What do you think?
Rate this book
Ben Lovatt #1
丕賱胤賮賱 丕賱禺丕賲爻
賰鬲亘賵丕 毓賳 "丕賱胤賮賱 丕賱禺丕賲爻" 兀賳賴丕 乇賵丕賷丞 賱丿賷賴丕 賯賵丞 丕賱賰丕亘賵爻貙 賰購鬲亘鬲 亘鬲賱賰 丕賱亘爻丕胤丞 丕賱賱丕匕毓丞 丕賱鬲賷 賴賷 賯賵丕賲 丕賱賰賵丕亘賷爻.
兀乇亘毓丞 兀胤賮丕賱 賵乇毓丕賷丞 丕賱兀賯丕乇亘 賵丕賱兀氐丿賯丕亍 賵賲賳夭賱 賯丿賷賲 噩賲賷賱 鬲丐爻爻賴 賯氐丞 丨亘 乇丕卅毓丞 亘賷賳 賴丕乇賷賷鬲 賵丿丕賮賷丿 賱賵賮丕鬲 孬賲 賷賵賱丿 賱賴賲丕 "丕賱胤賮賱 丕賱禺丕賲爻" 賮賷爻賯胤 賰馗賱 賲馗賱賲 賱丕 爻亘賷賱 廿賱賶 鬲睾賷賷乇賴.. 馗賱 囟禺賲 賵賯亘賷丨 賵毓賳賷賮 賱丕 賷賲賰賳 丕賱鬲丨賰賲 賮賷賴..乇囟賷毓 鬲賲賱丐賴 賰乇丕賴賷丞 亘丕乇丿丞 鬲氐丕乇毓 兀賲賴 賱乇毓丕賷鬲賴 賮鬲噩丕亘賴 亘馗賱丕賲 賱賲 鬲毓乇賮 賱賴 賲孬賷賱丕賸 賲賳 賯亘賱 賵鬲賳夭賵賷 賮賷 禺賵賮 丿丕卅賲 賲賳賴.. 賲賳 丕亘賳賴丕.. 賲賲丕 噩賱亘鬲賴 賴賷 賱賱毓丕賱賲!
兀乇亘毓丞 兀胤賮丕賱 賵乇毓丕賷丞 丕賱兀賯丕乇亘 賵丕賱兀氐丿賯丕亍 賵賲賳夭賱 賯丿賷賲 噩賲賷賱 鬲丐爻爻賴 賯氐丞 丨亘 乇丕卅毓丞 亘賷賳 賴丕乇賷賷鬲 賵丿丕賮賷丿 賱賵賮丕鬲 孬賲 賷賵賱丿 賱賴賲丕 "丕賱胤賮賱 丕賱禺丕賲爻" 賮賷爻賯胤 賰馗賱 賲馗賱賲 賱丕 爻亘賷賱 廿賱賶 鬲睾賷賷乇賴.. 馗賱 囟禺賲 賵賯亘賷丨 賵毓賳賷賮 賱丕 賷賲賰賳 丕賱鬲丨賰賲 賮賷賴..乇囟賷毓 鬲賲賱丐賴 賰乇丕賴賷丞 亘丕乇丿丞 鬲氐丕乇毓 兀賲賴 賱乇毓丕賷鬲賴 賮鬲噩丕亘賴 亘馗賱丕賲 賱賲 鬲毓乇賮 賱賴 賲孬賷賱丕賸 賲賳 賯亘賱 賵鬲賳夭賵賷 賮賷 禺賵賮 丿丕卅賲 賲賳賴.. 賲賳 丕亘賳賴丕.. 賲賲丕 噩賱亘鬲賴 賴賷 賱賱毓丕賱賲!
230 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1988
465 people are currently reading
19646 people want to read
About the author
Doris Lessing
522听books3,055听followersBoth of her parents were British: her father, who had been crippled in World War I, was a clerk in the Imperial Bank of Persia; her mother had been a nurse. In 1925, lured by the promise of getting rich through maize farming, the family moved to the British colony in Southern Rhodesia (now Zimbabwe). Like other women writers from southern African who did not graduate from high school (such as Olive Schreiner and Nadine Gordimer), Lessing made herself into a self-educated intellectual.
In 1937 she moved to Salisbury, where she worked as a telephone operator for a year. At nineteen, she married Frank Wisdom, and later had two children. A few years later, feeling trapped in a persona that she feared would destroy her, she left her family, remaining in Salisbury. Soon she was drawn to the like-minded members of the Left Book Club, a group of Communists "who read everything, and who did not think it remarkable to read." Gottfried Lessing was a central member of the group; shortly after she joined, they married and had a son.
During the postwar years, Lessing became increasingly disillusioned with the Communist movement, which she left altogether in 1954. By 1949, Lessing had moved to London with her young son. That year, she also published her first novel, The Grass Is Singing, and began her career as a professional writer.
In June 1995 she received an Honorary Degree from Harvard University. Also in 1995, she visited South Africa to see her daughter and grandchildren, and to promote her autobiography. It was her first visit since being forcibly removed in 1956 for her political views. Ironically, she is welcomed now as a writer acclaimed for the very topics for which she was banished 40 years ago.
In 2001 she was awarded the Prince of Asturias Prize in Literature, one of Spain's most important distinctions, for her brilliant literary works in defense of freedom and Third World causes. She also received the David Cohen British Literature Prize.
She was on the shortlist for the first Man Booker International Prize in 2005. In 2007 she was awarded the Nobel Prize for Literature.
(Extracted from the pamphlet: A Reader's Guide to The Golden Notebook & Under My Skin, HarperPerennial, 1995. Full text available on ).
In 1937 she moved to Salisbury, where she worked as a telephone operator for a year. At nineteen, she married Frank Wisdom, and later had two children. A few years later, feeling trapped in a persona that she feared would destroy her, she left her family, remaining in Salisbury. Soon she was drawn to the like-minded members of the Left Book Club, a group of Communists "who read everything, and who did not think it remarkable to read." Gottfried Lessing was a central member of the group; shortly after she joined, they married and had a son.
During the postwar years, Lessing became increasingly disillusioned with the Communist movement, which she left altogether in 1954. By 1949, Lessing had moved to London with her young son. That year, she also published her first novel, The Grass Is Singing, and began her career as a professional writer.
In June 1995 she received an Honorary Degree from Harvard University. Also in 1995, she visited South Africa to see her daughter and grandchildren, and to promote her autobiography. It was her first visit since being forcibly removed in 1956 for her political views. Ironically, she is welcomed now as a writer acclaimed for the very topics for which she was banished 40 years ago.
In 2001 she was awarded the Prince of Asturias Prize in Literature, one of Spain's most important distinctions, for her brilliant literary works in defense of freedom and Third World causes. She also received the David Cohen British Literature Prize.
She was on the shortlist for the first Man Booker International Prize in 2005. In 2007 she was awarded the Nobel Prize for Literature.
(Extracted from the pamphlet: A Reader's Guide to The Golden Notebook & Under My Skin, HarperPerennial, 1995. Full text available on ).
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 2,572 reviews
June 16, 2020
Motherhood - a horror story
This book starts off with two young 20-somethings, David and Harriet, who find each other at a work party in the late 1960s. They're deliriously happy to find each other, having always felt different and somewhat condemned for their differences. They marry, and buy a huge Victorian house with many rooms to fill with the many children they plan to have. Their families are disapproving. Why so many children? How will you support them? What's the rush? Aren't there more important things to do with your life, anyway?
They are determined though, to fulfill this dream of a big family and vibrant family gatherings. And they do it. In almost as many years, they have 4 kids (yes, this is a horror story....). Their families, who were disapproving and finger wagging, almost have to eat crow. They all convene in the Victorian mansion for riotous holiday celebrations, and they LOVE it. They have to admit, this life is warm and joyful and fulfilling. Everyone's having a great time.
Until... well, you guessed it. Child #5. From conception, it is a nightmare. The pregnancy alone is torture, and a sneak peek into life afterward. Child #5 is nothing like the rest of the family. Child #5 does scary things. Child #5 systematically destroys the family.
This powerful novella had me terribly uncomfortable during the entire reading. After, I thought a great deal about it. In 150 pages, Doris Lessing captures the impossible positions motherhood can present. A mother is often damned if she does, damned if she doesn't. Take care of one, destroy the family. Let go of one, destroy herself.
Often Harriet feels like she is being punished, treated like a criminal. Is she being punished for going after her own happiness? For wanting an excess, too much? Is this a general indictment for overpopulation? Or is she ultimately punished for the abandonment of her first four children? Or, perhaps, worse still, is all of this in her head - the result of an inexplicable maternal ambivalence?
Lessing knew a thing or two about these things. After her first marriage ended, she left her two oldest children in Rhodesia for their father to raise, but took the youngest with her to England. At first, as she is quoted as saying, she felt "brave" for doing this, and pursuing her writing and political passions. But maybe by 1988, at the time of this publication, and towards the end of her life, she felt the full effects of her decision. Felt like a criminal. Felt like she had destroyed a perfectly good family. Saw that she didn't know when to quit when she was ahead.
Whatever you see in these pages, the impossibilities and catch-22 situations within motherhood will stand out, and gouge you.
Comparisons can be made to Lionel Shriver's terrifying We Need to Talk About Kevin. Maybe even, in some respects, Ira Levin's Rosemary's Baby. As with all good horror stories, you will be chilled as you turn the final page. As with all good literary fiction, you'll be thinking a long time afterwards.
This book starts off with two young 20-somethings, David and Harriet, who find each other at a work party in the late 1960s. They're deliriously happy to find each other, having always felt different and somewhat condemned for their differences. They marry, and buy a huge Victorian house with many rooms to fill with the many children they plan to have. Their families are disapproving. Why so many children? How will you support them? What's the rush? Aren't there more important things to do with your life, anyway?
They are determined though, to fulfill this dream of a big family and vibrant family gatherings. And they do it. In almost as many years, they have 4 kids (yes, this is a horror story....). Their families, who were disapproving and finger wagging, almost have to eat crow. They all convene in the Victorian mansion for riotous holiday celebrations, and they LOVE it. They have to admit, this life is warm and joyful and fulfilling. Everyone's having a great time.
Until... well, you guessed it. Child #5. From conception, it is a nightmare. The pregnancy alone is torture, and a sneak peek into life afterward. Child #5 is nothing like the rest of the family. Child #5 does scary things. Child #5 systematically destroys the family.
This powerful novella had me terribly uncomfortable during the entire reading. After, I thought a great deal about it. In 150 pages, Doris Lessing captures the impossible positions motherhood can present. A mother is often damned if she does, damned if she doesn't. Take care of one, destroy the family. Let go of one, destroy herself.
Often Harriet feels like she is being punished, treated like a criminal. Is she being punished for going after her own happiness? For wanting an excess, too much? Is this a general indictment for overpopulation? Or is she ultimately punished for the abandonment of her first four children? Or, perhaps, worse still, is all of this in her head - the result of an inexplicable maternal ambivalence?
Lessing knew a thing or two about these things. After her first marriage ended, she left her two oldest children in Rhodesia for their father to raise, but took the youngest with her to England. At first, as she is quoted as saying, she felt "brave" for doing this, and pursuing her writing and political passions. But maybe by 1988, at the time of this publication, and towards the end of her life, she felt the full effects of her decision. Felt like a criminal. Felt like she had destroyed a perfectly good family. Saw that she didn't know when to quit when she was ahead.
Whatever you see in these pages, the impossibilities and catch-22 situations within motherhood will stand out, and gouge you.
Comparisons can be made to Lionel Shriver's terrifying We Need to Talk About Kevin. Maybe even, in some respects, Ira Levin's Rosemary's Baby. As with all good horror stories, you will be chilled as you turn the final page. As with all good literary fiction, you'll be thinking a long time afterwards.
December 3, 2021
The Fifth Child, Doris Lessing
The Fifth Child is a short novel by the British-Zimbabwean writer Doris Lessing, first published in the United Kingdom in 1988, and since translated into several languages.
It describes the changes in the happy life of a married couple, Harriet and David Lovatt, as a consequence of the birth of Ben, their fifth child.
When David Lovatt meets Harriet at an office party, they both immediately fall in love. They both share the same conservative outlooks, which they perceive to be a rarity in the London of the 1960's.
The two marry and purchase a large house in a small town within commuting distance of London. The couple both intend to have several children, a wish frowned upon by the rest of the family. By the time they have four children, two boys and two girls, their house becomes a center of joy not only for them but for all their relatives and friends who come and visit.
This continues until Harriet has a fifth, wildly dysfunctional child, Ben. Her painful pregnancy with him marks the beginning of the misery and suffering that this child brings to the whole family.
