to someone famous. I don’t get avante garde art, so I’m not a good judge of whether she’s any good as a director. I have little doubt that marrying Ben has opened doors for her.
Amen Jaya. I’ve never seen a celebrity’s are get so much coverage as this woman has. I’m scared to say it drives me bonkers for fear of backlash but it’s the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Enough with her already.
Thanks Windowchair5! Judging by the number of comments she has received since I posted, it seems like you and I are in the minority. Can’t believe that so many people follow her/are interested in her. Let’s get back to basics, Celebitchy — let’s see interesting, worthy, controversial figures!!!
Trudie Styler, circa 1980s.
Wow, so much artsy fartsy gibberish and not one proud or loving word on “her” newborn son. Weird.
This is a really unfair statement to new moms. We are able to love more than one thing at a time.
Yes, when my baby was born I was so grateful when people wanted to talk about something else for a while.
You lot are not wrong, but it was the first thing that sprang to my mind when I read the article, which I find a bit vacuous. Either make her a bit ore human and approachable by mentioning her son at least once (I don’t want an article about changing diapers either) or make her sound like a genuine artist by giving us more on her concepts rather than a few name drops and overblown language.
I still don’t know what she plans with Phaedra except some lights and fillm (not that that piece needs much fiddling with anyway).
I don’t care about babies so I am happy to read about a woman and her work.
It’s an interview about her job, why would she talk about her child?
Its the Guardian (a serious newpaper), not US weekly, they don’t focus on babies and private lives.
Guess what – not every woman wants to interject her kids into everything.
The thing is, most women I have met who has kids does just that, talks endlessly about their kids, even my more career oriented friends. Which is why I have had difficulties carrying on friendships once my friends have had kids, the snide comments towards my lifestyle kid-free gets very old(it comes off as them jealous of the life they once had and no longer do) and the constant conversations about their kid like they are some special snowflake gets old as well.
Men don’t discuss their kids in every work-related interview so why should women? And after that thread yesterday about that insensitive moron pretty much declaring me and others not women and not beautiful because we can’t have kids, I think there should be a moratorium on asking actresses and models about their kids.
” Seeing the work of directors like Romeo Castellucci, Ivo van Hove, Thomas Ostermeier, and Simon McBurney and Théâtre de Complicité, was, and continues to be, hugely important to me, almost as important as seeing each of my cute little pumpkin’s soiled nappy. He’s so creative from a very young age and not one of his poos was ever the same! To my mind these are artists who are forging new languages of performance and storytelling, and their constant reinvention is very inspiring.”
Sounds better?
Lol!
LOL! But then she’d just get attacked for daring to mention her child in what was supposed to be a work-related interview. Girl is never gonna be forgiven for daring to marry Cumberbatch and have his Cumberbaby.
Standing ovation for QWERTY!!!
I agree with y’all about not bringing up the kid – like Lilacflowers said, men aren’t made to answer questions about their kids, so why should women?
However, this still does not make me a fan of hers as she is even more insufferable than her husband!
Thank you Boston Green Eyes! +1000. She would not be getting any exposure if she wasn’t married to BC. And I don’t like her as well and it’s not because I’m jealous or because of who she married. She would not have received her own article before as no one knew who she was. Now she is getting all this exposure because of her spouse. I do things on my own merit and admire those who do the same, not ride others coattails.
While I find this woman overwhelmingly pretentious and attention-seeking, and I agree that a woman shouldn’t just have to talk about babies and marriage but it’s the way she speaks that is ridiculous. I mean “At the moment, my focus is on opera and classical music”?? At the moment you have a newborn, that should be your focus. She could have said that another way and it wouldn’t have sounded so callous- but I truly believe this baby is an afterthought. Meal ticket punched, now here, nanny, you take it. It’s not like she’s a doctor or a teach or in some important job that she went back to after giving birth- This is a 15 minute opera, in which people wander through a dark castle and then listen to a woman sing… so glad she’s focused on this world-changing piece of art rather than the human she produced.
“At the moment, my focus is on opera and classical music”… She is talking about her work and explaining where her work focus is right now. Why would she talk about her kid in this interview which is so obviously only about work?
This is the opening paragraph of the article:
“If you want something done, so they say, ask a busy mother. This advice may well hold true, but if the mother in question is Sophie Hunter, wife of Benedict Cumberbatch, then it is best not to refer to her new maternal status.”
It’s not as if her role as mother and wife is not a topic and in fact the only reason this article has been written full stop.
Phoebe, I had a similar reaction to yours.
I don’t mind that she didn’t bring up her kid in the interview, but my first reaction to reading how busy she’s been with work after giving birth certainly didn’t paint her as very maternal. Anyone who’s taken care of a newborn (mine was easy-peasy) knows that they need a lot of attention. This interview makes it sound like she handed her newborn to a granny or nanny so she could get right back to work. I’m not a child-centric mother but that doesn’t sit well with me at all. Even women I’ve known with successful careers took a few months off to focus on motherhood, bond with their baby and enjoy that precious time before they felt the desire to get back to work.
Makes me feel sorry for the kid, that he has not one, but two very ambitious parents that are trying to make their name in the world. I have no issues with women who want to pursue their passion (which opera is obviously one of hers), but when we put ourselves in a position to get pregnant, adjustments need to be made to give a child what they need. I think those sacrifices we make are worth raising up a child as a happy, responsible, productive member of society.
After working full-time with two kids and having a very supportive husband, my conclusion is that we can’t have it all. I never feel as though I’m giving my kids or my employer everything they want. I just do the best I can, believing that in the end, my kids will know they were loved and valued.
I’m somehow worried that ‘a woman being not very maternal’ will become the new ‘burn the witch’. My own mother was not very maternal in the infant-toddler stage of her children. When I was nine months old, she got a fellowship abroad, so she promptly handed me to my father, and off she went for a year. I’ve always admired her gumption in pursuing something that was fulfilling for her, not to mention that she ended up making considerably more money because of it. She’s my mentor and the person I trust the most in this world. So no need to feel sorry for all the kids of driven mothers.
