Discover millions of ebooks, audiobooks, and so much more with a free trial

Only $11.99/month after trial. Cancel anytime.

The Cleft: A Novel
The Cleft: A Novel
The Cleft: A Novel
Ebook227 pages4 hours

The Cleft: A Novel

Rating: 3 out of 5 stars

3/5

()

Read preview

About this ebook

From Doris Lessing, "one of the most important writers of the past hundred years" (Times of London), comes a brilliant, darkly provocative alternative history of humankind's beginnings.

In this fascinating and beguiling novel, Lessing confronts the themes that inspired much of her early writing: how men and women manage to live side by side in the world and how the troublesome particulars of gender affect every aspect of our existence.

In the last years of his life, a Roman senator retells the history of human creation and reveals the little-known story of the Clefts, an ancient community of women living in an Edenic coastal wilderness. The Clefts have neither need nor knowledge of men; childbirth is controlled through the cycles of the moon, and they bear only female children. But with the unheralded birth of a strange new child—a boy—the harmony of their community is suddenly thrown into jeopardy.


LanguageEnglish
PublisherHarperCollins
Release dateOct 13, 2009
ISBN9780061868269
The Cleft: A Novel
Author

Doris Lessing

Winner of the 2007 Nobel Prize in Literature, Doris Lessing was one of the most celebrated and distinguished writers of our time, the recipient of a host of international awards. She wrote more than thirty books—among them the novels Martha Quest, The Golden Notebook, and The Fifth Child. She died in 2013.

Read more from Doris Lessing

Related to The Cleft

Related ebooks

Literary Fiction For You

View More

Related articles

Reviews for The Cleft

Rating: 2.855421584939759 out of 5 stars
3/5

166 ratings16 reviews

What did you think?

Tap to rate

Review must be at least 10 words

  • Rating: 3 out of 5 stars
    3/5
    When I first read The Cleft, nine years ago, I described it as "bizarre but pleasant." It left no imprint on my memory, perhaps because I read it on a plane. Altitude amnesia. I feel a PhD dissertation coming on. Never mind. I am likely to remember the second reading slightly - slightly - more tenaciously, but not terribly fondly. I'm not a Lessing aficionado, though I studied The Summer Before the Dark in depth and with enthusiasm many (many many) years ago. That work was superb. The Cleft not so much.It was a brave undertaking by Lessing. Like D. H. Lawrence in The Plumed Serpent she has to invent a mythology. Like D. H. Lawrence she doesn't succeed - though perhaps she is a little more readable, enjoyable. Were I re-reading The Plumed Serpent in the air I think I'd implore Quetzalcoatl or whoever - Cthulhu maybe - to crash the plane. But The Cleft simply felt labourious. Okay, vaginae and willies, clefts and squirts, we get that. Gender role archetypes, criticized here by other reviewers, were, well, largely a fact for better or for worse, so I get that too. Boys will sometimes be boys, because they stand up to pee or something. For what it's worth I think Lessing is engaging in a phenomenological and etiological reading of religious history. Just wanted to say that. And, also for what it's worth, that's a time-honoured philosophical viewpoint. The reading of history she invents is fine. But. I'm just not sure why we have some sort of ersatz narrative voice, a rather featureless first century well-to-do Roman citizen. The ancients' narratives are presented, occasionally critiqued or otherwise questioned, and I'm afraid this reader was left with a meh. Yes, females, once the word was invented, have clefts, and males, once they're invented (or survive female horror at their deformity) have squirts, and yes human beings have various volitions and I guess anti-volitions but goodness, is that the time? In the end a cave goes "poof" and history continues. Or begins. Or something. Thanks for the memories. I'll re-read the very different Summer Before the Dark and The Cleft will lapse into aeronautically-induced amnesia (because as it happens I re-read it on a flight, too.
  • Rating: 3 out of 5 stars
    3/5
    This is the first Doris Lessing novel that I have read; I had read her obituary notices and she seemed to be just the sort of author that I might enjoy but, this was not much of a tale. The story is of a time when the proto human race was all female. Strange babies start to be born (boys) and the tale takes us through the opposition to change and how the sexes came to an understanding. The clever part, is that the story is told by a Roman historian. This gives the story a remove so that he can be all knowledgeable, but we from his future, can see that his belief that his views are wise, are as dated to us, as the new humans views were to him - or,indeed, as our views will seem to a future generation.The idea was clever, but the thought that early versions of human kind were less inquisitive than ours does not ring true. There was also a surprising amount of gender stereotyping: men were rash, women nagged.It is true that, on the whole, I tend to read factual books, but when I do read a novel, I either want to be entertained by a cracking yarn, or complete the final page with the idea that I know myself, or my fellow man, better. I could not say either in this case. Being stubborn, I shall try more of Doris Lessing's work before consigning her to a poor author (in my humble opinion!)
  • Rating: 3 out of 5 stars
    3/5
    A fable of the first women and the first men who came after them. An exploration of the essence of relationships between men and women. An imagined history or mythology of a time before history, as told by a Roman who himself imgagines his civilisation to be the apex of human achievement. Quietly and clearly told.
  • Rating: 3 out of 5 stars
    3/5
    This is not so much a novel as a fantasy wrapped around a theory. The theory is that humans came from the sea and started off by reproducing parthogenetically. Here, a Roman historian describes the quirks of early humanity, based on old written documents which are a transcription of still older oral histories.