鬲丕乇蹖禺 賳禺爻鬲蹖賳 禺賵丕賳卮: 乇賵夭 卮丕賳夭丿賴賲 賲丕賴 丌诏賵爻鬲 爻丕賱2016賲蹖賱丕丿蹖
毓賳賵丕賳: 賮乇夭賳丿 倬賳噩賲貨 賳賵蹖爻賳丿賴: 丿賵乇蹖爻 賱爻蹖賳诏貨 賲鬲乇噩賲: 賲賴丿蹖 睾亘乇丕蹖蹖貨 鬲賴乇丕賳貙 賳卮乇 孬丕賱孬貨 趩丕倬 爻賵賲 爻丕賱1393貙 丿乇208氐貨 賲賵囟賵毓 丿丕爻鬲丕賳賴丕蹖 賳賵蹖爻賳丿诏丕賳 夭蹖賲亘丕亘賵賴 鬲亘丕乇 亘乇蹖鬲丕賳蹖丕 - 爻丿賴20賲
乇賲丕賳 芦賮乇夭賳丿 倬賳噩賲禄 賳賵卮鬲賴鈥� 芦丿賵乇蹖爻 賱爻蹖賳诏禄 亘丕 鬲乇噩賲賴鈥� 噩賳丕亘丕賳 芦讴蹖賴丕賳 亘賴賲賳蹖禄 賵 芦蹖丕爻蹖賳 賲丨賲丿蹖禄 (趩丕倬 倬賳噩賲 爻丕賱1393貙 丿乇208氐賮丨賴)貙 丕夭 爻賵蹖 丕賳鬲卮丕乇丕鬲 芦丕賮乇丕夭禄 賳蹖夭 趩丕倬 卮丿賴 丕爻鬲貨 乇丐蹖丕 趩蹖夭蹖 丕爻鬲 讴賴 丌丿賲鈥屬囏� 亘賴 丌賳 丕丨鬲蹖丕噩 丿丕乇賳丿貨 乇丐蹖丕蹖蹖 亘乇丕蹖 夭蹖爻鬲賳貙 乇丐蹖丕蹖蹖 亘乇丕蹖 噩丿丕 卮丿賳 丕夭 賲卮讴賱丕鬲 賵 丿睾丿睾賴鈥� 賴丕蹖 乇賵夭賲乇賴貙 賵 倬蹖賵爻鬲賳 亘賴 丌蹖賳丿賴鈥� 丕蹖 讴賴 乇賵卮賳 賵 賮乇蹖亘賳丿賴 丕爻鬲貨 賲蹖鈥屫堌з嗀� 亘賴 丨賯蹖賯鬲 亘倬蹖賵賳丿丿 賵 蹖丕 鬲賵賴賲蹖 丕夭 爻賵蹖 氐丕丨亘丕賳 乇丐蹖丕 亘丕卮丿貨 芦賴乇蹖鬲禄 賵 芦丿蹖賵蹖丿禄貙 夭賳 賵 賲乇丿賽 讴鬲丕亘 芦賮乇夭賳丿 倬賳噩賲禄 亘乇 禺賱丕賮 賮乇賴賳诏 毓賲賵賲蹖貙 賵 亘丕賵乇賴丕蹖 禺丕賳賵丕丿诏蹖鈥屫簇з� 鬲氐賲蹖賲 賲蹖鈥屭屫辟嗀� 亘趩賴鈥� 丿丕乇 卮賵賳丿貨
賳賯賱 丕夭 賲鬲賳: 芦趩賳丿 鬲丕 亘趩賴 賲蹖鈥屫堌з囒屫熉回� 芦丿蹖賵蹖丿禄 诏賮鬲: 芦禺蹖賱蹖.禄貨 芦賴乇蹖鬲禄 诏賮鬲: 芦禺蹖賱蹖禄貨 賵 噩賵丕亘 卮賳蹖丿賳丿: 芦賲賮鬲賽 趩賳诏鈥屫з喡� 倬丕蹖丕賳 賳賯賱
亘乇丕蹖 亘賴 賵丕賯毓蹖鬲 倬蹖賵爻鬲賳 丕蹖賳 乇丐蹖丕蹖 丿賵賳賮乇賴貙 禺丕賳賴鈥� 丕蹖 亘夭乇诏 禺乇蹖丿賳丿貙 亘丕 爻亘讴 芦賵蹖讴鬲賵乇蹖丕蹖蹖禄貨 禺丕賳賴鈥� 丕蹖 亘丕 丕鬲丕賯鈥屬囏й� 亘爻蹖丕乇貙 亘乇丕蹖 賮乇夭賳丿丕賳蹖 讴賴 賯乇丕乇 亘賵丿 禺蹖賱蹖 夭賵丿 禺丕賳賵丕丿賴 乇丕貙 亘賴 噩賲毓蹖 卮丕丿 賵 爻乇禺賵卮貙 鬲亘丿蹖賱 讴賳丿貨 乇丕爻鬲卮 賱丕夭賲 賳蹖爻鬲 芦賮乇夭賳丿 倬賳噩賲禄 丕夭 乇丕賴 亘乇爻丿貙 賱丕夭賲 賳蹖爻鬲 丕鬲賮丕賯丕鬲 倬卮鬲 爻乇 賴賲 亘蹖賮鬲賳丿貙 賵 芦賴乇蹖鬲禄 賵 芦丿蹖賵蹖丿禄貙 丿乇 丌賳 禺丕賳賴鈥� 蹖 丿乇賳丿卮鬲鈥屫簇з� 亘丕 鬲噩乇亘賴鈥� 賴丕蹖蹖 丿乇丿賳丕讴 乇賵亘乇賵 卮賵賳丿貙 鬲丕 禺賵丕賳卮诏乇 亘賮賴賲丿 诏丕賴蹖 賴賲賴鈥� 趩蹖夭 芦丕爻鬲毓丕乇賴禄 丕爻鬲貨 芦亘賽賳禄貙 倬賳噩賲蹖賳 賮乇夭賳丿 禺丕賳賵丕丿賴貙 亘蹖卮 丕夭 丌賳鈥屭┵� 亘賴 讴賵丿讴蹖 卮亘蹖賴 亘丕卮丿貙 賴蹖賵賱丕蹖蹖 讴賵趩讴 丕爻鬲貙 讴賴 賲蹖鈥屫堌з囏� 鬲賲丕賲 夭賳丿诏蹖 乇丕 蹖讴鈥屫� 賳丕亘賵丿 讴賳丿貙 鬲賳賴丕 丕诏乇 夭賳噩蹖乇 賲丨丿賵丿蹖鬲鈥屬囏й屫� 亘丕夭 卮賵丿貨 亘賴鈥� 爻丕丿诏蹖 賳禺 賳丕夭讴 夭賳丿诏蹖 倬丕乇賴 賲蹖鈥屫促堌� 亘賴鈥� 爻丕丿诏蹖 乇丐蹖丕賴丕貙 噩丕蹖 禺賵丿卮丕賳 乇丕 亘賴 讴丕亘賵爻鈥屬囏� 賲蹖鈥屫囐嗀� 賵 乇賵夭賴丕蹖 禺賵卮 亘賴 鬲氐賵蹖乇蹖 禺丕讴 诏乇賮鬲賴貙 賵 乇賵 亘賴 賮乇爻丕蹖卮貙 鬲亘丿蹖賱 賲蹖鈥屫促堌� 芦賮乇夭賳丿 倬賳噩賲禄 賲蹖鈥屫堌з嗀� 丕爻鬲毓丕乇賴鈥� 丕蹖 亘丕卮丿貙 丕夭 賲卮讴賱丕鬲蹖 讴賴 噩丕賲毓賴鈥� 蹖 賲購丿乇賳 亘丕 丌賳 賲賵丕噩賴賴 丕爻鬲貨 趩蹖夭蹖 賳丕禺賵卮丕蹖賳丿貙 亘丕 卮賲丕蹖賱蹖 毓噩蹖亘 賵 睾乇蹖亘貙 丿乇 丕乇鬲亘丕胤 夭賳 賵 賲乇丿貙 丿乇 丕乇鬲亘丕胤 賵丕賱丿蹖賳 賵 賮乇夭賳丿丕賳 賴爻鬲貙 讴賴 卮丕蹖丿 丿乇 禺丕乇噩 丕夭 趩賴丕乇趩賵亘 丿丕爻鬲丕賳貙 賵 丿乇 亘丕賮鬲 賵丕賯毓蹖 夭賳丿诏蹖 亘賴 趩卮賲 賳蹖丕蹖丿貙 丕賲丕 丕毓囟丕蹖 禺丕賳賵丕丿賴 丕夭 丌賳 丿乇 毓匕丕亘鈥� 賴爻鬲賳丿貙 趩蹖夭蹖 讴賴 乇丕亘胤賴鈥� 賴丕 乇丕 爻乇丿 賲蹖鈥屭┵嗀� 賲丕丿乇 乇丕 丕夭 賮乇夭賳丿丕賳卮 丿賵乇貙 賵 倬丿乇 乇丕 亘賴 讴丕乇 亘蹖卮鈥屫� 賵 亘蹖卮鈥屫� 賲蹖鈥屭┴簇з嗀�
丕蹖賳 倬丿蹖丿賴鈥� 蹖 賳丕賲亘丕乇讴 丕賳诏丕乇 亘賴 賯爻賲鬲蹖 丕夭 夭賳丿诏蹖 禺丕賳賵丕丿诏蹖 乇爻賵禺 賲蹖鈥屭┵嗀� 丌賳鈥屭嗁嗀з� 讴賴 賲賴乇亘丕賳蹖 賮賱噩 賲蹖鈥屫促堌� 賱亘禺賳丿賴丕 鬲購賴蹖貙 賵 賱丨馗丕鬲 禺賵卮貙 亘乇丕蹖 賴賲蹖卮賴 亘賴 诏匕卮鬲賴鈥� 賴丕蹖 丿賵乇丿爻鬲 賲蹖鈥屬聚屬堎嗀嗀� 賴賲賴 讴賳丕乇 賴賲鈥� 賴爻鬲賳丿貙 亘丕賴賲鈥� 賴爻鬲賳丿 賵 鬲賳賴丕蹖賳丿貨 芦賴乇蹖鬲禄 丿乇 賯爻賲鬲蹖 丕夭 讴鬲丕亘 賲蹖鈥屭堐屫�: (丕丨爻丕爻 賲蹖鈥屭┵嗁� 丕夭 夭賲丕賳 鬲賵賱丿 芦亘賽賳禄 丿蹖诏乇丕賳 賲賱丕賲鬲賲 讴乇丿賴鈥� 丕賳丿貨 丕丨爻丕爻 賲蹖鈥屭┵嗁� 賴賲蹖卮賴 胤賵乇蹖 亘丕 賲賳 乇賮鬲丕乇 讴乇丿賴鈥� 丕賳丿 讴賴 丕賳诏丕乇 噩賳丕蹖鬲讴丕乇賲)禄貨 芦賮乇夭賳丿 倬賳噩賲禄 賳丕賴賳噩丕乇 丕爻鬲貨 丕賮爻乇丿诏蹖鈥� 賵 丕囟胤乇丕亘 賵 賮卮丕乇 乇賵丨蹖 丿丕乇丿貙 賲卮讴賱丕鬲 賵 賳丕禺賵卮蹖鈥屬囏й� 亘賴 亘丕乇 丌賲丿賴 丿乇 丿賳蹖丕蹖 賲鬲賲丿賳 丕爻鬲貙 讴賴 賳丕禺賵丕爻鬲賴 亘賴 丿賱 禺丕賳賵丕丿賴 卮亘蹖禺賵賳 賲蹖鈥屫操嗀� 賵 乇丐蹖丕蹖 亘丕卮讴賵賴 芦賴乇蹖鬲禄 賵 芦丿蹖賵蹖丿禄 丿乇 賲賯丕亘賱鈥屫簇з� 賴乇夭 賲蹖鈥屫辟堌� 賵 鬲讴賴鈥� 鬲讴賴 賲蹖鈥屫促堌�
乇賵丕蹖鬲 芦丿賵乇蹖爻 賱爻蹖賳诏禄 丿乇 讴鬲丕亘 芦賮乇夭賳丿 倬賳噩賲禄 爻丕丿賴 賵 丿賱趩爻亘 丕爻鬲貨 蹖讴 乇丕賵蹖賽 爻賵賲 卮禺氐 诏賴诏丕賴蹖 亘賴 匕賴賳 卮禺氐蹖鬲 賲蹖鈥屫辟堌� 丕賲丕 賮丕氐賱賴鈥� 蹖 禺賵丿卮 乇丕 亘丕 禺賵丕賳卮诏乇 賳诏丕賴 賲蹖鈥屫ж必� 芦丿賵乇蹖爻 賱爻蹖賳诏禄 讴賴 丿乇 爻丕賱2007賲蹖賱丕丿蹖 亘乇賳丿賴鈥� 蹖 噩丕蹖夭賴鈥屰� 芦賳賵亘賱 丕丿亘蹖丕鬲禄 卮丿賳丿貙 讴鬲丕亘 丿蹖诏乇蹖 丿丕乇賳丿 亘丕 毓賳賵丕賳 芦亘賳 丿乇 噩賴丕賳禄 讴賴 噩賳丕亘 芦賲賴丿蹖 睾亘乇丕蹖蹖禄 丿乇 賲賯丕賲 賲鬲乇噩賲貙 丕蹖賳 丕孬乇 乇丕 賯爻賲鬲 丿賵賲 乇賲丕賳 芦賮乇夭賳丿 倬賳噩賲禄 丿丕賳爻鬲賴 丕賳丿貨 芦丿賵乇蹖爻 賱爻蹖賳诏禄貙 賳賵蹖爻賳丿賴 蹖 讴鬲丕亘 芦賮乇夭賳丿 倬賳噩賲禄 丿乇 芦讴乇賲丕賳卮丕賴禄 亘賴 丿賳蹖丕 丌賲丿賴 丕爻鬲貨 丕蹖賳 賳賵蹖爻賳丿賴 蹖 芦夭蹖賲亘丕亘賵賴禄 鬲亘丕乇 芦亘乇蹖鬲丕賳蹖丕蹖蹖禄貙 蹖丕夭丿賴賲蹖賳 夭賳蹖 丕爻鬲 讴賴 鬲賵丕賳爻鬲賴 噩丕蹖夭賴 蹖 賳賵亘賱 丕丿亘蹖丕鬲 乇丕 亘賴 丿爻鬲 亘蹖丕賵乇丿貨 賲丕丿乇 芦賱爻蹖賳诏禄 倬乇爻鬲丕乇 賵 倬丿乇 丕蹖卮丕賳 丕賮爻乇 丕乇鬲卮 丕爻鬲毓賲丕乇蹖 芦亘乇蹖鬲丕賳蹖丕禄 亘賵丿貙 讴賴 倬爻 丕夭 亘丕夭賳卮爻鬲诏蹖 亘賴 毓賱鬲 噩乇丕丨鬲 丿乇 噩賳诏 噩賴丕賳蹖 丕賵賱貙 丿乇 亘丕賳讴 卮丕賴賳卮丕賴蹖 丕蹖乇丕賳 丿乇 芦讴乇賲丕賳卮丕賴禄 讴丕乇 賲蹖讴乇丿
鬲丕乇蹖禺 亘賴賳诏丕賲 乇爻丕賳蹖 30/01/1400賴噩乇蹖 禺賵乇卮蹖丿蹖貨 11/09/1400賴噩乇蹖 禺賵乇卮蹖丿蹖貨 丕. 卮乇亘蹖丕賳蹖
The Fifth Child is a short novel by the British-Zimbabwean writer Doris Lessing, first published in the United Kingdom in 1988, and since translated into several languages.
It describes the changes in the happy life of a married couple, Harriet and David Lovatt, as a consequence of the birth of Ben, their fifth child.
When David Lovatt meets Harriet at an office party, they both immediately fall in love. They both share the same conservative outlooks, which they perceive to be a rarity in the London of the 1960's.
The two marry and purchase a large house in a small town within commuting distance of London. The couple both intend to have several children, a wish frowned upon by the rest of the family. By the time they have four children, two boys and two girls, their house becomes a center of joy not only for them but for all their relatives and friends who come and visit.
This continues until Harriet has a fifth, wildly dysfunctional child, Ben. Her painful pregnancy with him marks the beginning of the misery and suffering that this child brings to the whole family.