AGREED Nutballs- there’s a difference between a whole article about poopy diapers and mentioning, at least once, that her life has changed, wonderful addition, exciting time, even something like- “My focus is on my beautiful new family but it’s also wonderful to have the opportunity to work on this project that I’m also passionate about” Done, family mentioned, moved on- but NOPE.
Plus for the previous 4 or 5 years she has done nothing. NO opera. NO classical music. Then the minute she has a baby she jumps into work? It’s not like she had to take time away from something she was working on- she’s NEVER done it!
I understand that she’s only getting the chance to do this because of who she schtupped (as one commenter put it and made me laugh), and if the kid was even 6 months old I would give her a bit more slack but that kid just came out and she’s running around to garden parties and tennis matches and directing opera in Ireland.
They might as well ship that kid off to live with his sister and then the re-creation of the plot of Parade’s End will be complete.
S, you and I have a different value system. I don’t care about making a lot of money nor do I think it’s always ok to do what fulfills me personally at the expense of what my child needs. I do pursue things that I enjoy, but in much smaller doses than when I was childless. Investing in my kid at the expense of what I might enjoy doing, is not a bad investement, in my opinion.
That’s great that you have a good relationship with your mom, despite her leaving you for a year when you were a toddler. Perhaps if later she did spend time with you and made you feel loved and valued along with her career, things turned out ok for you. Also, having your dad at home is different than what the Cumberbaby has, since his dad is a known workaholic.
It’s one thing to pursue a passion temporarily or for a season, it’s another to make it a lifelong habit of putting our dream-pursuits ahead of our kids. I guess it remains to be seen if this is evidence of how she will operate as a mom or if she’s simply striking while the iron’s hot.
Ugh trying not to dwell on the passive aggressive notes here. My mother leaving, oh the fatal danger to my psyche, but how fine that I turned OK. She loved and valued me even when she was away. You know what? Some women can pull it off. No, not in terms of time, but in terms of mental largesse and independence. I loath the idea of mommy martyrdom (not that you’re talking about it, I’m just expanding). Also: dad was working too.
S, I’m not sure what you mean by passive-aggressiveness. You wouldn’t have remembered your mom being gone as a toddler, so I wouldn’t assume damage to your psyche from that year away. Since you seem to have a good relationship with your mom today I’d assume that when she returned from her fellowship, she did invest time in you. Also, I was making a point that having your dad around (even if he worked) would have been a good thing for you. I don’t think kids need moms more than dads. Both are important, so that’s another blessing you had that I’m not sure Cumberbaby will have, based on Ben’s working habits.
Yes, I know women who have thriving careers and are attentive, involved moms as well. They have a lot of physical and emotional energy to be “fully present” with their children when they’re not a work. I’m not advocating martyrdom — but I am speaking against our current culture’s value of self-fulfillment above all else. If everyone simply does only what makes them feel good, then a lot of needs get unmet. There needs to be an appropriate balance. My huz and I have hobbies that we allow each other to pursue each week, but limit them due to our children’s need for our attention. We don’t do them as much as we want, but we do it enough, in order to take care of ourselves as well as our kids.
I don’t know what kind of a mom Sophie is — I’m just commenting that the article gives the impression that she’s not very involved in caring for her child, which is unusual for a new mom. I hope she’s more invested in the daily care of her child than the impression I get just from this interview, that’s all.
I’m sorry- but I see this kind of stuff in comments all the time:
“it happened to me so therefore everyone else it happens to will have the same outcome” and it makes me stabby.
It’s the same kind of disordered thinking as this exchange:
A: ” I hate the color green”
B: “Green is my favorite color so you have clearly offended me to my very core even though you don’t know me and your comment was not directed at me- you are my enemy now”
Or this:
A: “I don’t get art”
B: ” Well, my great aunt is an artist so I understand all art and have a higher appreciation and expertise in this area than you do”
Can we all agree that we have no idea how this kid will turn out, but having your mother around in the first few months is important? But I’m sure the nanny is a very nice lady and will do a good job 😉
XYZ didn’t paint her as very maternal. What does that even mean? And based on sparse information from a blog?
Sorry, but the pretense of objectivity is … no bueno. All I see is women piling on other women. Just raise your kids the way you see fit, and stop demeaning others because of different choices. If you see neglect, call it as it is, if not, get those maternal brownie points. Sheesh!
Why is “her” in quotation marks? Do you not think she’s the mother?
Not at all weird. Like many people in the public eye she and her husband have obviously decided to protect the privacy of their baby. Nobody even knew David Tennant had become a father again until like ten months later, and James McAvoy and Anne-Marie Duff have never talked about their kids. There are a few celebs whose kids’ names are not public knowledge. Good for them.
It’s just them keeping the baby so private contradicts the “the marriage and baby was all for PR” conspiracy theory, so the stans are scrambling to find an excuse. In this case “someone giving a single interview about their work without mentioning their kid means they hate their kid!1!”
Has she ever mentioned her kid? To not mention a newborn who is probably the sole reason for her quicky marriage is more than a little strange. She is blinded by her sense of self importance and newfound fame. Jerk.
I think if you know all the references and name drops in the collaborations and directions, it would make sense. Opera seems to be a very ambitious endeavor, since you truly need a powerful voice to pull off the drama. I’m not familiar with the influences she is speaking of, but what I’m getting is that it will be a really cool stage/set design. I don’t know enough of her work to gauge if she has the gravitas to be a compelling and accomplished opera singer.
This interview, clearly, is more geared toward the European audience who will be familiar with these places she mentions, plus the previous work.
She’s not a opera singer, she pretends to be a Opera director.
Ah, I was lost. Has anyone seen her work? Any good?
You can check by yourself on Youtube.
I’ve seen the fishhead video. It was a classical masterpiece.
Totally unforgetable.
But are any of these pieces she is working on really opera? I have understood they are short musical pieces like 15 to 30 minutes.
If I was going to an opera or a classical music concert I would expect it to last a couple of hours at least.
From what I’ve read here, she is currently staging an opera and a cantata.