    The story is that women started giving birth to men, and, considering them deformed, put them out to die. Some of the men survived and then began rescuing the new male babies. After a lot of social upheaval, the men and women got together, and the human race switched over to sexual reproduction. Meanwhile, this tale explains most of the tensions between modern women and men.

    Who knows - maybe it did happen that way? Kind of unlikely though. My feeling is that Lessing whipped this book off one daydreamy afternoon, which is about how long it takes to read it.
  • Rating: 4 out of 5 stars
    4/5
    Well I think I understand what Doris Lessing was trying to do here, although I am no great fan of allegory. A sort of creation story, with dialogue, that seeks to explain women and men as separate, like and unlike creatures, attracted and antagonistic towards each other, with each in turn being dependent and imposing. She builds her own mythic world; women (seal like in their smoothness and equanimity) living by the sea; while men follow an rougher, more restless, existence amongst the inland forests. And so on until the arrangement collapses with the men´s destruction (carelessness really...) of the women´s ancestral home and the start of a new existence for both, which brings us to the beginning of recorded history. This story is narrated by a Roman scholar as history, secret writings based on oral traditions are passed down to him, and presented along with a few small asides relating to his current precarious existence under Nero. The storytelling is confident and you have to be impressed by the bravura of it. Lessing does a fair job of distilling all of the themes of men and women, and generations into a book sized parable that reads quite well. But I wonder why she chose this carriage for her ideas, specifically an educated Roman´s view of the natures and origins of women and men. This makes it a story twice removed as it were from our present experience. I can understand that it is a method that blur´s the focus and invites us to suspend judgement on its value as an accurate narrative. It ´hangs together´ as a story retold many times (by wandering story-tellers as it were) before being written down, acquiring over time elaborations that while anachronistic still ring true to the original theme.But my problem with the novel is that while it purports to be a Roman view of the world, Lessings story is told without any sense that it is being relayed by a Roman with Roman sensibilities, by someone whose mythological world is already filled with Greek and Roman concepts not just of creation, but of carefully defined aspects of female and male. Those stories of Aphrodite, Hera and Zeus still seem to me to carry more power, and insight into our character than Lessing´s. I struggle to see how it could have been relayed without reference to this already rich world of concepts of female and male, beyond the barest reference to the suckling of Romulus and Remus by the wolf-mother. And then I wonder why Lessing did not simply choose science fiction, or future history as the field in which to play out these themes, particularly as she has already written so well in both of them. At the end of the day I am left with the impression that she might have been attracted to the challenge of writing a convincing – and entirely new - story of the pre-history of men and women. But to write about our most basic aspects of femaleness and maleness without also referencing our incredibly rich concepts (expressed in ancient and modern myth) about male and femaleness seems to leave half the story untold. Or perhaps she intended to do exactly that, strip the story of all of our previously invented explanations and ask us to consider the issue afresh.This book does not work at all as an entertainment; nor as the final word on the great themes of women and men. But as a thought-provoker, a subtle irritant that works on the mind – and the prejudices – of the reader, it sort of works. Perhaps best to approach this unpromising rough oyster via a more extensive reading of Lessings other books, lest you miss the small pearl contained herein.
  • Rating: 2 out of 5 stars
    2/5
    I love Doris Lessing, but The Cleft is a disappointing, and rather boring, piece of a speculative fiction. The premise is that a Roman Senator is compiling an account of human origins from the earliest of prehistoric times supposedly based on oral accounts of "Memories" later transcribed. The basic premise of humanity rising from the sea comes from Elaine Morgan's Descent of Woman published in the 1970s. There's no real story here unfortunately.
  • Rating: 4 out of 5 stars
    4/5