鬲丕乇蹖禺 賳禺爻鬲蹖賳 禺賵丕賳卮: 乇賵夭 卮丕賳夭丿賴賲 賲丕賴 丌诏賵爻鬲 爻丕賱2016賲蹖賱丕丿蹖
毓賳賵丕賳: 賮乇夭賳丿 倬賳噩賲貨 賳賵蹖爻賳丿賴: 丿賵乇蹖爻 賱爻蹖賳诏貨 賲鬲乇噩賲: 賲賴丿蹖 睾亘乇丕蹖蹖貨 鬲賴乇丕賳貙 賳卮乇 孬丕賱孬貨 趩丕倬 爻賵賲 爻丕賱1393貙 丿乇208氐貨 賲賵囟賵毓 丿丕爻鬲丕賳賴丕蹖 賳賵蹖爻賳丿诏丕賳 夭蹖賲亘丕亘賵賴 鬲亘丕乇 亘乇蹖鬲丕賳蹖丕 - 爻丿賴20賲
乇賲丕賳 芦賮乇夭賳丿 倬賳噩賲禄 賳賵卮鬲賴鈥� 芦丿賵乇蹖爻 賱爻蹖賳诏禄 亘丕 鬲乇噩賲賴鈥� 噩賳丕亘丕賳 芦讴蹖賴丕賳 亘賴賲賳蹖禄 賵 芦蹖丕爻蹖賳 賲丨賲丿蹖禄 (趩丕倬 倬賳噩賲 爻丕賱1393貙 丿乇208氐賮丨賴)貙 丕夭 爻賵蹖 丕賳鬲卮丕乇丕鬲 芦丕賮乇丕夭禄 賳蹖夭 趩丕倬 卮丿賴 丕爻鬲貨 乇丐蹖丕 趩蹖夭蹖 丕爻鬲 讴賴 丌丿賲鈥屬囏� 亘賴 丌賳 丕丨鬲蹖丕噩 丿丕乇賳丿貨 乇丐蹖丕蹖蹖 亘乇丕蹖 夭蹖爻鬲賳貙 乇丐蹖丕蹖蹖 亘乇丕蹖 噩丿丕 卮丿賳 丕夭 賲卮讴賱丕鬲 賵 丿睾丿睾賴鈥� 賴丕蹖 乇賵夭賲乇賴貙 賵 倬蹖賵爻鬲賳 亘賴 丌蹖賳丿賴鈥� 丕蹖 讴賴 乇賵卮賳 賵 賮乇蹖亘賳丿賴 丕爻鬲貨 賲蹖鈥屫堌з嗀� 亘賴 丨賯蹖賯鬲 亘倬蹖賵賳丿丿 賵 蹖丕 鬲賵賴賲蹖 丕夭 爻賵蹖 氐丕丨亘丕賳 乇丐蹖丕 亘丕卮丿貨 芦賴乇蹖鬲禄 賵 芦丿蹖賵蹖丿禄貙 夭賳 賵 賲乇丿賽 讴鬲丕亘 芦賮乇夭賳丿 倬賳噩賲禄 亘乇 禺賱丕賮 賮乇賴賳诏 毓賲賵賲蹖貙 賵 亘丕賵乇賴丕蹖 禺丕賳賵丕丿诏蹖鈥屫簇з� 鬲氐賲蹖賲 賲蹖鈥屭屫辟嗀� 亘趩賴鈥� 丿丕乇 卮賵賳丿貨
賳賯賱 丕夭 賲鬲賳: 芦趩賳丿 鬲丕 亘趩賴 賲蹖鈥屫堌з囒屫熉回� 芦丿蹖賵蹖丿禄 诏賮鬲: 芦禺蹖賱蹖.禄貨 芦賴乇蹖鬲禄 诏賮鬲: 芦禺蹖賱蹖禄貨 賵 噩賵丕亘 卮賳蹖丿賳丿: 芦賲賮鬲賽 趩賳诏鈥屫з喡� 倬丕蹖丕賳 賳賯賱
亘乇丕蹖 亘賴 賵丕賯毓蹖鬲 倬蹖賵爻鬲賳 丕蹖賳 乇丐蹖丕蹖 丿賵賳賮乇賴貙 禺丕賳賴鈥� 丕蹖 亘夭乇诏 禺乇蹖丿賳丿貙 亘丕 爻亘讴 芦賵蹖讴鬲賵乇蹖丕蹖蹖禄貨 禺丕賳賴鈥� 丕蹖 亘丕 丕鬲丕賯鈥屬囏й� 亘爻蹖丕乇貙 亘乇丕蹖 賮乇夭賳丿丕賳蹖 讴賴 賯乇丕乇 亘賵丿 禺蹖賱蹖 夭賵丿 禺丕賳賵丕丿賴 乇丕貙 亘賴 噩賲毓蹖 卮丕丿 賵 爻乇禺賵卮貙 鬲亘丿蹖賱 讴賳丿貨 乇丕爻鬲卮 賱丕夭賲 賳蹖爻鬲 芦賮乇夭賳丿 倬賳噩賲禄 丕夭 乇丕賴 亘乇爻丿貙 賱丕夭賲 賳蹖爻鬲 丕鬲賮丕賯丕鬲 倬卮鬲 爻乇 賴賲 亘蹖賮鬲賳丿貙 賵 芦賴乇蹖鬲禄 賵 芦丿蹖賵蹖丿禄貙 丿乇 丌賳 禺丕賳賴鈥� 蹖 丿乇賳丿卮鬲鈥屫簇з� 亘丕 鬲噩乇亘賴鈥� 賴丕蹖蹖 丿乇丿賳丕讴 乇賵亘乇賵 卮賵賳丿貙 鬲丕 禺賵丕賳卮诏乇 亘賮賴賲丿 诏丕賴蹖 賴賲賴鈥� 趩蹖夭 芦丕爻鬲毓丕乇賴禄 丕爻鬲貨 芦亘賽賳禄貙 倬賳噩賲蹖賳 賮乇夭賳丿 禺丕賳賵丕丿賴貙 亘蹖卮 丕夭 丌賳鈥屭┵� 亘賴 讴賵丿讴蹖 卮亘蹖賴 亘丕卮丿貙 賴蹖賵賱丕蹖蹖 讴賵趩讴 丕爻鬲貙 讴賴 賲蹖鈥屫堌з囏� 鬲賲丕賲 夭賳丿诏蹖 乇丕 蹖讴鈥屫� 賳丕亘賵丿 讴賳丿貙 鬲賳賴丕 丕诏乇 夭賳噩蹖乇 賲丨丿賵丿蹖鬲鈥屬囏й屫� 亘丕夭 卮賵丿貨 亘賴鈥� 爻丕丿诏蹖 賳禺 賳丕夭讴 夭賳丿诏蹖 倬丕乇賴 賲蹖鈥屫促堌� 亘賴鈥� 爻丕丿诏蹖 乇丐蹖丕賴丕貙 噩丕蹖 禺賵丿卮丕賳 乇丕 亘賴 讴丕亘賵爻鈥屬囏� 賲蹖鈥屫囐嗀� 賵 乇賵夭賴丕蹖 禺賵卮 亘賴 鬲氐賵蹖乇蹖 禺丕讴 诏乇賮鬲賴貙 賵 乇賵 亘賴 賮乇爻丕蹖卮貙 鬲亘丿蹖賱 賲蹖鈥屫促堌� 芦賮乇夭賳丿 倬賳噩賲禄 賲蹖鈥屫堌з嗀� 丕爻鬲毓丕乇賴鈥� 丕蹖 亘丕卮丿貙 丕夭 賲卮讴賱丕鬲蹖 讴賴 噩丕賲毓賴鈥� 蹖 賲購丿乇賳 亘丕 丌賳 賲賵丕噩賴賴 丕爻鬲貨 趩蹖夭蹖 賳丕禺賵卮丕蹖賳丿貙 亘丕 卮賲丕蹖賱蹖 毓噩蹖亘 賵 睾乇蹖亘貙 丿乇 丕乇鬲亘丕胤 夭賳 賵 賲乇丿貙 丿乇 丕乇鬲亘丕胤 賵丕賱丿蹖賳 賵 賮乇夭賳丿丕賳 賴爻鬲貙 讴賴 卮丕蹖丿 丿乇 禺丕乇噩 丕夭 趩賴丕乇趩賵亘 丿丕爻鬲丕賳貙 賵 丿乇 亘丕賮鬲 賵丕賯毓蹖 夭賳丿诏蹖 亘賴 趩卮賲 賳蹖丕蹖丿貙 丕賲丕 丕毓囟丕蹖 禺丕賳賵丕丿賴 丕夭 丌賳 丿乇 毓匕丕亘鈥� 賴爻鬲賳丿貙 趩蹖夭蹖 讴賴 乇丕亘胤賴鈥� 賴丕 乇丕 爻乇丿 賲蹖鈥屭┵嗀� 賲丕丿乇 乇丕 丕夭 賮乇夭賳丿丕賳卮 丿賵乇貙 賵 倬丿乇 乇丕 亘賴 讴丕乇 亘蹖卮鈥屫� 賵 亘蹖卮鈥屫� 賲蹖鈥屭┴簇з嗀�
丕蹖賳 倬丿蹖丿賴鈥� 蹖 賳丕賲亘丕乇讴 丕賳诏丕乇 亘賴 賯爻賲鬲蹖 丕夭 夭賳丿诏蹖 禺丕賳賵丕丿诏蹖 乇爻賵禺 賲蹖鈥屭┵嗀� 丌賳鈥屭嗁嗀з� 讴賴 賲賴乇亘丕賳蹖 賮賱噩 賲蹖鈥屫促堌� 賱亘禺賳丿賴丕 鬲購賴蹖貙 賵 賱丨馗丕鬲 禺賵卮貙 亘乇丕蹖 賴賲蹖卮賴 亘賴 诏匕卮鬲賴鈥� 賴丕蹖 丿賵乇丿爻鬲 賲蹖鈥屬聚屬堎嗀嗀� 賴賲賴 讴賳丕乇 賴賲鈥� 賴爻鬲賳丿貙 亘丕賴賲鈥� 賴爻鬲賳丿 賵 鬲賳賴丕蹖賳丿貨 芦賴乇蹖鬲禄 丿乇 賯爻賲鬲蹖 丕夭 讴鬲丕亘 賲蹖鈥屭堐屫�: (丕丨爻丕爻 賲蹖鈥屭┵嗁� 丕夭 夭賲丕賳 鬲賵賱丿 芦亘賽賳禄 丿蹖诏乇丕賳 賲賱丕賲鬲賲 讴乇丿賴鈥� 丕賳丿貨 丕丨爻丕爻 賲蹖鈥屭┵嗁� 賴賲蹖卮賴 胤賵乇蹖 亘丕 賲賳 乇賮鬲丕乇 讴乇丿賴鈥� 丕賳丿 讴賴 丕賳诏丕乇 噩賳丕蹖鬲讴丕乇賲)禄貨 芦賮乇夭賳丿 倬賳噩賲禄 賳丕賴賳噩丕乇 丕爻鬲貨 丕賮爻乇丿诏蹖鈥� 賵 丕囟胤乇丕亘 賵 賮卮丕乇 乇賵丨蹖 丿丕乇丿貙 賲卮讴賱丕鬲 賵 賳丕禺賵卮蹖鈥屬囏й� 亘賴 亘丕乇 丌賲丿賴 丿乇 丿賳蹖丕蹖 賲鬲賲丿賳 丕爻鬲貙 讴賴 賳丕禺賵丕爻鬲賴 亘賴 丿賱 禺丕賳賵丕丿賴 卮亘蹖禺賵賳 賲蹖鈥屫操嗀� 賵 乇丐蹖丕蹖 亘丕卮讴賵賴 芦賴乇蹖鬲禄 賵 芦丿蹖賵蹖丿禄 丿乇 賲賯丕亘賱鈥屫簇з� 賴乇夭 賲蹖鈥屫辟堌� 賵 鬲讴賴鈥� 鬲讴賴 賲蹖鈥屫促堌�
乇賵丕蹖鬲 芦丿賵乇蹖爻 賱爻蹖賳诏禄 丿乇 讴鬲丕亘 芦賮乇夭賳丿 倬賳噩賲禄 爻丕丿賴 賵 丿賱趩爻亘 丕爻鬲貨 蹖讴 乇丕賵蹖賽 爻賵賲 卮禺氐 诏賴诏丕賴蹖 亘賴 匕賴賳 卮禺氐蹖鬲 賲蹖鈥屫辟堌� 丕賲丕 賮丕氐賱賴鈥� 蹖 禺賵丿卮 乇丕 亘丕 禺賵丕賳卮诏乇 賳诏丕賴 賲蹖鈥屫ж必� 芦丿賵乇蹖爻 賱爻蹖賳诏禄 讴賴 丿乇 爻丕賱2007賲蹖賱丕丿蹖 亘乇賳丿賴鈥� 蹖 噩丕蹖夭賴鈥屰� 芦賳賵亘賱 丕丿亘蹖丕鬲禄 卮丿賳丿貙 讴鬲丕亘 丿蹖诏乇蹖 丿丕乇賳丿 亘丕 毓賳賵丕賳 芦亘賳 丿乇 噩賴丕賳禄 讴賴 噩賳丕亘 芦賲賴丿蹖 睾亘乇丕蹖蹖禄 丿乇 賲賯丕賲 賲鬲乇噩賲貙 丕蹖賳 丕孬乇 乇丕 賯爻賲鬲 丿賵賲 乇賲丕賳 芦賮乇夭賳丿 倬賳噩賲禄 丿丕賳爻鬲賴 丕賳丿貨 芦丿賵乇蹖爻 賱爻蹖賳诏禄貙 賳賵蹖爻賳丿賴 蹖 讴鬲丕亘 芦賮乇夭賳丿 倬賳噩賲禄 丿乇 芦讴乇賲丕賳卮丕賴禄 亘賴 丿賳蹖丕 丌賲丿賴 丕爻鬲貨 丕蹖賳 賳賵蹖爻賳丿賴 蹖 芦夭蹖賲亘丕亘賵賴禄 鬲亘丕乇 芦亘乇蹖鬲丕賳蹖丕蹖蹖禄貙 蹖丕夭丿賴賲蹖賳 夭賳蹖 丕爻鬲 讴賴 鬲賵丕賳爻鬲賴 噩丕蹖夭賴 蹖 賳賵亘賱 丕丿亘蹖丕鬲 乇丕 亘賴 丿爻鬲 亘蹖丕賵乇丿貨 賲丕丿乇 芦賱爻蹖賳诏禄 倬乇爻鬲丕乇 賵 倬丿乇 丕蹖卮丕賳 丕賮爻乇 丕乇鬲卮 丕爻鬲毓賲丕乇蹖 芦亘乇蹖鬲丕賳蹖丕禄 亘賵丿貙 讴賴 倬爻 丕夭 亘丕夭賳卮爻鬲诏蹖 亘賴 毓賱鬲 噩乇丕丨鬲 丿乇 噩賳诏 噩賴丕賳蹖 丕賵賱貙 丿乇 亘丕賳讴 卮丕賴賳卮丕賴蹖 丕蹖乇丕賳 丿乇 芦讴乇賲丕賳卮丕賴禄 讴丕乇 賲蹖讴乇丿
鬲丕乇蹖禺 亘賴賳诏丕賲 乇爻丕賳蹖 30/01/1400賴噩乇蹖 禺賵乇卮蹖丿蹖貨 11/09/1400賴噩乇蹖 禺賵乇卮蹖丿蹖貨 丕. 卮乇亘蹖丕賳蹖
May 2, 2022
The core dilemma
This is a horror story exploring what happens when a monstrous child is born to a perfect family. When there is no way for everyone to be happy and safe, who must sacrifice what, how does one choose - and what happens when the parents can鈥檛 agree? It is essentially a variant of the , where you see a runaway train at a fork in the track, with people at risk on both: you can either do nothing, knowing five people will die, or actively divert it so that just one person dies.
The plot is simple and told chronologically by an omniscient narrator: Harriet and David want to fill their enormous house with a huge family. They have four beautiful blond, blue-eyed, rosy cheeked children in quick succession, in between hosting popular house parties at Christmas, Easter, and the summer holidays. Then Ben is born.
鈥�If I had let him die, then all of us鈥� would have been happy.鈥�
There is no supernatural aspect, though it never feels quite plausible either: not the original idyl (living 鈥渉appiness in the old style鈥�, counter to 鈥渢he greedy and selfish sixties鈥�), nor the horror of Ben, and certainly not the degree to which some things are ignored by those around, including the authorities. That made me increasingly question the accuracy of Harriet鈥檚 fears and observations, whilst also feeling bad about not believing her, when she already felt so judged.
鈥�She wanted to be acknowledged, her predicament given its value.鈥�
What is wrong with Ben?
I don鈥檛 think Ben is a subhuman 鈥渢hrowback鈥�, changeling, troll, or alien as Harriet often says. Although he鈥檚 hyperactive and shares some traits with autistic people, his issues are not so easily defined.
鈥� Is he slow and misunderstood, irredeemably evil, or just not as loved and loveable as his siblings?
鈥� Is he as horrendous as Harriet claims?
鈥� To what extent is she to blame - should we instead ask what鈥檚 wrong with her? (But despite her fear and revulsion, she goes to great lengths to protect him, to the detriment of herself, her husband, and their other children.)
The covers of various editions imply radically different answers:
There are also difficult questions about what punishments, containment, and threats are justified for the wider good. It may be useful to compare this with ; I鈥檝e not read that, though I saw the film several years ago.
Differing (dis)abilities
Ben鈥檚 existence fractures relationships all round, and forces choices that no parent wants to make. How can you be 鈥渇air鈥� when your children have hugely different needs? How do you cope with not loving your own child鈥� with sometimes wishing he were dead?
I had my only child when I was 29, so when my routine scans (sonograms) were fine, I was not offered testing for Down鈥檚 or anything else (though we could have insured against a disabled child). The odds were good, it would be our child, and we鈥檇 do our best. However, it would have been different if we already had a child whose life could be hugely and detrimentally affected by the birth of a severely disabled sibling. That was long enough ago that I read this with understanding, but the safety of distance. This is not a book to read if you're thinking about having a(nother) child any time soon!
While Ben arouses fear, his cousin with Down鈥檚 Syndrome (referred to as a 鈥淢ongol child鈥� more than once!) is generally loved - except by her own father (鈥渄istressed by physical disability鈥� and 鈥渁ppalled鈥� by her) and Harriet (who assumes Amy is a symptom of an unhappy marriage).
