Benedict Cumberbatch has faced criticism for not housing a Syrian refugee after his impassioned on-stage appeal during a 2015 performance of Hamlet, in which he condemned the Tory government’s refugee policy and passed around a collection bucket. The actor now says he does not regret speaking out, though he admits he “got overexcited and said things in a rather grand manner some nights”.
In a column for The Observer, Barbara Ellen argues that demanding celebrities undertake life-changing acts such as taking refugees into their homes to prove sincerity is “ridiculous”. She notes that Cumberbatch considered the option but decided against it because he and his wife had a young son to care for. Ellen questions why he should need to justify himself further.
Ellen points out that famous people who speak out are often made to “jump through every hoop” to demonstrate their commitment, whereas ordinary people who do not house refugees are not similarly condemned. She writes that celebrities like Cumberbatch generate national and international headlines, raising awareness in a way few others can, and that this value should not be dismissed.
While acknowledging that some may view celebrity activism as performative, Ellen contends that being unable to offer a home to a refugee does not make someone hypocritical. She argues that drawing a line on what one can do is legitimate, and that pressuring high-profile individuals into grand gestures may ultimately discourage them from speaking out at all.