“The turn of the screw” by Benjamin Britten is an opera, which lasts about 2 hours (a short opera as most last about 3 hours). It all happens in a house and most of Britten operas are stage in a very avant-garde style, which I personally don’t like.
“Phaedra” is a short cantata also by Britten. The thing with cantatas is that they aren’t as demanding as operas because they were written for concert/recital and not theatrical staging, so how how elaborated its scenario is, doesn’t really matters (for example check out the stagings of “Carmina Burana”).
Does SH even have any training in music? From what I know, her college degree was not in any way related to theater, and then she did train in theater, but not in music.
I’m guessing she got SOME music training, since she did that album, but her singing was more whispering than singing. I have 7 years of music training behind me, yet I wouldn’t dream to presume that I’m in any position to DIRECT an opera without much more fundamental music training.
She’s not a singer, she’s an opera director, as is mentioned in like every sentence of the article…..
Thanks for the snark Sarah…I read the article and not the intro and afternotes.
“The director and former performer” was how she was mentioned in the interview excerpt.
I saw the puppet show about the Shackleton Antartica adventure and it was fabulous.
+1
I missed that, but wanted to see it. The reviews were wonderful!
I’d love to know more about this downtown theatre scene in NYC and what she saw– I’m spending a lot more time in NYC now, and I am looking for things to check out!
Do report back, Miss Jupitero. Meanwhile, I’m getting my schedules all jumbled between the Out of the Box this week and Boston Summer Arts Weekend next weekend and the Concerts in the Courtyard and the ICA Wavelengths and the giant inflatable bunnies on the lawn at D.
Folks on here have seen some of her directorial and production items and said good things.
Her acting however is awful and her singing is pretty whispering as a result of a good producer.
I’ve said from the start, her style isn’t my thing but that doesn’t mean it’s bad. Not all work has to be commercially successful and she works in a very niche genre so her arty-farty use of language isn’t surprising to me. I do think her CV has been padded out somewhat since getting together with him. I believe that could be more ego on his side to make them seem like some sort of power couple in the UK theatre world.
Good analysis. I just don’t get the level of anger directed at her. shrugs. She’s with a renowned actor, and either by intent or mere proximity, she’s going to get more attention and press. I don’t understand the animus directed at Amal, either, so there’s that.
Amal’s fans would tell you that Amal has a (real) impressive career as a lawyer.
As a lawyer, I say Amal has a career as a lawyer.
I don’t know much about this woman but let’s face it, she only got these pieces in Vogue and Guardian because of her association with Bendy, not her own merit.
When I read that she is theatre director, opera director, playwright, singer, actress, keen equestrian, polished pianist or whatever – it reeks of “Jack of all trades, master of none.”
It strikes me that if she’s aiming to make opera more accessible, she needs to cut down on the artsy-fartsy, highbrow language, because that does nothing to make it appeal to a fresh audience. I’m not saying dumb it down, but explain things with more clarity and less waffle, because the idea of opera being a) posh and b) incomprehensible is exactly what puts people off.
She’s not aiming to make opera more accessible. That’s a misrepresentation.
“There is still a critical need for a new audience and for new ways of thinking about the presentation and accessibility of opera…”
Yes she is.
No she’s not necessarily. For all I gathered she could talk about making opera more abstruse.
Yes. Of course. Of course that’s what she means.
That’s exactly what annoys me about this. I get no sense that she loves opera or understands it. What comes through loud and clear is that she thinks being involved in the opera world makes her super special and impressive, which is just furthering the idea that opera is for “sophisticates” and “intellectuals” and probably isn’t much fun.
In reality, opera (done well) is passionate, exciting, and deeply moving. A good director would talk about that and how they want to support and highlight the great strengths of opera. Also, a good director would be aware that currently there are other good and interesting directors working in opera who are more “avant-garde” than she probably is. The fact that she talks as though she is the first person who wants to update and experiment with opera productions clues me in that she doesn’t know what is going on the in opera world at all.
For some reason, the three words really throwing me off are her being quoted as saying she’s really focused on opera/classical music “at the moment.” To be fair, she could have just meant those are the projects she’s working on right now, but it comes across as if opera is just the newest of many art forms she’s pursued work in and could jump to anything else on a whim next. To be a full time opera director (as opposed to an avant guard theater director dabbling in opera) takes a lot of training in both the music and the stagecraft, in addition to doing the actual work. If she’s really immersed herself in opera for years, then I rescind all this, but it seems like she’s being labelled as an opera director because someone wanted to profile her (due to the attention she gets off her relationship to Cumberbatch) and based on the project under discussion (a staging of a 15 minute cantata as part of a larger festival) there was no really succinct way of identifying her job title.
@PrettyBlueFox: I think your assessment here is entirely correct, and that the temporary title itself depended more upon easy shorthand for the journalist + editorial catering to a specific audience.
As you know, there are plenty of people wearing all sorts of cross-discipline hats throughout the arts. It’s been my experience that working artists/professionals are much more fluid in their definitions – and need titles less, if at all – than the people intent upon describing & pigeonholing them vs. doing a wide variety of it themselves.
Opera is accessible, though. I feel like people who are saying the art isn’t accessible are just not that much into art.
I just watched MetOpera broadcast last week, at the movies place 5 miles from my home. (And there were total of less than 20 people and I think the auditorium fits at least 200) . And I am going to watch 3 more.
They are also broadcasting Bolshoi and NY ballet and NT Live plays.
Art has never been accessible as it is now.
My concern though is that the broadcasts will be cancelled due to the lack of interest from the public.
True. For 30 dollars you can get decent seats in almost all opera houses in the US. Europe is a bit more expensive but still accessible, I got “cheap” tickets for La Scala two years ago. In my country, Mexico, you can get tickets from 150 pesos (about 12 dollars). Beside form that, you can watch performances from major opera houses around the world (MET, ROH, WSO, ONP) for accesible prices on the internet, or by live transmissions. As you say, the problem is that people just don’t go, in many cases for big misconceptions about it (elitist, boring, etc.).
Sure – in practical terms, opera is more accessible than ever, but attracting new people is still difficult, and that’s my point. More needs to be done to shake the idea of opera as something solely for upper-class, snobby rich white people.