Parental sacrifice and children鈥檚 sense of entitlement
Most parents make sacrifices for their children, but how far should they go? 鈥淎 mother is fed by watching her children eat鈥� is a guilt-inducing phrase I sometimes heard in childhood when money was tight: my mother would treat us to something nice to eat, while eating toast herself.
鈥溾赌�It鈥檚 either him or us鈥�... 鈥楬e鈥檚 our child.鈥� 鈥楴o, he鈥檚 not鈥� well he鈥檚 certainly not mine.鈥欌赌�
Harriet and David make sacrifices for different combinations of their children, but their passive sense of entitlement towards their own parents is staggering: they choose a huge house and family, but can only do so because David鈥檚 father pays for it all, and Harriet鈥檚 mother becomes a full-time childminder and skivvy. Both parents have other calls on their money and time, but go largely unthanked.
When?
It spans twenty years, from the mid 60s to around the time it was published, but despite the odd mention of rising crime, it always felt stuck in the 60s, and certainly not like the late 80s I remember.
Nevertheless, I鈥檓 glad I read it. It鈥檚 quite brutal, but raises profound questions, without suggesting answers. However, the little I've read about the sequel ensures I won't go on to that.
Quotes
鈥� 鈥淭here was an ugly edge on events: more and more it seemed that two peoples lived in England, not one - enemies, hating each other, who could not hear what the other said.鈥� Written of 1972, but applies today.
鈥� 鈥淗is taking possession of the future in her鈥� - making love, intensely.
鈥� 鈥淪he knew the cost, in every way, of a family.鈥� [Harriet鈥檚 mother, Molly.]
鈥� 鈥淲hen he bent to kiss her, and stroked Luke鈥檚 heat, it was with a fierce possessiveness that Harriet liked and understood, for it was not herself being possessed, or the baby, but happiness. Hers and his.鈥�
鈥� 鈥淗er heart was hurt as it would be for one of her own, real children.鈥�
鈥� 鈥淏en was Harriet鈥檚 responsibility and his was for the children - the real children.鈥�
鈥� 鈥淲hen she put her arms around him, there was no response, no warmth; it was as if he did not feel her touch.鈥�
鈥� 鈥淪he had been drained of some ingredient that everyone took for granted.鈥�
Inspiration for...
This novel is part of the inspiration for Claire Oshetsky's brilliant, raw, and disturbing novel, Chouette, which I reviewed HERE.
This is a horror story exploring what happens when a monstrous child is born to a perfect family. When there is no way for everyone to be happy and safe, who must sacrifice what, how does one choose - and what happens when the parents can鈥檛 agree? It is essentially a variant of the , where you see a runaway train at a fork in the track, with people at risk on both: you can either do nothing, knowing five people will die, or actively divert it so that just one person dies.
The plot is simple and told chronologically by an omniscient narrator: Harriet and David want to fill their enormous house with a huge family. They have four beautiful blond, blue-eyed, rosy cheeked children in quick succession, in between hosting popular house parties at Christmas, Easter, and the summer holidays. Then Ben is born.
鈥�If I had let him die, then all of us鈥� would have been happy.鈥�
There is no supernatural aspect, though it never feels quite plausible either: not the original idyl (living 鈥渉appiness in the old style鈥�, counter to 鈥渢he greedy and selfish sixties鈥�), nor the horror of Ben, and certainly not the degree to which some things are ignored by those around, including the authorities. That made me increasingly question the accuracy of Harriet鈥檚 fears and observations, whilst also feeling bad about not believing her, when she already felt so judged.
鈥�She wanted to be acknowledged, her predicament given its value.鈥�
What is wrong with Ben?
I don鈥檛 think Ben is a subhuman 鈥渢hrowback鈥�, changeling, troll, or alien as Harriet often says. Although he鈥檚 hyperactive and shares some traits with autistic people, his issues are not so easily defined.
鈥� Is he slow and misunderstood, irredeemably evil, or just not as loved and loveable as his siblings?
鈥� Is he as horrendous as Harriet claims?
鈥� To what extent is she to blame - should we instead ask what鈥檚 wrong with her? (But despite her fear and revulsion, she goes to great lengths to protect him, to the detriment of herself, her husband, and their other children.)
The covers of various editions imply radically different answers:
There are also difficult questions about what punishments, containment, and threats are justified for the wider good. It may be useful to compare this with ; I鈥檝e not read that, though I saw the film several years ago.
Differing (dis)abilities
Ben鈥檚 existence fractures relationships all round, and forces choices that no parent wants to make. How can you be 鈥渇air鈥� when your children have hugely different needs? How do you cope with not loving your own child鈥� with sometimes wishing he were dead?
I had my only child when I was 29, so when my routine scans (sonograms) were fine, I was not offered testing for Down鈥檚 or anything else (though we could have insured against a disabled child). The odds were good, it would be our child, and we鈥檇 do our best. However, it would have been different if we already had a child whose life could be hugely and detrimentally affected by the birth of a severely disabled sibling. That was long enough ago that I read this with understanding, but the safety of distance. This is not a book to read if you're thinking about having a(nother) child any time soon!
While Ben arouses fear, his cousin with Down鈥檚 Syndrome (referred to as a 鈥淢ongol child鈥� more than once!) is generally loved - except by her own father (鈥渄istressed by physical disability鈥� and 鈥渁ppalled鈥� by her) and Harriet (who assumes Amy is a symptom of an unhappy marriage).
Parental sacrifice and children鈥檚 sense of entitlement
Most parents make sacrifices for their children, but how far should they go? 鈥淎 mother is fed by watching her children eat鈥� is a guilt-inducing phrase I sometimes heard in childhood when money was tight: my mother would treat us to something nice to eat, while eating toast herself.
鈥溾赌�It鈥檚 either him or us鈥�... 鈥楬e鈥檚 our child.鈥� 鈥楴o, he鈥檚 not鈥� well he鈥檚 certainly not mine.鈥欌赌�
Harriet and David make sacrifices for different combinations of their children, but their passive sense of entitlement towards their own parents is staggering: they choose a huge house and family, but can only do so because David鈥檚 father pays for it all, and Harriet鈥檚 mother becomes a full-time childminder and skivvy. Both parents have other calls on their money and time, but go largely unthanked.
When?
It spans twenty years, from the mid 60s to around the time it was published, but despite the odd mention of rising crime, it always felt stuck in the 60s, and certainly not like the late 80s I remember.
Nevertheless, I鈥檓 glad I read it. It鈥檚 quite brutal, but raises profound questions, without suggesting answers. However, the little I've read about the sequel ensures I won't go on to that.
Quotes
鈥� 鈥淭here was an ugly edge on events: more and more it seemed that two peoples lived in England, not one - enemies, hating each other, who could not hear what the other said.鈥� Written of 1972, but applies today.
鈥� 鈥淗is taking possession of the future in her鈥� - making love, intensely.
鈥� 鈥淪he knew the cost, in every way, of a family.鈥� [Harriet鈥檚 mother, Molly.]
鈥� 鈥淲hen he bent to kiss her, and stroked Luke鈥檚 heat, it was with a fierce possessiveness that Harriet liked and understood, for it was not herself being possessed, or the baby, but happiness. Hers and his.鈥�
鈥� 鈥淗er heart was hurt as it would be for one of her own, real children.鈥�
鈥� 鈥淏en was Harriet鈥檚 responsibility and his was for the children - the real children.鈥�
鈥� 鈥淲hen she put her arms around him, there was no response, no warmth; it was as if he did not feel her touch.鈥�
鈥� 鈥淪he had been drained of some ingredient that everyone took for granted.鈥�
Inspiration for...
This novel is part of the inspiration for Claire Oshetsky's brilliant, raw, and disturbing novel, Chouette, which I reviewed HERE.
May 19, 2021
DOBBIAMO PARLARE DI BEN
Pablo Picasso: Maternit脿 nel campo, 1901.
Harriet e David si incontrano a una festa aziendale e immediatamente cupido scocca la freccia. L鈥檃more 猫 ricambiato, i due sono presi e rapiti l鈥檜no dall鈥檃ltra.
Hanno la fortuna di condividere, oltre l鈥檌mmediata attrazione, anche principi valori sogni e progetti di vita: per loro, tutto questo 猫 rappresentato da una famiglia numerosa, sei figli 猫 l鈥檕biettivo.
Siamo all鈥檌nizio degli anni Sessanta e la coppia si direbbe muoversi esattamente contro corrente, o in ritardo sui tempi.
Pablo Picasso: Maternit脿 (madre e figlio), 1901.
Per realizzare il sogno, dopo le nozze comprano una grande casa vittoriana in campagna dove la famiglia potr脿 crescere prospera e felice. E, ovviamente, rinunciano a qualsiasi contraccettivo.
I primi quattro figli arrivano in serie, due maschi e due femmine. Le cose vanno per il verso giusto. Entrambi i lati della famiglia, i parenti tutti si stringono festosi ed entusiasti intorno alla coppia, anche generosamente disponibili ad aiutarli e supportarli economicamente.
Pablo Picasso: Madre e figlio, 1903.
Harriet dopo le prime quattro gravidanze senza sosta vorrebbe rallentare un attimo, prendersi un periodo di pausa. Ma invece rimane incinta per la quinta volta.
E questa volta 猫 molto diversa dalle precedenti quattro: il bambino nella sua pancia si agita e scalcia come volesse demolirla. Lei finisce col sentirsi isolata: nel loro patto di matrimonio, David e Harriett non avevano contemplato dolore, cupore, malinconia, tristezza, preoccupazione.
Pablo Picasso: Madre e figlio, 1903.
La creatura che nasce 猫 strana alquanto. E infatti, 猫 pi霉 facile definirlo 鈥榗reatura鈥� che bambino: ha pelle e occhi di colore strano, giallastro. Sostanzialmente, 猫 brutto. Inoltre, Ben, questo 猫 il nome scelto per lui, si dimostra presto aggressivo e violento, aspetto che non aiuta a farsi amare.
Quel nido d鈥檃more e gioia familiare 猫 pi霉 che turbato: 猫 letteralmente sconvolto. Si allontanano tutti, compresi i primi quattro figli, che si trasferiscono a vivere altrove.
Pablo Picasso: Madre e figlio acrobati, 1905.
Per salvare la situazione David decide che ben va internato in un istituto. Ma Harriett comprende che quel luogo 猫 in realt脿 una tomba, un lager di sterminio per diversi e deformi che vengono eliminati a furia di maltrattamenti - 猫 dove la normalit脿 si difende dall鈥檃normalit脿 - contro il volere di David 鈥� e finir脿 col perdere anche lui 鈥� Harriett torna a riprendersi Ben. Il quinto figlio.
Pablo Picasso: Famiglia di acrobati con scimmia, 1905.
Doris Lessing ci conduce in un territorio inquietante e disturbante dove non sembrano esistere verit脿 cui aggrapparsi, fari che illuminano il cammino. 脠 brava a lasciarci in sospeso, appesi a questa sua storia tra la fantascienza e la distopia per quanto nell鈥檃ssoluta contemporaneit脿 del suo setting.
Ben sembra arrivato da un altro spazio, un alieno, oppure da un altro tempo, una creatura primordiale: come se dagli albori della vita sulla terra fosse stato scagliato in piena fine del XX secolo (1988 猫 l鈥檃nno di pubblicazione). Compie gesti che sembrano pura brutalit脿 primitiva, e mettono raccapriccio, generano orrore. Impossibile non pensare al Frankenstein di Mary Shelley.
Pablo Picasso: Maternit脿, 1905.
Harriett si accartoccia nel senso di colpa, incapace di capire chi sia realmente Ben, quale sia la sua vera natura, piombata dalla preistoria o venuta da un altro mondo.
Lessing 猫 brava a sfatare il mito della maternit脿 come realizzazione di una donna; 猫 brava a mettere sulla griglia la societ脿 del tempo, edonistica, ma anche convinta di essere la migliore, l鈥檃pice dell鈥檈voluzione. Al punto che qui e l脿 ci si chiede se sia Ben che si comporta male, o sono quelli intorni che lo considerano malvagio.
Pablo Picasso: Madre e figlio, 1907.
O ancora, e forse pi霉, sar脿 mica la societ脿 che lo spinge su quella china? Ben ha animo selvaggio, o 猫 la mancanza d鈥檃more che lo emargina e rende violento? Chi tra i due elementi 猫 pi霉 spietato?
Lessing lascia aperte porte e finestre senza porgere appigli, stimolando ipotesi mentre genera dubbi e domande.
Pablo Picasso: Madre e figlio, 1921.
Pablo Picasso: Maternit脿 con mela, 1971.
Pablo Picasso: Maternit脿 nel campo, 1901.
Harriet e David si incontrano a una festa aziendale e immediatamente cupido scocca la freccia. L鈥檃more 猫 ricambiato, i due sono presi e rapiti l鈥檜no dall鈥檃ltra.
Hanno la fortuna di condividere, oltre l鈥檌mmediata attrazione, anche principi valori sogni e progetti di vita: per loro, tutto questo 猫 rappresentato da una famiglia numerosa, sei figli 猫 l鈥檕biettivo.
Siamo all鈥檌nizio degli anni Sessanta e la coppia si direbbe muoversi esattamente contro corrente, o in ritardo sui tempi.
Pablo Picasso: Maternit脿 (madre e figlio), 1901.
Per realizzare il sogno, dopo le nozze comprano una grande casa vittoriana in campagna dove la famiglia potr脿 crescere prospera e felice. E, ovviamente, rinunciano a qualsiasi contraccettivo.
I primi quattro figli arrivano in serie, due maschi e due femmine. Le cose vanno per il verso giusto. Entrambi i lati della famiglia, i parenti tutti si stringono festosi ed entusiasti intorno alla coppia, anche generosamente disponibili ad aiutarli e supportarli economicamente.
Pablo Picasso: Madre e figlio, 1903.
Harriet dopo le prime quattro gravidanze senza sosta vorrebbe rallentare un attimo, prendersi un periodo di pausa. Ma invece rimane incinta per la quinta volta.
E questa volta 猫 molto diversa dalle precedenti quattro: il bambino nella sua pancia si agita e scalcia come volesse demolirla. Lei finisce col sentirsi isolata: nel loro patto di matrimonio, David e Harriett non avevano contemplato dolore, cupore, malinconia, tristezza, preoccupazione.
Pablo Picasso: Madre e figlio, 1903.
La creatura che nasce 猫 strana alquanto. E infatti, 猫 pi霉 facile definirlo 鈥榗reatura鈥� che bambino: ha pelle e occhi di colore strano, giallastro. Sostanzialmente, 猫 brutto. Inoltre, Ben, questo 猫 il nome scelto per lui, si dimostra presto aggressivo e violento, aspetto che non aiuta a farsi amare.
Quel nido d鈥檃more e gioia familiare 猫 pi霉 che turbato: 猫 letteralmente sconvolto. Si allontanano tutti, compresi i primi quattro figli, che si trasferiscono a vivere altrove.
Pablo Picasso: Madre e figlio acrobati, 1905.
Per salvare la situazione David decide che ben va internato in un istituto. Ma Harriett comprende che quel luogo 猫 in realt脿 una tomba, un lager di sterminio per diversi e deformi che vengono eliminati a furia di maltrattamenti - 猫 dove la normalit脿 si difende dall鈥檃normalit脿 - contro il volere di David 鈥� e finir脿 col perdere anche lui 鈥� Harriett torna a riprendersi Ben. Il quinto figlio.
Pablo Picasso: Famiglia di acrobati con scimmia, 1905.
Doris Lessing ci conduce in un territorio inquietante e disturbante dove non sembrano esistere verit脿 cui aggrapparsi, fari che illuminano il cammino. 脠 brava a lasciarci in sospeso, appesi a questa sua storia tra la fantascienza e la distopia per quanto nell鈥檃ssoluta contemporaneit脿 del suo setting.