    In The Cleft, a Roman senator takes on a project whereby he will compile into a single narrative the fragments of recorded oral histories telling of the time when the human race first divided into two distinct kinds: female and male. The novel is presented as that compilation, with interjections and speculations in the first person from the senator. The Cleft might be called speculative mythology, and it explores what would happen if a community of women, who had always lived without even a concept of "male," never mind any actual men, and who were impregnated by nature without any identifiable cause, suddenly started giving birth to boys. The novel begins with those first births of boys, and continues on to the time when men and women develop their first small understandings of one another. The Cleft is an odd book, and one which I have a hard time coming to terms with, which I'm not sure how to understand. But it's exploration of gender difference and its handling of its premise are compelling, even if the book does drag a bit in the last third. Recommended.
  • Rating: 3 out of 5 stars
    3/5
    Doris Lessing’s The Cleft is more like an ambiguous epic than a novel – an alternate story of human origins neither evolutionary, in the Darwinian sense, nor divine. The premise is that a Roman historian narrates the sketchily recorded history of a race of women called Clefts who knew no men and gave birth only to daughters. This community is not necessarily utopian, but it is comfortably settled and seemingly governed by consensus. A change occurs and this is the starting point for the story: the women begin giving birth to boys – initially called monsters and sacrificed to the eagles because they’re considered deformed. I won’t go further than this in describing the plot, so as not to spoil it for others planning to read the book. But I will say that Lessing maintains distance between her readers and her characters. Perhaps the Clefts and monsters are meant to remain elusive because their recorded history can permit us no greater intimacy – or perhaps because Lessing wants to remind readers of how different people were, in these early stages of culture, from us today. I guess I would say that this is a novel of ideas. It debates the limits of recoverable history, the politics of historical representation, sexual politics, gender stereotypes and so on. The early naming of women and men reduces them to their genitals: Clefts and Squirts. Indeed, in this early community, mating and reproduction become very important. Some commentators have observed that there are plenty of gender stereotypes: women as naggers, nesters and fretting child-rearers and men as questers, warriors and delinquent fathers. This is true. I wasn’t sure whether this reflected on the bias of the Roman narrator or on the way gender roles were alleged to have emerged from ancient living conditions. Is Lessing saying that these roles were once – in ancient times – useful or inevitable (and now possibly archaic given our changed conditions)? Is she justifying them as biologically natural? Or is she suggesting that they are simply assumed and incorporated by the Roman narrator? I think this ambiguity, while uncomfortable, is actually one of the novel’s strengths. That said, I found the book intriguing and challenging, rather than straightforwardly enjoyable. It won’t be to everyone’s tastes, so I recommend it to those interested in either Lessing or the ideas she debates.
  • Rating: 2 out of 5 stars
    2/5
    The story is of creation in reverse - first came the women. So relates a Roman Senator who wishes to stem the tide of Christianity as it inserts itself into Roman society. Full of symbolism and euphemisms, the book was difficult to read. It seemed to focus on why women nag and why men deserve to be nagged. It could have been so much more.
  • Rating: 3 out of 5 stars
    3/5
    A fascinating idea that is not fully realized. I was disappointed in how such an interesting theory-- that humans were originally only female-- ended up as a story that relied predominantly on stereotypes, and mainly the cliched stereotypes of bad jokes on marriage (think "men get lost but won't admit being lost;" "women are incessant nags"). Perhaps that's meant to be assumed as the rendering through the biased eyes of our male Roman historian narrator. If it is, the narrative device fails the idea behind the novel. Lessing is a good writer, even here the story has a good flow to it, but I had to make myself finish this relatively short book, and it took me longer than to read than good books twice its length.
  • Rating: 3 out of 5 stars
    3/5