My country’s Opera House, which is amongst the best, created a program to encourage people to experience classical music and opera. Students have access for free and there are a lot of cheap tickets for every performance. The general idea is to introduce main composers and the most important or renowned Operas, and work it from there. The same goes for the ballet season.
Opera is NOT elitist, but it does carry a misconception. If Sophie believes she will change this and reintroduce Opera to a wider audience, then good for her. I have no idea how performing a Cantata in a barn will accomplish this, maybe the second Britten piece will adjust better to her vision. I haven’t seen any of her works and I don’t like avant-garde, I have no patience for it, but it would be unfair to say this is the most modern approach. Opera Houses around the world are working towards making Opera available to all. I believe this is why some people are bothered by the article. It almost sounds as if she believed she and Staples are the only ones doing this. Might be a problem with the editing of the interview.
I don’t get her. At all. She doesn’t even fully commit to the pretentiousness, does she? I feel like there’s room. Is there an interview you can watch? Because in photos and in print she seems like the most bland, boring person I have ever seen on this blog. Maybe in motion I’ll change my mind?
I think there’s a reason why she hasn’t been allowed to talk on camera and on the red carpet.
I don’t get it. This is a pretty snarky celebitchy article with no cause. Yes, let’s shade someone who enjoys her job in the arts. Nothing she is saying is outlandish or controversial, unless you don’t like Benjamin Britten. She’s using her new “celebrity status” to promote something she is passionate about. How dare opera get more attention!
f***ing lolled at the name swap, it wasn’t unintentional was it? lmao
Could we please not focus on this pretentious, droning bore? I can understand her being brought up in stories about Benedict, but giving her her own headline is way more than she deserves. Her only claim to fame is getting knocked up by a famous actor. No one cared about her a year ago and no one will care about her after he divorces her. She’s a snobby, trust fund brat and all the swanning about, trying to pretend she is a successful director is not going to cover the fact that she is in her mid thirties and has done nothing with her life that is of any significance. The only thing her stuck up, tone deaf droning about “THE ARTS” is making me do is think that Benedict must really be a completely boring, stuck up, self obsessed twat who doesn’t even notice how odious his “life mate” is. Seriously, go orbit some other planet, comet Sophie.
Do you have a case of cornflakes urinated on this morning/today? They’re going to divorce now? Pace yourself, there’s a real world out there with actual unpleasantness and things worth getting riled against.
They have to be an insufferably boring couple. I feel sorry for their kid, having to grow up with Mr. and Mrs. Dull for parents.
Yes, having boring parents are the worst. ( Did anyone say 1 world problems?)
Can you imagine the dinner conversations at that house? “Son, did I ever tell you about the time I trained with LaCock?”
Lol, yes, can you imagine the kid will be reading Shakespeare and playing piano by the time he is five. Such a hard life.
On the upside, he’ll never want for anything, And if he wants to become an actor or pursue other passions he will be able to do unlike most of us who had to work for food and shelter.
Nothing’s stopping you from reading Shakespeare or playing the piano or becoming an actor or pursuing other passions. Having dull, uninteresting parents doesn’t guarantee anything, but hard work does. Don’t let your lack of boring parents stop you from doing something you want to do.
> Don’t let your lack of boring parents stop you from doing something you want to do.
Yeah, my parents are not boring. My parents are super-duper-driven, ambitious with ambitious going all the way to the Moon and back. Is it any better you think? I get tired just watching them spin.
As far as parents go, it is a lottery but boring is not something I have objections too. Not that I find Cumberbatch or Hunter boring the first place. I think they are ambitious and artsy workoholics.
Haven’t read her other interviews but I see nothing smug or pretentious in this one.
Have the mentioned what name they gave their son?
Fitzwilliam Timothy Benedict Henry James Edward I.
William Timothy Frederick Cumberbatch. WTF to his friends…
Although I’m willing to accept Oscar Olivier Percival Seely as an alternative. Imagine the monogram.
Only kidding. I wish the Batchling a long and happy life filled with frivolity and laughter – although I suspect with parents that sound as pretentious as his do interviews, he may have to get shipped off to boarding school to experience those things.
The OOPS monogram is a fantastic idea. Maybe that can be his nickname too.
Dara, home run with those acronyms.
Nutty – until the Cumberbatches see fit to reveal the name of their drool-nugget, I’m going to suggest ever more fantastical alternatives – although Oscar Olivier is actually growing on me so I may stick with that one for a while.
I understand when celebs opt not to share baby photos, but I fail to see what is such an invasion of privacy about a name. I’d understand if their last name was Smith or Jones – there would be a small chance the kid could fly under the radar at school, at least for a while. But with a surname like Cumberbatch that is a lost cause already, so what would it hurt for everyone to know his name?
I really wanted to give her the benefit of the doubt, but she has wasted no time at all jumping on the back of Benedict’s fame to launch her avant-garde career. I find it hard to respect someone who is very aggressive and opportunistic in this piggy-backing manner.
I also think it’s very risky, if these new productions are rubbish, it will be disaster for all. I am surprised, that during such a busy year, wedding, baby etc that she is pushing herself out to every tabloid and magazine going with such pretentious, boring interviews.
She’s very ambitious, I give her that.
And if she was a stay at home mom, people would be calling the kid her meal ticket. I don’t think she can win, actually. If she is genuinely interested in her endeavors, should she not give interviews? Eventually, some reviewer or audiences will either pan her work or praise it. Interest in interviews will wax or wane. In the meantime, she is hustling to get a career going rather than some women who take a back seat to their husband’s, and then leave empty handed if they ever divorce, and many will call them gold-diggers for even seeking alimony without their own careers. Maybe she was interested in him because he was famous and maybe she just liked him, but is now using a golden opportunity, who knows? Like someone said above, maybe Cumberbatch wants to puff her up to make his own choice seem brilliant. Isn’t that what Clooney did?
> And if she was a stay at home mom, people would be calling the kid her meal ticket. I don’t think she can win, actually.
Exactly.