Ben sembra arrivato da un altro spazio, un alieno, oppure da un altro tempo, una creatura primordiale: come se dagli albori della vita sulla terra fosse stato scagliato in piena fine del XX secolo (1988 猫 l鈥檃nno di pubblicazione). Compie gesti che sembrano pura brutalit脿 primitiva, e mettono raccapriccio, generano orrore. Impossibile non pensare al Frankenstein di Mary Shelley.
Pablo Picasso: Maternit脿, 1905.
Harriett si accartoccia nel senso di colpa, incapace di capire chi sia realmente Ben, quale sia la sua vera natura, piombata dalla preistoria o venuta da un altro mondo.
Lessing 猫 brava a sfatare il mito della maternit脿 come realizzazione di una donna; 猫 brava a mettere sulla griglia la societ脿 del tempo, edonistica, ma anche convinta di essere la migliore, l鈥檃pice dell鈥檈voluzione. Al punto che qui e l脿 ci si chiede se sia Ben che si comporta male, o sono quelli intorni che lo considerano malvagio.
Pablo Picasso: Madre e figlio, 1907.
O ancora, e forse pi霉, sar脿 mica la societ脿 che lo spinge su quella china? Ben ha animo selvaggio, o 猫 la mancanza d鈥檃more che lo emargina e rende violento? Chi tra i due elementi 猫 pi霉 spietato?
Lessing lascia aperte porte e finestre senza porgere appigli, stimolando ipotesi mentre genera dubbi e domande.
Pablo Picasso: Madre e figlio, 1921.
Pablo Picasso: Maternit脿 con mela, 1971.
January 22, 2022
It was the summer of 2013 when a friend of mine, who is an English teacher, asked me how I would teach 鈥淭he Fifth Child鈥�. Since I knew nothing about the book nor had it, she sent me a PDF copy and here I am, after an unsettling but fascinating reading, asking myself the same question: what key of lecture could I offer? Because it is, undoubtedly, worth reading. A little masterpiece about the fragility of happiness and the illusion of the security provided by family, as the author herself said in an interview:
''I do have a sense, and I've never not had it, of how easily things can vanish. It's a sense of disaster. I know where it comes from 鈥� my upbringing. That damn First World War, which rode my entire childhood, because my father was so damaged by it. This damn war rammed down my throat day and night, and then World War II coming, which they talked about all the time. You know, you can never get out from under this kind of upbringing, the continual obsession with this. And after all, it's true. These wars did arise, and destroyed a beautiful household with all the loving children.''
This 鈥渟ense of disaster鈥� becomes Ben, the main character of this urban gothic story that shows not only how we get used to our misfortunes but how we even protect and nourish them.
I remember Freud said somewhere that society is not comfortable with happy families, because, being strongly attached to one another, they tend to cut themselves off from others. This is why civilization imposes all sorts of taboos, laws, customs and other restrictions that ultimately separate the members of the family.
Is Ben the embodiment of war and other evils society continuously pours over the individual? Or is he truly the embodiment of all unhappiness man tries to fight during his life? Or maybe the unknown that irrationally frightens us so much we need to reject it without really looking into it?
For here he comes, like a bad apple, in a family that, despite all pessimistic predictions, was living the dream, in a big house full of family and friends, sheltered until his arrival from the 鈥渟torms of the world鈥�. Here he comes, the 鈥淣eanderthal baby鈥�, the troll, the goblin, the gnome, result of who knows what primitive gene lost in his parents bodies. Not wanted, not expected and definitely not loved, he insinuates into the Lovatts鈥� life, changing it forever:
It is how misery strikes, isn't it? Like an incurable disease, it appears in the middle of joy, takes over little by little until it becomes the absolute king of a brand-new sorrowful kingdom. Why? Because it is more natural for mankind to suffer than to be happy. Or so Harriet thinks:
And once acquainted with grief, it is almost impossible to separate from it. That could explain why Harriet cannot bear the thought of Ben trapped in an institution that would ultimately kill him, even if she had wished him dead many times, and goes and rescues him, thus completing the family breakdown:
So, to return to my previous questions: is 鈥淭he Fifth Child鈥� about the vocation of misfortune which seems to be the fate of humanity? Or is it about the external pressures, social, political, even medical ones that would determine this misfortune? In other words, is the evil within us or outside us? Moreover, do we indulge in our suffering, wherever it comes from?
Because, unfortunately, one thing is certain: there is always a Ben somewhere waiting in the background, ready to spoil things. Beware if you can!
''I do have a sense, and I've never not had it, of how easily things can vanish. It's a sense of disaster. I know where it comes from 鈥� my upbringing. That damn First World War, which rode my entire childhood, because my father was so damaged by it. This damn war rammed down my throat day and night, and then World War II coming, which they talked about all the time. You know, you can never get out from under this kind of upbringing, the continual obsession with this. And after all, it's true. These wars did arise, and destroyed a beautiful household with all the loving children.''
This 鈥渟ense of disaster鈥� becomes Ben, the main character of this urban gothic story that shows not only how we get used to our misfortunes but how we even protect and nourish them.
I remember Freud said somewhere that society is not comfortable with happy families, because, being strongly attached to one another, they tend to cut themselves off from others. This is why civilization imposes all sorts of taboos, laws, customs and other restrictions that ultimately separate the members of the family.
Is Ben the embodiment of war and other evils society continuously pours over the individual? Or is he truly the embodiment of all unhappiness man tries to fight during his life? Or maybe the unknown that irrationally frightens us so much we need to reject it without really looking into it?
For here he comes, like a bad apple, in a family that, despite all pessimistic predictions, was living the dream, in a big house full of family and friends, sheltered until his arrival from the 鈥渟torms of the world鈥�. Here he comes, the 鈥淣eanderthal baby鈥�, the troll, the goblin, the gnome, result of who knows what primitive gene lost in his parents bodies. Not wanted, not expected and definitely not loved, he insinuates into the Lovatts鈥� life, changing it forever:
'The trouble is, you get used to hell,' said Harriet. 'After a day with Ben I feel as if nothing exists but him. As if nothing has ever existed. I suddenly realize I haven't remembered the others for hours.'
It is how misery strikes, isn't it? Like an incurable disease, it appears in the middle of joy, takes over little by little until it becomes the absolute king of a brand-new sorrowful kingdom. Why? Because it is more natural for mankind to suffer than to be happy. Or so Harriet thinks:
She said to David, 'We are being punished, that's all.'
'What for?' he demanded, already on guard because there was a tone in her voice he hated.
'For presuming. For thinking we could be happy. Happy because we decided we would be.'
And once acquainted with grief, it is almost impossible to separate from it. That could explain why Harriet cannot bear the thought of Ben trapped in an institution that would ultimately kill him, even if she had wished him dead many times, and goes and rescues him, thus completing the family breakdown:
Around and around and around: if I had let him die, then all of us, so many people, would have been happy, but I could not do it, and therefore...
So, to return to my previous questions: is 鈥淭he Fifth Child鈥� about the vocation of misfortune which seems to be the fate of humanity? Or is it about the external pressures, social, political, even medical ones that would determine this misfortune? In other words, is the evil within us or outside us? Moreover, do we indulge in our suffering, wherever it comes from?
Because, unfortunately, one thing is certain: there is always a Ben somewhere waiting in the background, ready to spoil things. Beware if you can!
February 14, 2020
The Selfish Gene Pool
My mother had six live births. The eggs didn鈥檛 get any better as they went on. Neither did the quality of family life. I don鈥檛 know if she actually wanted all those children or was forced into her situation by religion and a high libido husband. In either case it wore her out and I think she came to regret imposing all these fairly strange people on the world.
It seems to be unacceptable in much polite company to point out that the urge to procreate is as necessary to constrain as any other. I think this is Lessing鈥檚 point. The desire for children, for a family life filled with one鈥檚 offspring and the emotional satisfaction of their presence is as subject to excess, perversion, and rationalisation as any other.
Let鈥檚 face it: there are no good reasons to produce children. They are expensive, emotionally and physically exhausting, destructive of the relationships which produced them, a continuing drain on the world鈥檚 (including the grandparents鈥�) limited resources, and they, of course, are likely to contribute to an indefinite extension of this situation into an infinite future.
And all that is the best case scenario. Nature and nurture combine forces not infrequently to produce people who actually don鈥檛 contribute an iota to the world鈥檚 happiness quotient. The odds are that the more children one has the more likely there will be a genetic, psychological, or behavioural defect in the bunch. There are orders of magnitude more homicidal criminals than potential Nobel laureates in the world. As I said: the eggs don鈥檛 get any better. Neither does their care.
Neither happiness, nor any other sort of 鈥榝ulfilment鈥� is an inalienable right of any human being. The pursuit of happiness may be sanctioned by law and democratic tradition, but this is merely license to invent fantasies which are almost always Ill-conceived and require the sacrifice of others in order to be achieved. They are the stuff of neuroses, economic externalities, and inevitable disappointments. Pursuing happiness - particularly by creating a large family - is a mug鈥檚 game. The only winners are psychiatrists, self-help gurus, and divorce lawyers. And, although smug, none of them are likely to be happy either.
I鈥檓 betting that if transhumanism ever really becomes a thing, the machines will be savvy enough to eliminate reproduction entirely.
My mother had six live births. The eggs didn鈥檛 get any better as they went on. Neither did the quality of family life. I don鈥檛 know if she actually wanted all those children or was forced into her situation by religion and a high libido husband. In either case it wore her out and I think she came to regret imposing all these fairly strange people on the world.
It seems to be unacceptable in much polite company to point out that the urge to procreate is as necessary to constrain as any other. I think this is Lessing鈥檚 point. The desire for children, for a family life filled with one鈥檚 offspring and the emotional satisfaction of their presence is as subject to excess, perversion, and rationalisation as any other.
Let鈥檚 face it: there are no good reasons to produce children. They are expensive, emotionally and physically exhausting, destructive of the relationships which produced them, a continuing drain on the world鈥檚 (including the grandparents鈥�) limited resources, and they, of course, are likely to contribute to an indefinite extension of this situation into an infinite future.
And all that is the best case scenario. Nature and nurture combine forces not infrequently to produce people who actually don鈥檛 contribute an iota to the world鈥檚 happiness quotient. The odds are that the more children one has the more likely there will be a genetic, psychological, or behavioural defect in the bunch. There are orders of magnitude more homicidal criminals than potential Nobel laureates in the world. As I said: the eggs don鈥檛 get any better. Neither does their care.
Neither happiness, nor any other sort of 鈥榝ulfilment鈥� is an inalienable right of any human being. The pursuit of happiness may be sanctioned by law and democratic tradition, but this is merely license to invent fantasies which are almost always Ill-conceived and require the sacrifice of others in order to be achieved. They are the stuff of neuroses, economic externalities, and inevitable disappointments. Pursuing happiness - particularly by creating a large family - is a mug鈥檚 game. The only winners are psychiatrists, self-help gurus, and divorce lawyers. And, although smug, none of them are likely to be happy either.
I鈥檓 betting that if transhumanism ever really becomes a thing, the machines will be savvy enough to eliminate reproduction entirely.
December 11, 2023
Harriet and David work in the same company. She is a graphic designer, and he is an architect. They love each other, decide to marry, and promise to have many children.
Their choice stopped on a massive building in the suburbs of London. Pregnancies follow one another quickly in a joyous house, always complete, family celebrations bringing together the couple's parents and brothers and sisters, each attracted by the harmony. But, unfortunately, the birth of Ben, the fifth child, arrived too soon after the last delivery, tossing the lives of all into discomfort as powerful as indefinable. Declared sane by doctors, Ben does not look like a classic baby and combines incredible strength with great violence. Moreover, his mother can not help but compare him to a troll.
This novel is reminiscent of Rosemary's baby; even though Ben is not an emanation of the Devil, as in the story of Ira Levin, he is transforming family life into hell. With a crescendo of tension, the Fifth Child plunges us into a world all the more frightening than it is commonplace: that of maladjusted children, poorly accepted in a conservative and individualistic society where the animality of Ben, present in any man, can only express itself through violence鈥攁 beautiful story by Doris Lessing about the myth of the perfect family.
Their choice stopped on a massive building in the suburbs of London. Pregnancies follow one another quickly in a joyous house, always complete, family celebrations bringing together the couple's parents and brothers and sisters, each attracted by the harmony. But, unfortunately, the birth of Ben, the fifth child, arrived too soon after the last delivery, tossing the lives of all into discomfort as powerful as indefinable. Declared sane by doctors, Ben does not look like a classic baby and combines incredible strength with great violence. Moreover, his mother can not help but compare him to a troll.
This novel is reminiscent of Rosemary's baby; even though Ben is not an emanation of the Devil, as in the story of Ira Levin, he is transforming family life into hell. With a crescendo of tension, the Fifth Child plunges us into a world all the more frightening than it is commonplace: that of maladjusted children, poorly accepted in a conservative and individualistic society where the animality of Ben, present in any man, can only express itself through violence鈥攁 beautiful story by Doris Lessing about the myth of the perfect family.
April 17, 2018
丕賱卮毓賵乇 丕賱賯賵賷 丕賱匕賷 睾賲乇賳賷 賴賵
丕賱鬲毓噩亘 賲賳 賳賷賱 丿賵乇賷爻 賱賷爻賷賳噩 賳賵亘賱
賮丕賱乇賵丕賷丞 兀賯賱 賲賳 毓丕丿賷丞
賵賱賲 兀卮毓乇 賲毓賴丕 亘兀賷 丕亘丿丕毓 鬲賯乇賷亘丕
賱賷爻鬲 爻賷卅丞 賳毓賲
賵乇亘賲丕 賱賱賲丐賱賮丞 賰鬲亘 兀賴賲
賵賱賰賳賳賷 賱爻鬲 賲鬲丨賮夭丞 賱賱賯乇丕亍丞 賱賴丕 賲噩丿丿丕
爻賷胤乇 毓賱賷 卮毓賵乇 乇亘賲丕 賷亘丿賵 賮賰丕賴賷丕
卮毓乇鬲購 亘兀賳賳賷 胤賵丕賱 丕賱賯乇丕亍丞 兀噩賱爻 兀賲丕賲 卮丕卮丞 鬲賱賮丕夭
賵兀卮丕賴丿 賮賷賱賲丕 鬲賱賷賮夭賷賵賳賷丕 賲賲賱丕 賯賱賷賱丕 賵賯丿賷賲
賵賮賷賴 丕賱鬲乇噩賲丞 鬲馗賴乇 亘丕賱亘賳胤 丕賱毓乇賷囟 噩丿丕 賰賲丕 賰丕賳 丕賱丨丕賱 賮賷 丕賮賱丕賲 丕賱鬲爻毓賷賳丕鬲
亘丕禺鬲氐丕乇 賱丕 兀乇卮丨賴丕 賱兀丨丿
丕賱鬲毓噩亘 賲賳 賳賷賱 丿賵乇賷爻 賱賷爻賷賳噩 賳賵亘賱
賮丕賱乇賵丕賷丞 兀賯賱 賲賳 毓丕丿賷丞
賵賱賲 兀卮毓乇 賲毓賴丕 亘兀賷 丕亘丿丕毓 鬲賯乇賷亘丕
賱賷爻鬲 爻賷卅丞 賳毓賲
賵乇亘賲丕 賱賱賲丐賱賮丞 賰鬲亘 兀賴賲
賵賱賰賳賳賷 賱爻鬲 賲鬲丨賮夭丞 賱賱賯乇丕亍丞 賱賴丕 賲噩丿丿丕
爻賷胤乇 毓賱賷 卮毓賵乇 乇亘賲丕 賷亘丿賵 賮賰丕賴賷丕
卮毓乇鬲購 亘兀賳賳賷 胤賵丕賱 丕賱賯乇丕亍丞 兀噩賱爻 兀賲丕賲 卮丕卮丞 鬲賱賮丕夭
賵兀卮丕賴丿 賮賷賱賲丕 鬲賱賷賮夭賷賵賳賷丕 賲賲賱丕 賯賱賷賱丕 賵賯丿賷賲
賵賮賷賴 丕賱鬲乇噩賲丞 鬲馗賴乇 亘丕賱亘賳胤 丕賱毓乇賷囟 噩丿丕 賰賲丕 賰丕賳 丕賱丨丕賱 賮賷 丕賮賱丕賲 丕賱鬲爻毓賷賳丕鬲
亘丕禺鬲氐丕乇 賱丕 兀乇卮丨賴丕 賱兀丨丿
July 18, 2020
All Harriet and David Lovatt ever wanted was a happy marriage and a big house filled with children.听 For a few years, things played out their way, four great kids, and a house that virtually glowed with warmth and love.听 It was not until Harriet's next pregnancy that darkness begins its inevitable descent.听 The fifth child produced seems to be a different breed altogether.听 What better hiding place than inside a mother's womb?听 I'm sure all babies are different, but this one is unsettling in the extreme.听 Very strong and with a voracious appetite, he frightens his siblings and causes a rift between his parents that may be impossible to mend.
