Mortgaging 17 Cherry Tree Lane
I went to Mary Poppins Returns last night (yes, for New Year's Eve.) I quite liked it overall. Basically, that's about as violent as I like my films to ever be (i.e., with zero violence, and almost no threat of peril, either.) I could go on about the good song and dance numbers, or the sweetness of Lin-Manual Miranda, or how good *all* the actors were. I liked that there was at least one visibly Indian dancer and several prominent black people, and basically they made an attempt to not have it be Oscars-So-White and I appreciated the thought. Go see the movie, it's fun and nice.
But a couple of things bubbled up that I'm going to capture here. One is the opening credits. The idyllic river with bends at the start of the Disney credits? That's where I live. Just as DisneyWorld's Main Street USA bears a startling resemblance to our town (the Disney designer was from around here, as it turns out), the river surrounding the castle looks just like the river I live on. So I grok the satisfaction of the dream-like landscape. But what's with the huge castle? What atavistic desire is there for a big lit up monstrosity of a castle to be there? Is it protection from the White Walkers? Is it the desire to be ruled by Authority? My actual home-town is completely lacking in royalty. We are Congregationalists and Quakers who hold Town Meetings. We expect our Senator and Representatitves in Congress to not only show up to talk to us over Chamber of Commerce breakfasts, but to serve US, rather than us serving them. That whole fairy tale castle thing: why is it there? Who's satisfying dream is this that serfs labor so that beautiful clean people can live in beautiful big homes?
And that leads me back to 17 Cherry Tree Lane, an upper middle class address, probably on Primrose Hill. It's a very very nice house (bad plumbing and loud neighbors excepted) and it was passed to the current owner by his father, a very frugal businessman, free and clear of a mortgage. But Michael, the current owner, is an artist, and his hold on his upper middle class existence is slipping. Because you can inherit being poor and you can inherit being rich, but being middle class is up to each of us to earn all over again for ourselves. Michael has found that he can't quite afford this house. The solution to this is to downsize and/or find a way to monetize being an artist or to squelch your art and go find a paying job OR to discover you inherited wealth after all. This being a Disney movie that features a castle in the opening credits, I'll let you guess how they handle it. (Basically, it turns out to be good that he invested his tuppence instead of feeding the birds. The point isn't belabored, but it's there.)
I'm struggling with how to help one of my clients. He's an artist, he's really quite good, but his hold on the trappings of middle class are just as tenuous as is Michael Bank's. Even if you inherit a house like 17 Cherry Tree Lane free and clear of mortgage, it's still not affordable to live in a house that requires expensive improvements, staff to run it, and property taxes and insurance as ongoing expenses. If Michael Banks were my client, I would have done some basic financial planning with him and shown him his balance sheet (with more assets than he realized) and STILL advised him to consider whether his family could still be happy in a much smaller house. Maybe not, maybe staying there is their dream. Which leads me back to the struggle with my own client. He wants to keep his middle class life. He has some assets. He even wins prestigious grants for his art. He's just... not rich enough, and for some odd reason working class people aren't popping up trying to make sure my client stays in his very fine house.
Which leads me back to that castle. Why does everyone want there to be rich people? Why are the posh so satisfying for the gaslighters of London to help? Why would the cook volunteer her only jewelry when the family that lived there for sixty years have an attic full of valuable junk they could be selling? Or renting out a room? Or letting the house for the season and repairing to a more modest flat with Jane Banks? The social order seems to be reinforced from every direction. I was honestly a bit surprised that they seemed to be pairing up upper-middle-class Jane Banks and the working class gaslighter. True, that guy can both dance and sing. Rap, even. (I think he's not going to throw away his shot.) But how likely would she be to marry him? Maybe, I don't know. It just didn't seem in keeping with the firmly established class structure that everyone seemed to want.
But a couple of things bubbled up that I'm going to capture here. One is the opening credits. The idyllic river with bends at the start of the Disney credits? That's where I live. Just as DisneyWorld's Main Street USA bears a startling resemblance to our town (the Disney designer was from around here, as it turns out), the river surrounding the castle looks just like the river I live on. So I grok the satisfaction of the dream-like landscape. But what's with the huge castle? What atavistic desire is there for a big lit up monstrosity of a castle to be there? Is it protection from the White Walkers? Is it the desire to be ruled by Authority? My actual home-town is completely lacking in royalty. We are Congregationalists and Quakers who hold Town Meetings. We expect our Senator and Representatitves in Congress to not only show up to talk to us over Chamber of Commerce breakfasts, but to serve US, rather than us serving them. That whole fairy tale castle thing: why is it there? Who's satisfying dream is this that serfs labor so that beautiful clean people can live in beautiful big homes?
And that leads me back to 17 Cherry Tree Lane, an upper middle class address, probably on Primrose Hill. It's a very very nice house (bad plumbing and loud neighbors excepted) and it was passed to the current owner by his father, a very frugal businessman, free and clear of a mortgage. But Michael, the current owner, is an artist, and his hold on his upper middle class existence is slipping. Because you can inherit being poor and you can inherit being rich, but being middle class is up to each of us to earn all over again for ourselves. Michael has found that he can't quite afford this house. The solution to this is to downsize and/or find a way to monetize being an artist or to squelch your art and go find a paying job OR to discover you inherited wealth after all. This being a Disney movie that features a castle in the opening credits, I'll let you guess how they handle it. (Basically, it turns out to be good that he invested his tuppence instead of feeding the birds. The point isn't belabored, but it's there.)
I'm struggling with how to help one of my clients. He's an artist, he's really quite good, but his hold on the trappings of middle class are just as tenuous as is Michael Bank's. Even if you inherit a house like 17 Cherry Tree Lane free and clear of mortgage, it's still not affordable to live in a house that requires expensive improvements, staff to run it, and property taxes and insurance as ongoing expenses. If Michael Banks were my client, I would have done some basic financial planning with him and shown him his balance sheet (with more assets than he realized) and STILL advised him to consider whether his family could still be happy in a much smaller house. Maybe not, maybe staying there is their dream. Which leads me back to the struggle with my own client. He wants to keep his middle class life. He has some assets. He even wins prestigious grants for his art. He's just... not rich enough, and for some odd reason working class people aren't popping up trying to make sure my client stays in his very fine house.
Which leads me back to that castle. Why does everyone want there to be rich people? Why are the posh so satisfying for the gaslighters of London to help? Why would the cook volunteer her only jewelry when the family that lived there for sixty years have an attic full of valuable junk they could be selling? Or renting out a room? Or letting the house for the season and repairing to a more modest flat with Jane Banks? The social order seems to be reinforced from every direction. I was honestly a bit surprised that they seemed to be pairing up upper-middle-class Jane Banks and the working class gaslighter. True, that guy can both dance and sing. Rap, even. (I think he's not going to throw away his shot.) But how likely would she be to marry him? Maybe, I don't know. It just didn't seem in keeping with the firmly established class structure that everyone seemed to want.