    The premise of this novel intrigued me immensely: a mythical, entirely female community, living in harmony with nature, is disrupted by the birth of a ‘Monster’ – a boy. Initially, the premise seems likely to deliver a thoughtful story, complicated as it is by being told through the voice of a Roman man; this is a situation which is guaranteed to lead to a slight distrust of the narrator, telling the women’s story. The narrator’s reluctance to tell the story if the women’s initial cruelty to the Monsters is striking in contrast to their own insistent hatred and fear of the strange tubes and pipes that the males possess. As the novel progresses, you increasingly question his bias as he weaves parts of his own history into the tale and extrapolates from it to develop simple and apparently inflexible truths about human nature.There are some interesting ideas in the first section of the tale. The first fragmented bit of history that the ‘historian’ narrator recounts describes a world in which there was no awareness of females or mothers, for they were all female and mothers, and one can only define oneself by finding differences from the other. Moreover, they were scarcely aware of themselves as individuals, and many women were identified by the same title as they completed the same jobs. Interestingly, this is not really a utopia: the women are mindlessly content, but there is nothing in their mundane existence to envy. This is made clear by the narrator’s description of them as incurious almost slug like creatures. They do not question. They procreate effortlessly but do not seek to create or explore. Later on in the novel, they are repeatedly contrasted against the active men, who build and hunt and generally develop more skills in decades than the women have since whenever they crawled out of the sea.Ultimately, this is my problem with the novel: the characters are gendered caricatures. While a few characters are picked out and followed, even these are slaves to their genes. The men are active; the women nag. The men want adventure and challenge; the women want clean huts and instinctively know how to fix hurts. Regardless of Lessing’s use of narrative voice, she seems to be endorsing a thoroughly biological view of human nature as fixed, unchanging and inescapable.The main strength of the novel is its fluid narrative style which successfully creates a sense of myth. Lessing’s use of repetition emphasises this, especially in the first section of the novel, in which the same events are recounted three times, in a varying amount of detail. The fluidity of the characters supports this mode of storytelling. Even key characters suffer from a sense of flux: they appear without preface, their lifespan is indefinite and they vanish without care. In this way, the novel also raises some interesting questions about history: what can we know for certain? Who can we trust to record it?Overall, this is an unusual novel that seems to lack a thoughtful response to the question it initially posed.
  • Rating: 1 out of 5 stars
    1/5
    A nightmarish tale about human creation where women are called "clefts" and men are called "monsters" or "squirts". Male babies are sacrificed for years until some eagles decide to save the "monster" babies and to take them to another part of the island they all share..where they grow up to be "squirts". When the Clefts learn of this, they wander over and thus begins the story of how the human race began. Add animals that feed the babies, genital mutilation, and depictions of rape and murder and you have The Cleft. It was almost unbearable for me to read it. Crude and not well written. I would give it half a star if I could figure out how to do so
  • Rating: 2 out of 5 stars
    2/5
    This was the first book I've read from the author. It was a bad choice. The idea of the book was really promising, an ancient community where only women exist and the effects of male children being born. Although there were some interesting insight of male and female differences, the story was boring, unoriginal, depressing. The narrative story which was going on in between was completely unnecessary. Doris Lessing was awarded the Nobel Prize for Literature 2007 and came across as a very interesting person in the interview, which was shown after the award winner was announced. I'm hoping to read some of her other books, which are highly acclaimed, but this was a very unfortunate introduction to her work.
  • Rating: 1 out of 5 stars
    1/5
    Hated the book because I hated the narrartor. He repeats himself endlessly and with such a bias it made me unable to read it. I tried to skip around hoping it would get to a point where I could read more but never found that point. Even at the end he was repeating things he'd said early on. Ugh.
  • Rating: 3 out of 5 stars
    3/5
    This fable about how our women ancestors dealt with the advent of the Monsters/Squirts(men) is remarkable for the questions it raises, and the often bold and even silly way it directs them. In the end I was willing to be much more swept away than I was, for the premise is so bewilderingly valid (considering the so much less imaginable Judeo-Christian story of our beginnings...) and Lessing's telling of it so abrupt!
  • Rating: 3 out of 5 stars
    3/5
    I enjoyed this fable type story as well as the premise of gender biases. It's a quick, easy read that inspires some questions.