January 24, 2022
Videorecensione:
Ogni scarrafone potr脿 essere bello a mamma sua, ma a volte ci sono delle conseguenze.
Romanzo gelidissimo e di un'angoscia strisciante e tesissima.
Davvero un gioiellino.
Ogni scarrafone potr脿 essere bello a mamma sua, ma a volte ci sono delle conseguenze.
Romanzo gelidissimo e di un'angoscia strisciante e tesissima.
Davvero un gioiellino.
Read
March 18, 2021This is a story about a woman who gives birth to a troll.
It is neither charming nor delightful.
It reminded me of Peter the Great, although he didn't give birth to a troll.
You know he founded the City of St.Petersburg and designed it to have lots of canals because the Dutch were the most modern nation and they had lots of canals - though naturally it wouldn't have been expressed like that, perhaps he would have said that his new city required an appropriate transport infrastructure to meet the needs of an Imperial capital and to so future proof it against the inevitable challenges of the 1720s. Then he founded a Kunstkammer - a collection of curiosities, this you can still visit at your leisure in exchange for a small sum of money and see such odd things as the skeleton of an eight legged sheep - in life according to the reconstruction it only had six, two of the legs were undescended, which I imagine was pretty uncomfortable. In addition to this there are lots of deformed babies picked in jars, on some days an extra chamber is opened where in exchange for a little more money one can see even more deformed babies. Some are simple to describe - just conjoined, and unable to survive in anno domini 1713 or whenever precisely it was, the rest are just much weirder.
Lessing here takes that kind of idea that there is human variation that we see around us and we are used to, but that there is also a degree of variation that we maybe know about like say the so called Elephant Man which is a little beyond our comfort zone and then if that can exist then why not something else, much nastier and stranger - in fact a troll or something very much like it.
Reading this story again I noticed that it took a long time until the fifth, the troll child of the married couple came into the story, a third of the way - and then that as pregnancy - which as you might expect is unpleasantly trollish.
Given the long slow build up of couple formation, dwelling acquisition, family breeding, I might be tempted to believe that Madame Lessing initially was minded to write something more conventional but then decided to move off at a tangent. Nor do I think I would have pegged this as the work of a nobel prize winning author, yet at the time there is an impressive ease and grace in which she manages the timeline from the late 1960s to late 1980s without awkwardness or any sense of clumsy, abrupt jumps.
The story ends with the fifth child - the troll one an adolescent, the mother (we experience the story mostly from her point of view) not so much frightened by the child and what it might do so much as accepting that he is capable of any violent act.
Through this troll-child Lessing toys with the idea of a literal criminal recidivism, not a criminal under class, but a criminal under species, genetically asocial, satisfied and aroused through violence.
Perhaps the long build up with its careful class details, and one could say the troll child is the physical manifestation of their selfish snobbish aspirations or a humorous retort to them, sharpens the eventual threat of how a simple desire to fill a big house full of children can be destroyed through some genetic reversion to the mean, bringing forth not simply the Neanderthal or Denisovian hidden in our genes but something far bleaker.
Certainly walking up the road even in sunlight I was extra jumpy when I heard unexpected sounds on the other side of the hedge.
Uncanny, unheimlich.
It is neither charming nor delightful.
It reminded me of Peter the Great, although he didn't give birth to a troll.
You know he founded the City of St.Petersburg and designed it to have lots of canals because the Dutch were the most modern nation and they had lots of canals - though naturally it wouldn't have been expressed like that, perhaps he would have said that his new city required an appropriate transport infrastructure to meet the needs of an Imperial capital and to so future proof it against the inevitable challenges of the 1720s. Then he founded a Kunstkammer - a collection of curiosities, this you can still visit at your leisure in exchange for a small sum of money and see such odd things as the skeleton of an eight legged sheep - in life according to the reconstruction it only had six, two of the legs were undescended, which I imagine was pretty uncomfortable. In addition to this there are lots of deformed babies picked in jars, on some days an extra chamber is opened where in exchange for a little more money one can see even more deformed babies. Some are simple to describe - just conjoined, and unable to survive in anno domini 1713 or whenever precisely it was, the rest are just much weirder.
Lessing here takes that kind of idea that there is human variation that we see around us and we are used to, but that there is also a degree of variation that we maybe know about like say the so called Elephant Man which is a little beyond our comfort zone and then if that can exist then why not something else, much nastier and stranger - in fact a troll or something very much like it.
Reading this story again I noticed that it took a long time until the fifth, the troll child of the married couple came into the story, a third of the way - and then that as pregnancy - which as you might expect is unpleasantly trollish.
Given the long slow build up of couple formation, dwelling acquisition, family breeding, I might be tempted to believe that Madame Lessing initially was minded to write something more conventional but then decided to move off at a tangent. Nor do I think I would have pegged this as the work of a nobel prize winning author, yet at the time there is an impressive ease and grace in which she manages the timeline from the late 1960s to late 1980s without awkwardness or any sense of clumsy, abrupt jumps.
The story ends with the fifth child - the troll one an adolescent, the mother (we experience the story mostly from her point of view) not so much frightened by the child and what it might do so much as accepting that he is capable of any violent act.
Through this troll-child Lessing toys with the idea of a literal criminal recidivism, not a criminal under class, but a criminal under species, genetically asocial, satisfied and aroused through violence.
Perhaps the long build up with its careful class details, and one could say the troll child is the physical manifestation of their selfish snobbish aspirations or a humorous retort to them, sharpens the eventual threat of how a simple desire to fill a big house full of children can be destroyed through some genetic reversion to the mean, bringing forth not simply the Neanderthal or Denisovian hidden in our genes but something far bleaker.
Certainly walking up the road even in sunlight I was extra jumpy when I heard unexpected sounds on the other side of the hedge.
Uncanny, unheimlich.
September 2, 2022
4/5 Estrellas
Creo que esta noche he tenido pesadillas con Ben.....pobre Ben o maldito engendro. Gran creaci贸n que despierta en el lector toda clase de sentimientos encontrados.
Brutal como transforma la escritora un comienzo buc贸lico, donde retrata la construcci贸n de una familia por parte de una pareja al estilo tradicional, casa grande, muchos hijos, todos felices como conejos reproductores, un poco jetas, porque una gran parte de este edificio id铆lico y un poco de cart贸n piedra, se mantiene gracias a las ayudas monetarias y directas (arrimando el hombro) de gran parte de sus familiares, que ya no saben como decirles que paren la m谩quina de hacer hijos, aunque tambi茅n disfrutan de las reuniones de la gran familia feliz.
Sin embargo, llega Ben, el quinto. Pocas veces un personaje me ha impactado tanto. En alg煤n p谩rrafo hasta te da pena. c贸mo es y lo que le hacen...en otros sientes sus ojos verde-amarillentos sobre ti y quieres salir corriendo.....y el id铆lico y fastuoso edificio familiar se viene abajo de forma estrepitosa....驴Porqu茅 no pudieron parar en el 4潞?
4 estrellas porque, sobre todo el inicio, no est谩 a la altura del trepidante derrumbamiento familiar central.
Vamos, que me he apuntado el siguiente donde cuenta c贸mo le va en la vida a Ben. Por las cr铆ticas parece que no est谩 a la altura de este, pero me pica la curiosidad.
Creo que esta noche he tenido pesadillas con Ben.....pobre Ben o maldito engendro. Gran creaci贸n que despierta en el lector toda clase de sentimientos encontrados.
Brutal como transforma la escritora un comienzo buc贸lico, donde retrata la construcci贸n de una familia por parte de una pareja al estilo tradicional, casa grande, muchos hijos, todos felices como conejos reproductores, un poco jetas, porque una gran parte de este edificio id铆lico y un poco de cart贸n piedra, se mantiene gracias a las ayudas monetarias y directas (arrimando el hombro) de gran parte de sus familiares, que ya no saben como decirles que paren la m谩quina de hacer hijos, aunque tambi茅n disfrutan de las reuniones de la gran familia feliz.
Sin embargo, llega Ben, el quinto. Pocas veces un personaje me ha impactado tanto. En alg煤n p谩rrafo hasta te da pena. c贸mo es y lo que le hacen...en otros sientes sus ojos verde-amarillentos sobre ti y quieres salir corriendo.....y el id铆lico y fastuoso edificio familiar se viene abajo de forma estrepitosa....驴Porqu茅 no pudieron parar en el 4潞?
4 estrellas porque, sobre todo el inicio, no est谩 a la altura del trepidante derrumbamiento familiar central.
Vamos, que me he apuntado el siguiente donde cuenta c贸mo le va en la vida a Ben. Por las cr铆ticas parece que no est谩 a la altura de este, pero me pica la curiosidad.
December 31, 2019
Hey, ya know that ugly devil baby-in-arms in that one impressionable scene in "Passion of the Christ"? Yeah, well, he's here, here in the middle of this taut, mesmerizing novella, growing up and ripping his innocent family to shreds.
Well, he says "Hi."
Well, he says "Hi."
November 18, 2022
Doris Lessing submerges us in a true nightmare of a story in 鈥楾he Fifth Child鈥�. You could call this a horror story, but I did not detect anything supernatural about the fifth child, Ben. Ben is just a horrifying being and a total destructor, although he cannot be blamed for being who he is. He was born an alien creature. Ben was already acting in a horrific way in his mother鈥檚 womb. Harriet and David, his parents, had an exceptionally happy family life in their big manor house with their four children and lots of family visiting. Nothing but fun, sunshine and happiness. Then Ben arrives and plummets their sunny existence into a terrific nightmare. Doris Lessing was such an exceptional writer and she manages to convey the horrific atmosphere of the desintegration of the family very convincingly. This novel is certainly one of her exceptional books as far as I am concerned. Warning: pretty upsetting tale.
September 5, 2021
** Spoilers **
What a slippery, open-to-ambiguity, little story this is! I've seen review after review that reads this as a horror story of the perfect family destroyed by a monstrous child, with the inevitable gestures towards and . But, to me, Lessing is doing something far smarter and more politically-engaged here: Harriet and David may not be narrators but we do see the story via their viewpoints, especially Harriet's. The extent to which we choose to share their values, worldview, implicit politics and, by extension, their understanding and placement of Ben will inflect, even control, the way we either accept and are complicit with their story, or resist and destabilise it, finding an altogether different narrative nestled within the book, one congruent with Lessing's own unashamedly left-wing politics.
From the second sentence of the opening page, Harriet and David are skewered: they are both 'conservative, old-fashioned, not to say obsolescent', and while David is 'better' than Harriet in class terms (his father builds yachts flitting around from the Riviera to the Caribbean, of course David was educated at fee-paying schools), the two of them agree they want to have hordes of children... five...six...ten. Accordingly, and despite David's mediocre salary, they buy a huge 3-floor house (plus loft conversion, natch!) in the suburbs of London with six bedrooms, 4 rooms on the floor above and 'an enormous attic' - and David's yacht-building father picks up the entire mortgage, as well as dropping off additional cheques throughout the story. And when Harriet has four children in four years and can't get on with any of the local 'help' because they're all 'lazy', she co-opts her mother as a home help (unpaid, of course) till even her mother rebels: 'I'm your servant... you're very selfish, both of you. You are irresponsible'.
And if that weren't enough to make Lessing's views of her characters clear, there's their whole response to Harriet's sister's Down's Syndrome baby:
Harriet said to David, privately, that she did not believe it was bad luck: Sarah and William's unhappiness, their quarrelling, had probably attracted the mongol child - yes, yes, of course she knew one shouldn't call them mongol. But the little girl did look a bit like Genghis Khan, didn't she?
This is made especially heinous since Amy is probably the nicest, sweetest, most loving, unjudgmental and accepting character in the book and the others could learn much from her. William's rejection of his daughter ('he was distressed by physical disability, and his new daughter, the Down's Syndrome baby, appalled him') is a foretaste of David's own disowning of his son about to be born:
"He's a little child," she said. "He's our child."
"No, he's not," said David, finally. "Well, he's certainly not mine."
The point, then, is that in no way did I ever buy into the surface scenario discussed in the blurb and review after review that this is a perfect family about to be blown apart - they are reactionary, obnoxious, selfish, irresponsible, entitled and quite vile. Harriet's sisters and mother call them out at times, especially in Angela's mocking asides on how rich people live, but it's subtly done.
Into this privileged world comes baby Ben: rough, tough, huge, loud, and insatiably hungry. And I'm going to put the next chunk in spoilers.
So, for me, this isn't a supernatural horror or Gothic story but instead one which looks at how a family turns against its own, creating an alienated individual who is the scapegoat for all kinds of ills. Is it also an allegory of 'class war'? Lessing was a member of the Communist Party for years, and though she did get disillusioned with, especially, Stalinism, she never lost her social activism or sense of social justice. Is Ben, then, an avatar for the forces that might, from the inside, disrupt bourgeois values, standards and mores? Harriet and David were already described as 'obsolescent' from the opening page - is this the harbinger of their demise? Or the start of their fight-back? Is this, I wonder, a covert response to the Thatcherite government which, in 1988 when this was published, had been in power for eight years?
A marvellously cunning and ambiguous piece of writing, short on pages but rich, dense and - I'd suggest - far more socially engaged and politicised than might at first appear.
Luke explained. "They're sending Ben away because he isn't really one of us."
What a slippery, open-to-ambiguity, little story this is! I've seen review after review that reads this as a horror story of the perfect family destroyed by a monstrous child, with the inevitable gestures towards and . But, to me, Lessing is doing something far smarter and more politically-engaged here: Harriet and David may not be narrators but we do see the story via their viewpoints, especially Harriet's. The extent to which we choose to share their values, worldview, implicit politics and, by extension, their understanding and placement of Ben will inflect, even control, the way we either accept and are complicit with their story, or resist and destabilise it, finding an altogether different narrative nestled within the book, one congruent with Lessing's own unashamedly left-wing politics.
From the second sentence of the opening page, Harriet and David are skewered: they are both 'conservative, old-fashioned, not to say obsolescent', and while David is 'better' than Harriet in class terms (his father builds yachts flitting around from the Riviera to the Caribbean, of course David was educated at fee-paying schools), the two of them agree they want to have hordes of children... five...six...ten. Accordingly, and despite David's mediocre salary, they buy a huge 3-floor house (plus loft conversion, natch!) in the suburbs of London with six bedrooms, 4 rooms on the floor above and 'an enormous attic' - and David's yacht-building father picks up the entire mortgage, as well as dropping off additional cheques throughout the story. And when Harriet has four children in four years and can't get on with any of the local 'help' because they're all 'lazy', she co-opts her mother as a home help (unpaid, of course) till even her mother rebels: 'I'm your servant... you're very selfish, both of you. You are irresponsible'.