Yes, I agree – she can’t win. But it’s the scale of her PR push that’s got me. If her interviews were in arts press & those very expensive creative industries mags that are equal to avante-grade stuff & next to her peers in theatre/whatevershedoes but she’s gone full on Vogue & Telegraph culture where more successful artists in her field wouldn’t get a sniff at except at many years of critically acclaimed world.
The beauty of it is, how could they be rubbish? How does one judge?
They are special one-off performances of fragments of operas, not full on productions setting out for a long run with full reviews. And how many people will actually have the opportunity to see the work? Not many.
The quality of her work stays fully in the eye of the beholder. So therefore, she must be fabulous!
Um…what? I’m such a plebe I’m afraid I don’t understand anything she said.
In a nutshell:
Blah Blah Pretentious Blah Blah Dull Blah Blah LaCock Blah Blah Blah
So what is she doing with this project? She said theyre taking opera out of the concert hall and opera house, but where are they going with it exactly? I’m an American pleb so the closest I have come to an avant-garde opera anything was when I volunteered for a local rock festival and one of the djs (who was awful btw) remixed Pavarotti with electronic house music. I was the volunteer at the venue I didn’t seek that one out so don’t judge.
I’ve no idea what people are on about, she sounds like a typical person excited about her work.
I’m not even an artsy type and I understood what she said.
“Going on to train with Lecoq in Paris meant I discovered European theatre at a formative moment growing up. Seeing the work of directors like Romeo Castellucci, Ivo van Hove, Thomas Ostermeier, and Simon McBurney and Théâtre de Complicité, was, and continues to be, hugely important to me.”
Jesus. Effing. Christ…..
Lecoq was dead when she was in Paris, so she never trained with him.
But it’s not like it would be the only “exxageration” in her resume.
The way I read it – she meant ” training at Lecoq”, which is the same as ” training with Lecoq”, the school that is not the person.
It finally happened…she got her own post. And the angels wept.
it’s not her first one
She’s pretentious because she loves opera? I am confused by this entire post. It IS possible to genuinely love opera; it is not a mark of pretentiousness. Didn’t you guys see Pretty Woman? 😉
Zzzzzzzz….he couldn’t have married someone interesting?
Search for this phrase on Youtube:
Family Guy – (S4xE1) British Porn
I’m guessing they had Benny and Sophie in mind….
Or search for In the Meadow to check out her avant garde acting skills.
well, she is pretentious but still not above making a few quid for a Seat commercial… not sure it’s on TV in the US, but I’ve seen it in Europe and was wondering if it’s really her, the big OPERA director. But it’s her: http://sophiehunterinfo.tumblr.com/post/102520697113/sophie-hunter-in-the-commercial-for-the-new-seat
Didn’t you know that Thomas Ostermeier also did a Volkswagen tv ad?
Just joking ;).
Hah! Perhaps the title of that Guardian piece should be “The opera director who does SEAT ads?” 😉
She really gives me a “dabble a bit in this, dabble a bit on that, but is really great at nothing” vibe.
Nothing wrong with doing car commercials. I’ve a director friend who models in catalogs as a side job. And she has a permanent theater position, hard to come by, but it’s a small place and pays like crap.
Directing plays is still a pretty male-dominated field, and like acting, there’s more directors than jobs. So, you can have a good director just taking whatever they can get in between plays.
LOL..
Ok at the risk of being flamed why is her newborn not her focus at the moment? She’s prob still breastfeeding and can’t be away from him for any length of time. What, she had the kid and passed him onto Wanda to raise? If she wants to do it all fine but to come out and say that your work is more important than your son is a bit selfish.
Lots of smooth smug talk buy Sophie but not a single description of what exactly she is inspired by except for the name-dropping.
Posh people fireing out well-styled phrases without any content. Fascinating.
She could have used this interview to describe her projects and to point out what makes these projects and her approach special or fascinating or modern or unusual. But she doesn’t. She manages do to a lot of name-dropping but what does she actually mean?
Does anybody know?
I have red the guardian article. It seem that this article is mainly about her and her family but hardly about her work which is quite telling. I still don’t get what kind of opera/theatre she will stage and how. “Avantgarde” is a rather loose and rather broad concept.
And why is it important to list a persons ancestors several generations back? Am I supposed to be impressed by her family and their social status?
She seems heavy on the avant garde and light on opera. Sound like she’s using opera to express the avant garde . It makes me wonder how immersed in opera she is day to day and how knowledgable. Btw, I think avant garde stuff is largely a form of mental mast!rbat!on (ersatz intellectual variety) and dead easy to play with.
Does anyone on here like this woman…like really like this woman?
I feel like we are watching a slow motion train wreck btw. I doubt they will have the grand love that his parents have, and I am not some disgruntled fan saying that, but no one I have known who entered into parenthood this quickly had a smooth ride..
I can’t say I like her, because I really know nothing about her. On the hand, I really find no reason to dislike her, based on the same reason.
Yep. I will admit to not loving how she was presented during his awards push, as some beacon of fashion and industry who all women should aspire to be and if we liked him we had to love her. She was suddenly included in best dressed woman lists yet all the pictures of her included him and were from a 1 month period, whereas the other women were all solo, it was weird and also insulting and transparent, but as I said above, I think that was part of his campaign.
She is, of course getting attention and interviewed because of who she married, and yes she does come across as arty-farty (and not my type of person) but to be honest if it gets attention to smaller festivals, collaborations and theatres etc. then I can’t see it as a bad thing?
Ditto, Kiddo!
May I just say, as someone who has seen one of her works, that her work has given me more enjoyment than his work has.
I do not find her pretentious because she talks about opera. I find her pretentious because of the way she talks about opera – but that’s her deal. As I said above, as a couple they remind me of the couple in Exhibition- two posh Brits who take themselves and their art too seriously. I also suspect that she is precisely the type of woman he has hoped for his whole life and they are well-suited in manner and life expectations.
I am going to add that the comments about her as a working mother trouble me. There are no rules on what makes a good parent. It worries me when women hold other women to some unwritten standard on balancing career and motherhood. What works for one family doesn’t work for another and we should all have freedom in choosing our family’s path.
