<doc.id=2014.a4>
<title> "Pride goeth before destruction?" </title>
Harriet and David, two of the main characters in The Fifth Child, really believed in true happiness; they could achieve it if they lived well. The two shared each other's dreams of what makes a good family. Actually they were "made for each other", and both wanted to build an idyllic world to live in together, forever in happiness. It seemed like they believed in some kind of superior force, which decided who deserved being happy. If something went wrong, it only reflected the person's behavior. In Harriet's case with the fifth child, I see her difficulties as a punishment for her hubris, her arrogance that she really thought they, David and herself, were infallible. 

In the 60's, on a big office party, both Harriet and David seemed a bit odd. On the whole, it was probably the reason why they felt drawn to each other in the first place. They had the same philosophy of life, conservative and maybe old-fashioned, dreamed about children and to create their own perfect environment for that purpose. Happiness for them was to build a vivid family life. David expressed what characteristics his future wife should have: "His wife must be like him in this: that she knew were happiness lay and how to keep it". (p.13) 
Harriet and David found the house of their dreams. On the countryside, with a peaceful atmosphere and a moderate commuting distance to David's work in London. The house, an enormous building in Victorian style embraced by an overgrown garden, contained three storeys and an attic. Sure there was space enough to accommodate a horde of children, friends and relatives. David's wealthy father paid for it, but they did not bother, it was for the best - their happiness.

Happiness. A happy family. The Lovatts were a happy family. It was what they had chosen and what they deserved. [...]It had been hard preserving their belief in themselves when the spirit of the times, the greedy and selfish sixties, had been so ready to condemn them, to isolate, to diminish their best selves. And look, they had been right to insist on guarding that stubborn individuality of theirs, which had chosen, and so obstinately, the best - this. (p.28-29)

This I think was a description of Harriet's sin: her arrogance, pride and self-righteousness. The belief that everyone influences his future by the "right way of living"; in other words, she thought all humans have the ability to affect their own fate. To further express her belief, I think it is interesting what Harriet thought about her sister Sarah, who has got a child with Down's syndrome. Earlier the text told us that Sarah and William had a troubled marriage. He was unfaithful now and then and there were plenty of disagreements. It seemed like it was their children only, who kept them together. As a matter of fact William had also lost his work. "Harriet said to David, privately, that she did not believe it was bad luck: Sarah and William's unhappiness, their quarreling, had probably attracted the Mongol child." (p.29) Of course Harriet's own four children were nice in all respects, as a result of the pure happiness between David and herself. 

Then there was a fifth pregnancy. Perhaps this fetus knew when it had to make an entrance. And one month early, Harriet had an answer to her suspicions that Ben was something extraordinary: ugly and evil, which made both parents displeased over his arrival. "they both felt - secretly, they were ashamed of the thoughts they had about Ben - that he had willed himself to be born, had invaded their ordinariness, which had no defenses against him or anything like him" (p.70). 

Harriet's belief that she must have done something wrong to deserve such a child, made her feel terrible, because she could not possibly see her former presumption, and was ashamed over the fact that she was Ben's mother.
She knew when they had seen him, because of the way they looked at her afterwards. As if I were a criminal! She raged to herself [...] Even David, she believed condemned her. She said to him, 'I suppose in the old times, in primitive societies, this was how they treated a woman who'd given birth to a freak. As if it was her fault. (p.74)

When Harriet tried to make Ben more human, she forgot about the other children and that gave her more and more a bad conscience. She isolated herself from the rest of the family, and Dorothy, the grandmother, had to care about the other children; again a lot of selfishness and more dependence. David worked a lot, perhaps to escape from the harsh reality. Their happy family had split up. Before Ben was born, David proudly had let everyone know about his hospitality: "A room each for such little tiddlers!' -Dorothy exclaimed - 'It's important, 'said David fierce'; everyone should have a room". Then David's mother added: "Everyone in the world! Everybody!" (p.31) Apparently David did not remember his former adjustment, or perhaps more correctly, he did not want to remember. Ben was not within the frames of their imagined happiness.

The struggle goes on. In the end Harriet became more or less alone; her life had not turned out the way she had expected. But indeed she was released from her sin: the thinking that it is possible to be happy through a lifetime. Who is the victim of the story, I cannot tell. From my point of view, it is possible to victimize almost all characters. They seem to be each other's victims.
</doc>