Book preview

The Cleft - Doris Lessing

Begin Reading

I saw this today.

When the carts come in from the estate farm as the summer ends, bringing the wine, the olives, the fruits, there is a festive air in the house, and I share in it. I watch from my windows like the house slaves, for the arrival of the oxen as they turn from the road, listen for the creak of the cart. Today the oxen were wild-eyed and anxious, because of the noisy overfull road to the west. Their whiteness was reddened, just like the slave Marcus’s tunic, and his hair was full of dust. The watching girls ran out to the cart, not only because of all the delicious produce they would now put away into the storerooms, but because of Marcus, who had in the last year become a handsome youth. His throat was too full of dust to let him return their greetings, and he ran to the pump, snatched up the pitcher there, drank–and drank–poured water over his head, which emerged from this libation a mass of black curls–and dropped the pitcher, through haste, on the tile surround, where it shattered. At this, Lolla, whose mother my father had bought during a trip to Sicily, an excitable explosive girl, rushed at Marcus screaming reproaches and accusations. He shouted back, defending himself. The other servants were already lifting down the jars of wine and oil, and the grape harvest, black and gold, and it was a busy, loud scene. The oxen began lowing and now, and with an ostentatiously impatient air, Lolla took up a second pitcher, dipped it in the water and ran with it to the oxen, where she filled their troughs, which were nearly empty. It was Marcus’s responsibility to make sure the oxen got their water as soon as they arrived. They lowered their great heads and drank, while Lolla again turned on Marcus, scolding and apparently angry. Marcus was the son of a house slave in the estate house and these two had known each other all their lives. Sometimes he had worked here in our town house, sometimes she had gone for the summer to the estate. Lolla was known for her quick temper, and if Marcus had not been hot and dusty after the long slow journey he would probably have laughed at her, teased her out of her fit of impatience. But these two were no longer children: it was enough only to see them together to know her crossness, his sullenness, were not the result only of a very hot afternoon.

He went to the oxen, avoiding their great tossing horns, and began soothing them. He freed them from their traces, and led them to the shade of the big fig tree, where he slipped the traces over a branch. For some reason Marcus’s tenderness with the oxen annoyed Lolla even more. She stood, watching, while the other girls were carrying past her the produce from the cart, and her cheeks were scarlet and her eyes reproached and accused the boy. He took no notice of her. He walked past her as if she were not there, to the veranda, where he pulled out another tunic from his bundle and, stripping off the dusty tunic, he again sluiced himself with water, and without drying himself–the heat would do that in a moment–he slipped on the fresh one.

Lolla seemed calmer. She stood with her hand on the veranda wall, and now she was penitent, or ready to be. Again he took no notice of her, but stood at the end of the veranda, staring at the oxen, his charges. She said, ‘Marcus…’ in her normal voice, and he shrugged, repudiating her. By now the last of the jars and the fruit had gone inside. The two were alone on the veranda. ‘Marcus,’ said Lolla again, and this time coaxingly. He turned his head to look at her, and I would not have liked to earn that look. Contemptuous, angry–and very far from the complaisance she was hoping for. He went to the gate to shut it, and turned from it, and from her. The slaves’ quarters were at the end of the garden. He took up his bundle and began walking–fast, to where he would lodge that night. ‘Marcus,’ she pleaded. She seemed ready to cry. He was about to go into the men’s quarters and she ran across and reached him as he disappeared into the door.

I did not need to watch any longer. I knew she would find an excuse to hang about the courtyard–perhaps petting and patting the oxen, giving them figs, or pretend the well needed attention. She would be waiting for him. I knew that he would want to go off into the streets with the other boys, for an evening’s fun–he was not often here in this house in Rome itself. But I knew too that these two would spend tonight together, no matter what he would have preferred.

This little scene seems to me to sum up a truth in the relations between men and women.

Often seeing something as revealing, when observing the life of the house, I was impelled to go into the room where it was kept, the great pack of material which I was supposed to be working on. I had had it now for years. Others before me had said they would try to make something of it.

What was it? A mass of material accumulated over ages, originating as oral history, some of it the same but written down later, all purporting to deal with the earliest record of us, the peoples of our earth.

It was a cumbersome, unwieldy mass and more than one hopeful historian had been defeated by it, and not only because of its difficulty, but because of its nature. Anyone working on it must know that if it ever reached a stage of completion where it could have a name, and be known as a product of scholarship, it would be attacked, challenged, and perhaps be described as spurious.

I am not a person who enjoys the quarrels of scholars. What kind of a man I am is not really of importance in this debate–there has already been disputation about allowing this tale to exist away from the dusty shelves it has always been kept on. ‘The Cleft’–I did not choose this title–had at various times been regarded as so inflammatory it had been put with other ‘Strictly Secret’ documents.