Lilacflowers,
what exactly have you seen with BC in it? Because I find Sherlock (first 2 seasons) fantastic, and he was absolutely amazing in Frankenstein, so either SH’s work is just magnificent, or you have a rather different taste in entertainment (which is not a bad thing, but I’d suspect that you’re in a minority).
@Timbuktu, I have seen all three seasons of Sherlock, The Imitation Game, Atonement, The Other Boleyn Girl, War Horse, Star Trek Into Darkness, Parade’s End, August: Osage County, The Fifth Estate, Twelve Years a Slave, Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy, and Starter for Ten. I have no problem with being in the minority as far as entertainment goes. I’m quirky and I like quirky. I attend a great deal of live theater, concerts for a wide and eclectic range of music, an occasional opera, puppet shows, and dance. I also see a great number of movies. Of her work, I saw 69 S, the puppet show by Phantom Limb with the Kronos Quartet and I found it eerie, haunting, riveting, and really, really cool (no pun intended with the subject matter). I enjoyed it immensely whereas, with his work, I often feel he is playing the exact same character in everything – an emotionally repressed, posh Brit boy. He plays that part exceedingly well but seeing it over and over leaves me a bit cold.
Lilacflowers nailed it. +100000
Lilacflowers: I think he was good in Wreckers.
I am not going to comment on their parenting because it is none of my business. But I will snort laughter on the idea that she is the kind of woman he has been waiting his whole life for. How would you know that exactly? Let’s call a spade a spade. This is a shotgun wedding. Done.
The problem, though, is that, reading through Phantom Limb’s description of the process for the 69degrees thing, the company wrote it, came up with the concept, and came up with all the set/staging prior to her being brought in. It sounds as if she was brought in just to clean it up for an audience. Not that that doesn’t take some work, just not anywhere near the same type of devotion and vision that the actual company did, and she probably had not very much to do with what you loved about it.
Just from what I’ve read about her actual “work”, she seems like a hanger on who is surrounded by good teams, and her puffed up CV is taking credit for it now that she’s married to Cumberbatch. At least he has worked and hustled for his parts.
@Absolutely – YES!! She was the last, and to be fair and accurate, longest lasting, in a long line of directors. The production was pretty much in place before she stepped in. I mentioned this a few months ago and someone took umbrage and said “She was the DIRECTOR! Of course it was her vision!”. NO, it wasn’t. I’m sure she made a contribution, but it was not her vision.
@ Absolutely @wahine992
My thoughts, too.
No one in Hollywood stays married forever, or even for very long, so they would hardly be unique. The odds aren’t in *anyone’s* favor in that culture/industry, so I’m not clear on why these two in particular are getting so much skepticism.
Hell, even regular non-Hollywood folks aren’t really staying married anymore. Most of my friends are either divorced or getting close to it.
I agree there—-I know more divorced over married people currently amongst my friends/family.
She reminds me my mother, so I guess there is that. So when people start throwing mud at her I feel like they are insulting my mom. Not good.
So crappy to shade a new mother for working. I don’t know who you people think you are, criticizing a stranger’s parenting choices when you don’t even have any idea what they are. Maybe she isn’t breastfeeding. And guess what? THAT’S OKAY. It’s allowed. Mind your own damn business, GOD, I just cannot with the sanctimommies.
Directing an opera in another country is not “working”. It’s not at all the not the same as going back to a job/career that you took time away from to have a baby.
Also, coming to a gossip website and telling people to mind their own business is ridiculous- this site is made for judging the business of celebrities. It’s not called “Celebnicey”. If you don’t like it, don’t read it.
A Cumberbatch-Hunter thread isn’t complete until someone complains about the gossiping that occurs on this GOSSIP SITE.
Same goes for Hiddleston threads. It’s enough to drive a Celebitch to drink.
@Nutballs- it’s so annoying. It’s just like the people who say “You don’t know him, you don’t know what his relationship is like!” and then proceed to make up 100 excuses as to why he said this or why she’s not there etc. OF COURSE WE DON’T AND NEITHER DO YOU! Gossip and speculation is the thing that makes celebrity culture fun- otherwise they are just overpaid dancing monkeys.
@Tippy: it’s like the 1950s landed in here.
So just in case anyone else was wondering: Snape Maltings is NOT Severus Snape’s ancestral home. Sad face.
@Sarah I totally had the same thought as you! Severus 4eva
Dammit!
She’s not pretentious. She’s speaking intelligently and eloquently on a culture she is immersed in and passionate about!
I was raised with opera and classical music. They were my musical mother-tongues. And I promise you, Hunter’s remarks are incredibly pretentious to anyone who really and truly loves the MUSIC, because it really is first and foremost about the MUSIC; her remarks reveal not the slightest passion for the music itself, but for how she can use it to foster her dreams of directorial glory. Which doesn’t make her unique in the opera world, where directors notoriously trample composer intent just so they can pretend the piece is actually theirs.
@seesitstellsit-
Aaaaa. Men. You captured my thoughts exactly. Well said!
LOLNOPE
Sorry that the ten million posters of Ben on your wall doesn’t mean he’ll fall in love with you.
If Sophie had spent her entire life on the dole in a council house, it wouldn’t make her “unworthy” of being loved by a man who happens to be famous.
If Sophie had spent her life working as a streetwalker, it wouldn’t make her undeserving of having a man fall in love with her.
Disgusting that stans are trying to tear down her career as a way of somehow “proving” that she’s not “good enough” (like such a thing exists) for Prince Dorky StoatFace.
He obviously doesn’t care what her career history is.
Lol, as if BC would ever go near anyone who ever lived in a council house.
And he obviously does care about what her career history is, since his PR team fluffed it up to high heaven.
given how bad the info was and all the confusion, I’ve decided there was less fluffing than people think and more bad reporting. His PR isn’t going to misidentify her as Sophie Turner, for starters, or miss things she’s actually done, and that happened multiple times.
I’d hope she got her own PR though. Even the not-famous spouses of a celeb will get their own rep, it’s cya thing.