And if that weren't enough to make Lessing's views of her characters clear, there's their whole response to Harriet's sister's Down's Syndrome baby:
Harriet said to David, privately, that she did not believe it was bad luck: Sarah and William's unhappiness, their quarrelling, had probably attracted the mongol child - yes, yes, of course she knew one shouldn't call them mongol. But the little girl did look a bit like Genghis Khan, didn't she?
This is made especially heinous since Amy is probably the nicest, sweetest, most loving, unjudgmental and accepting character in the book and the others could learn much from her. William's rejection of his daughter ('he was distressed by physical disability, and his new daughter, the Down's Syndrome baby, appalled him') is a foretaste of David's own disowning of his son about to be born:
"He's a little child," she said. "He's our child."
"No, he's not," said David, finally. "Well, he's certainly not mine."
The point, then, is that in no way did I ever buy into the surface scenario discussed in the blurb and review after review that this is a perfect family about to be blown apart - they are reactionary, obnoxious, selfish, irresponsible, entitled and quite vile. Harriet's sisters and mother call them out at times, especially in Angela's mocking asides on how rich people live, but it's subtly done.
Into this privileged world comes baby Ben: rough, tough, huge, loud, and insatiably hungry. And I'm going to put the next chunk in spoilers.
So, for me, this isn't a supernatural horror or Gothic story but instead one which looks at how a family turns against its own, creating an alienated individual who is the scapegoat for all kinds of ills. Is it also an allegory of 'class war'? Lessing was a member of the Communist Party for years, and though she did get disillusioned with, especially, Stalinism, she never lost her social activism or sense of social justice. Is Ben, then, an avatar for the forces that might, from the inside, disrupt bourgeois values, standards and mores? Harriet and David were already described as 'obsolescent' from the opening page - is this the harbinger of their demise? Or the start of their fight-back? Is this, I wonder, a covert response to the Thatcherite government which, in 1988 when this was published, had been in power for eight years?
A marvellously cunning and ambiguous piece of writing, short on pages but rich, dense and - I'd suggest - far more socially engaged and politicised than might at first appear.
October 4, 2023
It's the 1960's in London when David and Harriet meet at an office soiree. Neither really wants to be there, both introverted and rather conservative, so when they begin to converse they realize they have found a kindred spirit in one another. They quickly marry and move in together buying a house "the size of a hotel" in order to have enough space for the at least eight children they plan to have. They will be the happiest of all couples, they are sure of it.
And it really does seem like they are happy with the birth of their first son Luke, followed by Helen, Jane, and Paul. Family and friends are in and out with plenty of space for them to stay as long as they like. The holidays and summer break are a jubilant time with food and drink a plenty.
Then Harriet falls pregnant with their fifth child. This pregnancy is not like the others. It's as if the baby is trying to kick his way out at only three months along. As the months roll on the pain only gets worse and she is praying for an early labor.
Then the day comes when baby Ben is born and it is obvious that he will not be like the other children. He is ugly and ferocious, frightening anyone that spends time with him. As he grows older things only become more difficult.
A chilling little story that I am so happy to check off my TBR list as it has been on there forever. I thought for such a slim novel this really packed a punch. Though for those of you that are trying to become pregnant, are pregnant, or have recently had a baby: HEED MY WARNING AND SKIP THIS! 4 stars!
Thanks to me for buying this for me! 馃槈
And it really does seem like they are happy with the birth of their first son Luke, followed by Helen, Jane, and Paul. Family and friends are in and out with plenty of space for them to stay as long as they like. The holidays and summer break are a jubilant time with food and drink a plenty.
Then Harriet falls pregnant with their fifth child. This pregnancy is not like the others. It's as if the baby is trying to kick his way out at only three months along. As the months roll on the pain only gets worse and she is praying for an early labor.
Then the day comes when baby Ben is born and it is obvious that he will not be like the other children. He is ugly and ferocious, frightening anyone that spends time with him. As he grows older things only become more difficult.
A chilling little story that I am so happy to check off my TBR list as it has been on there forever. I thought for such a slim novel this really packed a punch. Though for those of you that are trying to become pregnant, are pregnant, or have recently had a baby: HEED MY WARNING AND SKIP THIS! 4 stars!
Thanks to me for buying this for me! 馃槈
November 2, 2022
No matter the intentions of the author or the expectations of the reader, this book is doing its own thing. It is such a rare experience to meet a book like this one, that it was hard to stop reading.听
It starts as a black comedy, with two "eccentric" conservatives ( Ha. That's a new one) who instantly decide to get married and make a lot of children ( ten they want). :))
And for the first four, all things are ... normal.
However, the fifth child brings out the horror.
"She fantasized that she took the big kitchen knife, cut open her stomach, lifted out the child."
And then in the second half, you ask yourself who is the monster.
There aren't easy answers to find here.
This was my first Doris Lessing. She knows what a journey is all about. Saw an interview with her and discovered that she wanted to write about goblins in this one. :))
I appreciate that my reading life can still find such ... delightful surprises.
It starts as a black comedy, with two "eccentric" conservatives ( Ha. That's a new one) who instantly decide to get married and make a lot of children ( ten they want). :))
And for the first four, all things are ... normal.
However, the fifth child brings out the horror.
"She fantasized that she took the big kitchen knife, cut open her stomach, lifted out the child."
And then in the second half, you ask yourself who is the monster.
There aren't easy answers to find here.
This was my first Doris Lessing. She knows what a journey is all about. Saw an interview with her and discovered that she wanted to write about goblins in this one. :))
I appreciate that my reading life can still find such ... delightful surprises.
May 2, 2008
This novel was disturbing on so many levels. It was supposed to have started out with this great couple who had all these wonderful family ideals, until the fifth child came along who was really tough to take (and basically a commentary on society's reaction to such a different child). However, I never saw the couple as having a great marriage. The only testament to any sort of greatness I guess would be their coupled desire to have a lot of children. Simply because their house was constantly filled with free-loaders, didn't imply to me that their family was so great.
And when the fifth child came along, where was everyone? Not only where the parents willing to throw this child away, but everyone suddenly disappeared right when they could have used some support. This book is a horrible example of family.
The other main thing that bothered me was the parents conclusion toward the end of the book that their fifth child's nature was due to some sort of latent paleolithic genes. They kept referring to how he was a caveman (in all seriousness, this is what they thought). They also equated this cavemanness with not being human (so, in effect, to them, early humans, weren't human at all). They constantly thought of their child as not human.
I thought perhaps this was written before autism was really heard of, but it was written in 1988. This kid seemed to have a classic case of autism and, instead of seeing specialist after specialist to get him help, the parents just succumbed to his tyranny in their home.
And when the fifth child came along, where was everyone? Not only where the parents willing to throw this child away, but everyone suddenly disappeared right when they could have used some support. This book is a horrible example of family.
The other main thing that bothered me was the parents conclusion toward the end of the book that their fifth child's nature was due to some sort of latent paleolithic genes. They kept referring to how he was a caveman (in all seriousness, this is what they thought). They also equated this cavemanness with not being human (so, in effect, to them, early humans, weren't human at all). They constantly thought of their child as not human.
I thought perhaps this was written before autism was really heard of, but it was written in 1988. This kid seemed to have a classic case of autism and, instead of seeing specialist after specialist to get him help, the parents just succumbed to his tyranny in their home.
May 2, 2021
Hasta la lectura de esta novela, no hab铆a le铆do nada de Doris Lessing. El argumento descrito en la contraportada de esta edici贸n me fascin贸 y decid铆 darle una oprtunidad, intrigado por lo que promet铆a ser una incursi贸n en el g茅nero de terror de una premio Nobel.
Terror, terror... no llega a ser, pero no deja de ser una novela con una atm贸sfera inquietante y sombr铆a que, en ciertos pasajes, recuerda (aunque m谩s comedida) al Lovecraft en estado de gracia, ese que conjeturaba sobre el origen del horror indescriptible, o al Henry James de "Otra vuelta de tuerca". Lessing hace uso de un estilo sobrio, elegante, casi minimalista a partir de la segunda mitad del libro, y es de agradecer porque favorece una lectura acompasada a los sentimientos de Harriet, la protagonista.
Respecto al contenido, se presenta en forma de f谩bula moral, aunque con muy diversas interpretaciones. La tem谩tica general puede incluirse dentro de las preocupaciones y reivindicaciones del feminismo de primera y, sobre todo, de segunda ola: los papeles de los c贸nyuges en la vida matrimonial, la maternidad numerosa bajo sospecha de frivolidad, el sentimiento maternal como debilidad o falta de sentido com煤n, la presi贸n social ante el modelo de familia heteronormativo y la familia como instituci贸n alienante. Adem谩s (y aqu铆 es donde creo que la autora se marca un tanto bastante significativo), "El quinto hijo" es la novela de la alteridad radical. El Otro se presenta en su faceta m谩s incomprensible y, por ende, m谩s salvaje. El personaje de Ben, el quinto hijo, es un ser brutal, carente de cualquier rasgo de humanidad, y es precisamente esa carencia la que dificulta las relaciones materno-filiales hasta el punto de ir minando progresivamente la unidad familiar... 驴o esta tambi茅n es una fantas铆a?
Un libro muy interesante, muy f谩cil de leer, aunque dif铆cil de asimilar en todas sus posibles lecturas.
Terror, terror... no llega a ser, pero no deja de ser una novela con una atm贸sfera inquietante y sombr铆a que, en ciertos pasajes, recuerda (aunque m谩s comedida) al Lovecraft en estado de gracia, ese que conjeturaba sobre el origen del horror indescriptible, o al Henry James de "Otra vuelta de tuerca". Lessing hace uso de un estilo sobrio, elegante, casi minimalista a partir de la segunda mitad del libro, y es de agradecer porque favorece una lectura acompasada a los sentimientos de Harriet, la protagonista.
Respecto al contenido, se presenta en forma de f谩bula moral, aunque con muy diversas interpretaciones. La tem谩tica general puede incluirse dentro de las preocupaciones y reivindicaciones del feminismo de primera y, sobre todo, de segunda ola: los papeles de los c贸nyuges en la vida matrimonial, la maternidad numerosa bajo sospecha de frivolidad, el sentimiento maternal como debilidad o falta de sentido com煤n, la presi贸n social ante el modelo de familia heteronormativo y la familia como instituci贸n alienante. Adem谩s (y aqu铆 es donde creo que la autora se marca un tanto bastante significativo), "El quinto hijo" es la novela de la alteridad radical. El Otro se presenta en su faceta m谩s incomprensible y, por ende, m谩s salvaje. El personaje de Ben, el quinto hijo, es un ser brutal, carente de cualquier rasgo de humanidad, y es precisamente esa carencia la que dificulta las relaciones materno-filiales hasta el punto de ir minando progresivamente la unidad familiar... 驴o esta tambi茅n es una fantas铆a?
Un libro muy interesante, muy f谩cil de leer, aunque dif铆cil de asimilar en todas sus posibles lecturas.
December 15, 2024
He was a Troll
Only a Mother Could Love...
THE FIFTH CHILD
by Doris Lessing
No spoilers. 5 stars. This story was published in 1988. It's debatable whether it can be classified as horror or drama, but either way, it is well-written...
David and Harriet Lovatt met at an office party. They shared a dream of having a large family. Eight children was their ultimate goal...
The couple bought a large three-story house and imagined it full of children and guests at holidays and during the summer...
Their first child, Luke, was born in 1966... then followed Helen, Jane, and Paul...
The couple decided to slow down a bit before having their next child, but despite their efforts, Harriet became pregnant with Ben...
Ben tried to fiercely fight and kick his way out of the womb, so Harriet had his birth induced at eight months...
Ben was odd...
He looked like a troll or gnome and was violent toward the others in the household... he preferred keeping to himself...
Ben could be quite dangerous to both children and animals. They feared him and were wary of him...
Well meaning relatives talked the couple into having Ben institutionalized in a place where he was never expected to leave...
He was expected to die there...
Harriet decided against the family's wishes to visit Ben. She saw his horrendous living conditions and took him home with her...
Ben was different. He was a troll-like creature that only a mother could love...
This is a rather short novel written without chapter breaks. It was thought-provoking, and readers will either really like it or vehemently hate it. I liked it and would compare it to THE CORMORANT by Stephen Gregory (another outstanding novel).
Only a Mother Could Love...
THE FIFTH CHILD
by Doris Lessing
No spoilers. 5 stars. This story was published in 1988. It's debatable whether it can be classified as horror or drama, but either way, it is well-written...
David and Harriet Lovatt met at an office party. They shared a dream of having a large family. Eight children was their ultimate goal...
The couple bought a large three-story house and imagined it full of children and guests at holidays and during the summer...
Their first child, Luke, was born in 1966... then followed Helen, Jane, and Paul...
The couple decided to slow down a bit before having their next child, but despite their efforts, Harriet became pregnant with Ben...
Ben tried to fiercely fight and kick his way out of the womb, so Harriet had his birth induced at eight months...
Ben was odd...
He looked like a troll or gnome and was violent toward the others in the household... he preferred keeping to himself...
Ben could be quite dangerous to both children and animals. They feared him and were wary of him...
Well meaning relatives talked the couple into having Ben institutionalized in a place where he was never expected to leave...
He was expected to die there...
Harriet decided against the family's wishes to visit Ben. She saw his horrendous living conditions and took him home with her...
Ben was different. He was a troll-like creature that only a mother could love...
This is a rather short novel written without chapter breaks. It was thought-provoking, and readers will either really like it or vehemently hate it. I liked it and would compare it to THE CORMORANT by Stephen Gregory (another outstanding novel).
August 15, 2024
The Fifth Child
By Doris Lessing
This is listed as a horror, but if there is any horror to it, it's the way society treats those with physical and mental defects and the mothers who bear them.
This is an interesting story, a bit creepy too. I could see how distressing it would be having a child with severe deformities, but what happens to the young child is horrendous.
In here, they call a baby with Down's a 'Mongol'. I forgot that was the term back then.
By Doris Lessing
This is listed as a horror, but if there is any horror to it, it's the way society treats those with physical and mental defects and the mothers who bear them.
This is an interesting story, a bit creepy too. I could see how distressing it would be having a child with severe deformities, but what happens to the young child is horrendous.
In here, they call a baby with Down's a 'Mongol'. I forgot that was the term back then.
April 16, 2022
Edgy and nearly perfect fiction about what it's like to raise a sociopath. Until the last pages where the book got a bit preachy and deterministic I felt that Lessing left me jittering unpleasantly between thinking that Ben, the "fifth child," was born this way, irredeemable, vs. that he was the victim of bad parenting and lack of love and even of abuse...which is of course the same duality any parent (in particular, mother) is judged by when raising a child who doesn't seem quite normal; who doesn't seem quite moral. Disturbing in the best possible way.
October 8, 2024
Pelos padr玫es em que eles - a sociedade a que ela pertencia - acreditavam, n茫o tivera outra alternativa sen茫o trazer Ben daquele local. Mas, porque o tinha feito e salvo da morte, destru铆ra a fam铆lia. Tinha prejudicado a sua vida... a de David... de Luke, Helen, Jane... e a de Paul. Paul fora o que mais sofrera.
Os pensamentos dela circulavam em torno daquele problema.
David continuava a dizer que ela n茫o devia ter l谩 ido... mas como podia n茫o ter ido, tendo o temperamento que tinha?
Depois da estopada que foi a leitura de Beloved, temi n茫o conseguir pegar em mais nenhum livro. Peguei neste hoje, ao in铆cio da tarde, e n茫o consegui parar de ler. Muito bom!
Os pensamentos dela circulavam em torno daquele problema.
David continuava a dizer que ela n茫o devia ter l谩 ido... mas como podia n茫o ter ido, tendo o temperamento que tinha?
