‘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 co-parent, we will be able to continue in the same manner. Love, Gwyneth & Chris’
I think I am not the only one who found the word ‘uncoupling’ slightly inappropriate to refer to a separation. That is why I think that this term has to be put in the context of its utterance.
First and foremost, this message is a comuniqué that the couple in toto decided to make. It is not only institutional but also creates the space for its own institutionalisation. The problem is that that claim is made through a manipulation of the word ‘love’ which is used as an instrument of forgiveness, forgetfulness and deterrence.
Secondly, the word ‘uncoupling’ transforms the ‘coupling’ into a temporary state which does not necessarily changes the parties involved or the world in which that ‘couple’ used to live. People, from this perspective, become tourists in their own lives. You visit ‘marriage’ and you leave when convenient. With two ‘wonderful children’ it is very difficult to think that they can ‘un-wonderful childrenise’ their lives. The prefix ‘un-‘ can only come across as distasteful and rather silly in this context.
Thirdly, Paltrow deploys the kind of language that I experienced while hanging around the NY mega rich elite. When you have more money that you could ever spend in a lifetime what makes you different from the others is whether you are a better person or not. The problem is that in this time and age no one has the time to pay enough attention to other individual’s humanistic volitions. Therefore, we all look for indicators that show us very quickly that a person is a ‘good person’. It is shocking the way the world love is deployed in the Upper East Side to the point that they soon need to unpack it as ‘to love someone’ as different from ‘being in love’. And also to love someone as different from ‘I love you so much, guys’. The problem with that social group is that in its lack of privacy, they totally lost that mental space where pain and guilt are created so they start to re-semantise the world around to fit it to their grandiose humanistic pretentions. Failure for them is not an option so the world must be readapted n order for the word ‘failure’ not to be associated with them.
The word ‘un-coupling’ hides the betrayal of a mother to her husband (Paltrow was allegedly unfaithful not once but many times to Chris Martin) behind a corporate crust of ‘Goop! cool motherhood’. I personally think Paltrow is a bitch. I would rephrase the whole thing as: ‘The bitch got ditched’. Just a thought.