@kelly, oh no, there was some major fluffing going on from PR, hers or his. The bad reporting happened here and there, but somethings on her CV has been debunked in other places. Others have gone into details about it in other threads if you have time to waste.
And the award for “epically missing the point goes to…”
Fact is nothing in a woman’s background/history (apart from maybe crime or really awful things like racism or child abuse) makes her unworthy of being loved. The love of a celebrity is not worth “more” than the love of someone else. If Sophie had married some random would she be being attacked so relentlessly? Of course not. The ONLY reason she’s attacked is because she married a man so many stans are obsessed with.
But the fact is, Benedict fell in love with her, and decided he wanted to make her his wife. Nothing the stans can say to try to tear her down or “prove” that she’s not good enough for him, will change that.
Really, some of the conspiracy theory blogs genuinely seem to believe if they work hard enough and spread enough hate, they genuinely can make Ben give up his marriage (of course they believe it’s all a huge conspiracy and they’re not really married and don’t really have a baby). Won’t happen. If they ever do split it’ll be because things simply didn’t work out, not because Ben read a Tumblr pointing out an avant garde theatre director is Not Very Famous and went, “OMG they’re right! How can I have been so stupid! Obviously a celebrity like myself can’t be married to a normal nonf-famous person! To the divorce courts quick haste!!”
The last two sentences of this post are perfection. Living the dream, indeed.
>Benedict Cumberbatch’s wife and baby-mama Sophie Hunter
What is up with the “baby-mama” dig? I didn’t read past that sentence.
Is Hillary Clinton Bill’s baby-mama? Is Kate Middleton Will’s baby-mama?
I find the term offensive, unless I am not up to speed on the current definition.
Where I live it is a demeaning term used to describe unwed mothers on welfare with intention to insult them.
Whoa! That’s not the definition at all, EN. Off to slang remedial school you go!
Maybe EN is really more offended by the truth, that Sophie has to be described this way or no one will know who she is.
What does it mean then?
According to the Urban dictionary
“baby mama –
The mother of your child(ren), whom you did not marry and with whom you are not currently involved. “
Sophie Hunter’s first solo thread on here and she got more comments than her husband’s past 10 threads. That only means one thing, we’ll be seeing her a lot on here from now on.
Nah, it means the jealous stans who run hate blogs for her are out in full force. It’s not like Sophie has anything to do with whether people decide to comment on a gossip blog or not.
Hunter’s “focus” is quite clearly on making the most of her husband’s high visibility, while it lasts, before Toddles, Tom Hardy, Eddie Redmayne, and (at last!) Aidan Turner leave him behind. Hunter was a fringe nobody who hadn’t worked since 2011 until she married Cumberbatch. It’s obvious there’s a bargain here: she helps him establish his husband/father creds, he helps her get the career she couldn’t get on her own no matter how she tried over 15+ years.
Hey, if it works for them, who am I to criticize?
Add in to that her previous for dating men with higher public profiles than she – Bendy isn’t the only one just the most famous one she got involved with. There was that musician Shambles or something or other.
Conrad Shawcroft.
Gambles, Matthew Gambles, although he denies ever having dated her, and her long relationship with Conrad Shawcross. To be fair, as Hunter had next to no profile outside of a small fringe, almost any man in the arts she took up with would have had a higher profile. She got (ooops!) lucky with Cumberbatch: had she not “renewed” their acquaintance last year when he was no longer a jobbing actor but a “star”, she would still be an unknown to most of us.
God forbid she think about her baby for one second. She’s got a career, people!
I suspect nannies will raise the child. How quant.
Thanks for making me loud after a long tedious day.
I meant laugh out loud. It truly was a long, tedious day.
I’m not super interested in her, but I do think it’s refreshing that an actor in his position, at the apex of his career and with every nitwit model at his disposal, chose to shackle himself to someone age-appropriate and accomplished in her own right. That shows some maturity on his part, even if she is a bit smug and annoying.
She was the one he got pregnant though. He wouldn’t have married her otherwise.
Pretty much. Shotgun through and through.
They were secretly seeing each other for 2 years, and planning the wedding before they learnt she was pregnant though…
No they weren’t though… he was shagging Katia in Ibiza in 2013, and she was living in NYC until May 2014.
Even his friends admitted it had moved quickly since ‘late summer 2014’ i.e the time she got pregnant.
Since we’re all so focused on Sophie failing to mention and being absent from her newborn’s side can we direct some of that attitude toward her husband as well? Daddy Batch is supposedly spending his days working on play rehearsals. But in the past 5 days, he has also found time to attend two matches at Wimbledon, one with his wife and one with his father AND, just this today, attended a performance of Louise Brealey’s play Constellations. In the Daily Mail pictures, he’s alone without baby or wife, unless she’s meeting him in the theater. Babies should have both parents, as well as the nanny and au pair.
ITA.
To be fair, his schedule was packed even before the pregnancy was announced, but it seems as if most of his free time is spent away from his son. Of course, we really don’t know what goes on BTS. But if they kid was born late May-early June, I’m sure he doesn’t spend too many hours away from his mother (assuming SH breastfeeds).
I don’t direct that attitude at either of them because it’s stupid. You can be a great parent without being with your kid 24/7, and some parents who are with their kids all the time are still shitty parents.
Neither of them have 8-hour, 7 days per week rehearsals, so they’re both probably spending more time with their baby than many working parents get to. I used to plan things during longer nap times myself.
My point: shade is being hurled at the mother, not by me, for failing to live up to some standard of motherhood but it is not being hurled at the father. Rather sexist into view
Kaye–Yep, his rehearsal schedule isn’t going to be as long as people think. I’d say, given Turner’s history and the play scale, varying from 6-8 hours a day, 5-6 days a week yet he wouldn’t need to be there every single day. He’s got a lot more free time than has been accounted for.
A perk of being director is you set the rehearsal schedule so Hunter controls when she works. They don’t even need a nanny if they coordinate, just an occasional sitter.
Hamlet rehearsals are 10-5 Mon-Fri. Sophie probably has the baby (plus nanny) with her at her rehearsals.