Depois da estopada que foi a leitura de Beloved, temi n茫o conseguir pegar em mais nenhum livro. Peguei neste hoje, ao in铆cio da tarde, e n茫o consegui parar de ler. Muito bom!
October 10, 2020
鈥� Certo dia de manh茫 cedo, alguma coisa fez com que Harriet sa铆sse da cama e entrasse no quarto do beb茅 e ali encontrou Ben equilibrado no peitoril da janela. O peitoril era alto, s贸 Deus sabia como 茅 Ben chegara at茅 ele, a janela estava aberta, num instante ele teria ca铆do. Harriet estava pensando: 鈥�que pena eu ter chegado", e recusou-se a ficar chocada consigo pr贸pria.鈥�
Que m茫e desapiedada 茅 capaz de pensar numa barbaridade destas?
A mesma m茫e que ir谩 salvar este mesmo filho de uma morte certa, contrariando a restante fam铆lia e assumindo um fardo que n茫o quer, mas n茫o pode descartar.
Doris Lessing ousava escrever sobre temas que beliscam a maioria das pessoas e este 茅 mais um deles.
Que fam铆lia est谩 preparada para aceitar a vinda de um filho deficiente mental /f铆sico profundo?
Quem tem alicerces para suportar um impacto desta natureza na estrutura familiar e social?
E a quest茫o proibida nestas circunst芒ncias: o que fazer com esta anomalia da natureza que constrange toda a gente 脿 volta?
As interroga莽玫es s茫o mais que muitas, e nem aqueles que passam por este drama ter茫o respostas satisfat贸rias.
Este livro n茫o se l锚 por prazer, 茅 antes um murro na nossa consci锚ncia; incomoda, mas n茫o se pode ignorar, e talvez nos fa莽a olhar de forma mais benevolente para os pais com filhos a quem a natureza n茫o favoreceu.
Que m茫e desapiedada 茅 capaz de pensar numa barbaridade destas?
A mesma m茫e que ir谩 salvar este mesmo filho de uma morte certa, contrariando a restante fam铆lia e assumindo um fardo que n茫o quer, mas n茫o pode descartar.
Doris Lessing ousava escrever sobre temas que beliscam a maioria das pessoas e este 茅 mais um deles.
Que fam铆lia est谩 preparada para aceitar a vinda de um filho deficiente mental /f铆sico profundo?
Quem tem alicerces para suportar um impacto desta natureza na estrutura familiar e social?
E a quest茫o proibida nestas circunst芒ncias: o que fazer com esta anomalia da natureza que constrange toda a gente 脿 volta?
As interroga莽玫es s茫o mais que muitas, e nem aqueles que passam por este drama ter茫o respostas satisfat贸rias.
Este livro n茫o se l锚 por prazer, 茅 antes um murro na nossa consci锚ncia; incomoda, mas n茫o se pode ignorar, e talvez nos fa莽a olhar de forma mais benevolente para os pais com filhos a quem a natureza n茫o favoreceu.
October 23, 2018
Readers, beware of novella鈥檚: they might look short, but their stories can haunt you for days.
Harriet and David Lovatt鈥檚 life couldn鈥檛 be happier: a good marriage, a big house perfect for hosting parties, and four healthy and charming children. Sure, it鈥檚 a lot of work for a couple both 26 years old, but this is the life they dreamed off!
Yet when Harriet gives birth to the fifth child, Ben, every happy dream disappears. 鈥淣eanderthal Ben鈥� is too strong for his age, always screams, and the little emotion he shows is violent and cruel.
As Ben grows up, Harriet slowly start to doubt herself: who or what gave she birth too?
Yes: the mother compares her baby to hell. This might not be the horror you expected*, but the (family鈥檚) reaction to Ben is both horrifying and painfully realistic. While her husband wants to lock Ben away, Harriet wants to keep him home鈥et that decision might cause more harm than good.
But what is wrong with Ben? You want to pick sides, but Doris Lessing cruelly leaves the decision about Ben鈥檚 nature up to us. This reminded me of 鈥� not because Ben is the anti-Christ 鈥� but because both books feature mothers slowly losing control of their life thanks to a child.
In both stories, this loss of control leads to a bitter ending, but in it鈥檚 more heartbreaking, more tragic than terrifying. The road to hell is paved with good intentions, but is the hell real, or just a mother鈥檚 fear? A judgement of society?
I love (horror) stories that haunt you like that. If such a book sounds appealing, I say pick this up and decide for yourself what's going on.
* = although the scene in the Children鈥檚 institution might change that...
Harriet and David Lovatt鈥檚 life couldn鈥檛 be happier: a good marriage, a big house perfect for hosting parties, and four healthy and charming children. Sure, it鈥檚 a lot of work for a couple both 26 years old, but this is the life they dreamed off!
Yet when Harriet gives birth to the fifth child, Ben, every happy dream disappears. 鈥淣eanderthal Ben鈥� is too strong for his age, always screams, and the little emotion he shows is violent and cruel.
As Ben grows up, Harriet slowly start to doubt herself: who or what gave she birth too?
鈥楾he trouble is, you get used to hell,' said Harriet. `After a day with Ben I feel as if nothing exists but him. As if nothing has ever existed. I suddenly realize I haven't remembered the others for hours.鈥�
Yes: the mother compares her baby to hell. This might not be the horror you expected*, but the (family鈥檚) reaction to Ben is both horrifying and painfully realistic. While her husband wants to lock Ben away, Harriet wants to keep him home鈥et that decision might cause more harm than good.
But what is wrong with Ben? You want to pick sides, but Doris Lessing cruelly leaves the decision about Ben鈥檚 nature up to us. This reminded me of 鈥� not because Ben is the anti-Christ 鈥� but because both books feature mothers slowly losing control of their life thanks to a child.
In both stories, this loss of control leads to a bitter ending, but in it鈥檚 more heartbreaking, more tragic than terrifying. The road to hell is paved with good intentions, but is the hell real, or just a mother鈥檚 fear? A judgement of society?
I love (horror) stories that haunt you like that. If such a book sounds appealing, I say pick this up and decide for yourself what's going on.
* = although the scene in the Children鈥檚 institution might change that...
April 7, 2013
She felt rejected by him. They had always loved to lie here feeling a new life, greeting it. She had waited four times for the first little flutters, easily mistaken but then certain; the sensation that was as if a fish mouthed out a bubble; the small responses to her movements, her touch, and even- she was convinced- her thoughts.
But what about me? I've been shot. Go on without me, save yourselves. Ooh aah it hurts, like a spoon or a papercut that irritates your mind into the beyond. Listen, take this review from my pocket over my frozen heart... Give it... gasps.... I don't have much time... Don't let it bash anyone else over the head with it's magazine article case study depthless void of empty characterizations that zip along like the latest autotuned hit to the next check on a form. Why the flipping hell did they HAVE to have six to ten kids? (Ten if someone was suspected to think the original six was too many. People who were essential to foot the bill, naturally.) 听Lovey dovey eyes that see into a shiny mirror. Don't let the constantly pregnant wife and her automatically possessive husband suck you into their weeks long Easter house parties of freeloaders hitched to their shag carpet ride on daddy's money and her mommy's retirement time. The glow of brand new furniture under layers of visiting butt sweat and baby vomit. Poor Ben was born into the dreams of spit out and consume. Poor Ben calls himself Poor Ben. He must have heard someone say it. It is getting life off on someone else's foot. He must have seen something, sensed something to have kicked and screamed with a "This is wrong" and not ask for better. I said better but there was nothing else here. He did come from a family who expected gloating contentment of the variety of I really couldn't give two shits. Housewife stuff if you were really angry about the sexual revolution. For no good reason. People were doing it and yeah I was researching for a period drama about issues. I saw a whir of ugly faces in a stream of going through the motions of this is the dream. Kill me before they get to tupperware parties. The boredom nearly did it. Their hopes meant nothing to me. What do they have to lose?听
So the wife-mother Harriet collects Ben out of the institution he is stuck in to die. It's like when your dog is going to "live on a farm somewhere with room to run" without the "room to run" part or the "farm". It's cold as the clinical shit baby Ben is covered in when Harriet lays her brooding (the egg laying definition) on him. I didn't know, I didn't think. I don't want to know, I don't want to think. It all happened so fast of and this happens next boringly flippant narration. The four kids whisper together. They were cute babies to show off five pages ago. We want Ben to be gone. Ben means nothing but an obstacle. An object of stone for their unfeelings. The side of the lucky to be born under a better sign, before the difficult pregnancies got more difficult. No body really knew what they wanted. I didn't know the kids. Theirs were a blurred face of get on the next bus out and marry the first person you see. They will all speak in the language of The Fifth Child that is whining or bragging grunts of hear what you expect to hear before anyone has said a word. The only difference in Harriet is that she turns her head when what she expected to hear is not what she had heard, though she is still afraid to look (that's important) and doesn't live. They weren't a family at all. Harriet may be a woman too weak to be good enough for a child like Ben. The other children may have felt unsafe in their own homes. I read a baby locked behind bars in a lonely room until he became the snarling animal in the corner they bought him for sight unseen. Yeah, there's a story in there and it kills me. But I didn't know them any more than the passing story related third hand about a man in Fla who fucked his wife into fourteen kids (he would yell at her "Flossie!" for back room sex with a house full of people). She dies and the fourteen kids go to the orphanage. The next wife gets four kids. The Fifth Child knows these people as well as that. It's creepy and sad and about complete strangers. Shouldn't there be more than passing judgement on strangers to this? It's not an issue or product of the times when it is your life. Maybe that kind of heartless removal speaks to others in a societal morse code I can't understand. Although a disturbing number of people on the review sites read this as a book about an evil little baby boy. I guess the message! anvils missed them, somehow. I don't get anything out of reading shit like that from strangers on the Internet either. I don't want it. That kind of thing kills me and I have no letters to home about that. That's so lonely. Harriet sees Ben and translates a monster stare looking for others like him. Where's the dying breath to understand?
May 20, 2021
3.5!
Bueno... 驴Qui茅n es el villano aqu铆? 驴Es realmente Ben un changeling? 驴Harriet y David son p茅simos padres? Creo que nunca encontrar茅 respuestas satisfactorias a estas preguntas, pero s铆 reafirm茅 el miedo que me da la maternidad en todas sus etapas. RESPECT a todos aquellos que gestan y crian un hijo.
Bueno... 驴Qui茅n es el villano aqu铆? 驴Es realmente Ben un changeling? 驴Harriet y David son p茅simos padres? Creo que nunca encontrar茅 respuestas satisfactorias a estas preguntas, pero s铆 reafirm茅 el miedo que me da la maternidad en todas sus etapas. RESPECT a todos aquellos que gestan y crian un hijo.
October 28, 2018
螘谓伪 渭喂魏蟻慰(蟽蔚 蔚魏蟿伪蟽畏) 伪蟻喂蟽蟿慰蠀蟻纬畏渭伪 纬喂伪 蟿伪 蠄蔚渭伪蟿伪 蟺慰蠀 位蔚渭蔚 蟽蟿慰谓 蔚伪蠀蟿慰 渭伪蟼 蟺蟻慰魏蔚喂渭蔚谓慰蠀 谓伪 伪蟺伪位位伪纬慰蠀渭蔚 伪蟺慰 蟿喂蟼 蔚蠀胃蠀谓蔚蟼 渭伪蟼 , 伪位位伪 魏伪喂 纬喂伪 蟿慰谓 蟿蟻慰渭伪魏蟿喂魏慰 蔚纬蠅喂蟽渭慰 蟿蠅谓 伪谓胃蟻蠅蟺蠅谓 蟺慰蠀 蟺蟻慰蟿喂渭慰蠀谓 谓伪 蠁蟿伪蟽慰蠀谓 蟽蟿伪 蟺喂慰 伪魏蟻伪喂伪 蟽畏渭蔚喂伪 蟽蠀渭蟺蔚蟻喂蠁慰蟻伪蟼 蟺蟻慰魏蔚喂渭蔚谓慰蠀 谓伪 渭畏谓 胃慰位蠅蟽慰蠀谓 蟿畏谓 蔚喂魏慰谓伪 蟿畏蟼 "慰喂魏慰纬蔚谓蔚喂伪魏畏蟼 蔚蠀蟿蠀蠂喂伪蟼" 蟺慰蠀 蔚蠂慰蠀谓 蠁伪谓蟿伪蟽喂蠅胃蔚喂..渭蔚 胃蠀渭蠅蟽蔚, 渭蔚 蟽蟿蔚谓慰蠂蠅蟻畏蟽蔚, 渭蔚 蟺蟻慰尾位畏渭伪蟿喂蟽蔚 慰蟺蠅蟼 慰蠁蔚喂位蔚喂 谓伪 魏伪谓蔚喂 魏伪胃蔚 蟽畏渭伪谓蟿喂魏慰 尾喂尾位喂慰.
April 27, 2013
This was my introduction to the writing of Doris Lessing; I had high hopes for the book but was sorely disappointed. The writing was pretty unengaging for me, though not poor. The plot was ridiculous in content, though perhaps acceptable as a sort of "unmagical realism"; completely unrealistic and unbelievable, along with two dimensional characters suitable for allegory only. Perhaps the book stands as an indictment of conservative 1950's family values, white picket fences, women staying home to work and raising 5 children...but written in 1988, the book seems a little bit moot as a social critique. If Ms Lessing intends to explore sociopathy and psychopathy, then she would do well to explore the inner life of the characters. Instead we have 17 years of time compacted into 150 pages, no compelling plot and practically a synoptic history of events throughout those years with a scattering of little explanatory stories. I will give Ms Lessing another shot with her famed The Golden Notebook, as perhaps this writing style is atypical for her. But I wouldn't recommend this to anyone. Go read Frankenstein or Martin Amis or Iain Banks.
April 29, 2022
A selfish couple called David and Harriet buy a big house and intend to have eight children. Luckily for them the husband has a very rich father and the wife has a doting mother. The rich father pays their mortgage, the doting mother looks after the children. There are big family gatherings with step-fathers, step-mothers, sisters, cousins, nephews, and nieces. This is a privileged family indeed.
Then the fifth child arrives, a goblin called Ben. Everything changes.
Harriet and David can't control Ben, he murders a dog, a cat, and tries to kill his brother Paul. This is where the story becomes truly ludicrous because all this 'bad behaviour' is tolerated until it gets too much and Ben is carted off having broken up the family to a strange kind of children's hospital up't north where it rains all the time and there are moors! How stereotypical is that?
And then the author expects us to believe that Harriet goes up't north to get the goblin back and the hospital allows her to take him away and there are no repercussions for this unlawful behaviour of the selfish mother from the social services. Honestly, how far can credulity be stretched?
I won't tell you the rest, apart from the fact that if you read this story you will be expected to believe that a loving mum and dad would allow their retarded goblin son to spend his time with children ten years older than himself and pay them to look after their son as he's taken to the seaside on motorbikes.
Then the fifth child arrives, a goblin called Ben. Everything changes.
Harriet and David can't control Ben, he murders a dog, a cat, and tries to kill his brother Paul. This is where the story becomes truly ludicrous because all this 'bad behaviour' is tolerated until it gets too much and Ben is carted off having broken up the family to a strange kind of children's hospital up't north where it rains all the time and there are moors! How stereotypical is that?
And then the author expects us to believe that Harriet goes up't north to get the goblin back and the hospital allows her to take him away and there are no repercussions for this unlawful behaviour of the selfish mother from the social services. Honestly, how far can credulity be stretched?
I won't tell you the rest, apart from the fact that if you read this story you will be expected to believe that a loving mum and dad would allow their retarded goblin son to spend his time with children ten years older than himself and pay them to look after their son as he's taken to the seaside on motorbikes.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 2,572 reviews
Can't find what you're looking for?
Get help and learn more about the design.