I said this the other day in his thread and people just called me a sanctimonious mommy.
He probably has 6-8 hour rehearsals. We’ll just say 10-6. (This is a normal equity theater rehearsal schedule). Seeing as how he seems quite well rested, I doubt he’s getting up in the middle of the night with Jr. Add in the tennis, the press nights, the parties, etc. he is not spending much time with that babe, and some of that is by choice. She chose to take on a directing project knowing that it would be 1-2 months after she gave birth. She didn’t have this lined up before getting pregnant like he did with Hamlet. And usually a director’s schedule is much longer days than an actor’s.
And if that’s the way his family is going to work, then ok. That’s their choice. I have to side eye them though. They have the means. They are not a living paycheck to paycheck family that can’t take maternity leave. He does not have to attend 5 hour tennis matches. I’m sure he wants to, though. It is definitely their choice!
There is a reason we have 6week to 3 month or more maternity leaves. It gives you time to heal and time to bond with the baby. I realize newborns sleep and eat a lot and are pretty boring, but they need that time to bond with someone. Mom or dad. They need to know that you’re going to be there to take care of their needs. And while there are many, many people in this world that do not have the option of not going back to work, these are not those people.
I feel bad for that kid. And if that makes me a sanctimonious mommy, then so be it.
Any more snarky comments you would like to add that don’t address the content of the post you’re replying to? Please, get them all out in one go.
Yet another post devoid of content. Keep going. Get it all out of your system.
I know, Nut. I’m not sure why I keep torturing myself. Well, not torturing, more shaking my head.
Nobody knows if BC and family stayed for the whole tennis match. Nobody knows how long they stay on those parties. Nobody knows if they might have a live-in nanny at hands because – practical. Or if his/her parents chip in because the baby is still very small and will sleep a lot. If you want an occasional babysitter and preferably always the same sitter and you want him to cover whenever you need him on an irregular schedule – good luck. Most occasional babysitters have regular jobs, too. Or exams as in “student”.
So it is hard to say how much time they spend with the baby.
I am curious if they will gush and goo about the baby in interviews or if they will politely decline.
+1 pt
i dont see the big deal either. they’ve gone to a handful of short events. if they were out all night clubbing or something, then id get it.
his rehearsals are like 7 hours during the week but he’s not needed at every single one. he doesnt like “well-rested” to me either. heck, he’s got eyebags in that top photo actually, makeup can’t hide it lol
@pondering thoughts, considering BC and his father were at the tennis match at the beginning, with him giving interviews, and attended the party at the end where he congratulated the winner, it would be safe to say he attended the full match, the second match he attended in two days. And he was seen going into the play before it began and left after it was over, so it would be safe to say he attended the whole play. She’s getting slammed for not being a gushing stay-at-home mom while he’s being given a pass and having excuses made for him for not being home with her and the kid. Not equal.
He is not being given a pass. In fact, it appears he’s spending way more time away and he’s the one who used to gush about fatherhood.
I haven’t commented on sir and lady pretentious much because I find them so incredibly boring. Here’s the thing, I have (once upon a time) worked in the entertainment field. I have worked with really great artists and some out and out ametures. What I have noticed is that those with legit talent who have great vision know how to describe their view and what they are trying to accomplish in their work in a way that is grounded to specifics and something that is tangible. They understand how to really express themselves which gets translated in the quality of their work. The ametures express themselves in a way that is designed to show off how “deep” they are and to impress with their own intellectualism. I find their results a mixed bag and often they just did not understand how to do the basics of storytelling. Sophie sounds like the latter to me. How well of a director she is will be a matter of opinion, like anything else in the arts.
And yes, she is absolutely using her husband for gigs and attention. It is right there in print. She may not be the one saying it, but she is allowing them to describe her as BC’s wife because obviously no one would know who she is otherwise. It is pretty clear what is happening.
I am an admitted bad speller. That doesn’t weaken my argument, but attacking it shows you don’t have one of your own. Thanks for playing. Try harder next time.
So? How is that different from every single person married to a celebrity?
Actually, there are plenty celeb spouses who are just spouses. Look at Matt Damon.
@ Madly
Thank you for writing this. I think your point is wonderful. I tried to make a similar one earlier but I am not as eloquent as you. I don’t get what Sophie’s vision is or what drives her as an artist. I don’t understand what special things she tries to accomplish except that it seems to be “avantgarde”. All her interview seems to be “me avantgarde me inspired me working me great”.
Thank you, I appreciate that and enjoy your comments.
Please don’t bite, but IMO she’s a beautiful English rose. The color of her eyes are lovely.
With that said, I’m pretty ambivalent with these two. I have read theough all the comments and I tend to agree with both side in some ways
She is very beautiful.
Can we get an IP check up in here? Many of these seemingly seem to be the same person – different usernames. …
Probably BC’s peeps again. Back when BC was doing all those shenanigans for the coveted Oscar, it seemed like we would get all these random posters (who we had never heard of before) jumping in to his defense.
no offense but i doubt his pr is paying commenters at cb. too small an audience.
probably the same fans using IP add-ons or commenters who usually lurk. there’s also a few people i recognize from other post topics who usually don’t comment on bc threads
Yup. Hits means popularity right?
And improved Google rankings.
Sigh, it’s all so orchestrated. (Did you see what I did there?)
Yeah theres been a lot of drive by compliments in here from randoms who seem to be passionate lifelong Sophie fans. Except shes been as well-known over the years as the maid in the local Motel 6. The heaps of praise are suspect to me….
Yep. Definitely the Tumblr stans using multiple different usernames to attack Sophie because they can’t bear that their Internet boyfriend fell in love with someone else. Pathetic, really. Especially as the main one is only 15.
@ whatsup
I would be careful whom I accuse. I have recently been accused to be the pr of some person just because I pointed out a few things about her education and her career and her family background and her paramour’s interests. For that I got shamed and had not so nice things shouted at me in the comments on this site. Not nice.
I will admit that I didn’t read all of the comments, and that I have googled it, but has the name of their baby ever been released?