As I have said, the history I am relating is based on ancient documents, which are based on even earlier oral records. Some of the reported events are abrasive and may upset certain people. I tried out selected bits of the chronicle on my sister Marcella and she was shocked. She would not believe that decent females would be unkind to dear little baby boys. My sister is ever ready to ascribe to herself the more delicate of female attributes–a not uncommon trait, I think. But as I remind her, anyone who has watched her screaming her head off as the blood flows in the arena is not likely easily to be persuaded of female fastidiousness. People wishing to avoid offence to their sensibilities may start the story.

The following is not the earliest bit of history we have, but it is informative and so I am putting it first.

Yes, I know, you keep saying, but what you don’t understand is that what I say now can’t be true because I am telling you how I see it all now, but it was all different then. Even words I use are new, I don’t know where they came from, sometimes it seems that most of the words in our mouths are this new talk. I say I, and again I, I do this and I think that, but then we wouldn’t say I, it was we. We thought we.

I say think but did we think? Perhaps a new kind of thinking began like everything else when the Monsters started being born. I am sorry, you keep saying the truth, you want the truth, and that is how we saw you, all of you, at first. Monsters. The deformed ones, the freaks, the cripples.

When was then? I don’t know. Then was a very long time ago, that’s all I know.

The caves are old. You have seen them. They are old caves. They are high in the rocks, well above any waves, even big ones, even the biggest. In stormy seas you can stand on the cliffs and look down and think that water is everything, is everywhere, but then the storm stops and the sea sinks back into its place. We are not afraid of the sea. We are sea people. The sea made us. Our caves are warm, with sandy floors, and dry, and the fires outside each cave burn sea-brush and dry seaweed and wood from the cliffs, and these fires have never gone out, not since we first had them. There was a time we didn’t have fire. That is in our records. Our story is known. It is told to chosen youngsters and they have to remember it and tell it when they are old to new youngsters. They have to be sure they remember every word, as it was told to them.

What I am saying now is not part of this kind of recording. When the story is told to the young ones–they have a name, they are called the Memories–it is told first among ourselves, and one will say, ‘No, it was not like that,’ or another, ‘Yes, it was like that,’ and by the time everyone is agreed we can be sure there is nothing in the story that is untrue.

You want to know about me? Very well, then. My name is Maire. There is always someone called Maire. I was born into the family of Cleft Watchers, like my mother and like her mother–these words are new. If everyone gives birth, as soon as they are old enough, everyone is a mother, and you don’t have to say Mother. The Cleft Watchers are the most important family. We have to watch The Cleft. When the moon is at its biggest and brightest we climb up to above The Cleft where the red flowers grow, and we cut them, so there is a lot of red, and we let the water flow from the spring up there, and the water flushes the flowers down through The Cleft, from top to bottom, and we all have our blood flow. That is, all who are not going to give birth. Very well, have it your way, the moon’s rays make the blood flow, not the red running down through The Cleft. But we know that if we don’t cut the red flowers–they are small and soft like the blisters on seaweed, and they bleed red if you crush them–if we don’t do that, we will not have our flow.

The Cleft is that rock there, which isn’t the entrance to a cave, it is blind, and it is the most important thing in our lives. It has always been so. We are The Cleft, The Cleft is us, and we have always made sure it is kept free of saplings that might grow into trees, free of bushes. It is a clean cut down through the rock and under it is a deep hole. Every year, when the sun touches the top of that mountain there, it is always the cold time, and we have killed one of us, and thrown the body down from the top of The Cleft into the hole. You say you have counted the bones, but I don’t see how you can have, when some of the bones are dust by now. You say if a body and its bones has been thrown down every year, it is not so difficult to work out how long it has been going on. Well, if that is what you think is important…

No, I cannot say how it started. That isn’t in our story.

The Old Shes must have known something.

We never called them that before the Monsters began being born. Why should we? We only had Shes, didn’t we, only Clefts, and as for old, we didn’t think like that. People were born, they lived for a time, unless they drowned swimming or had an accident or were chosen to be thrown into The Cleft. When they died they were put out on the Killing Rock.

No, I don’t know how many of us there were then. Whenever then was. There are these caves, as many as I have fingers and toes, and they are big and they go back a long way into the cliffs. Each cave has the same kind of people in it, a family, the Cleft Watchers, the Fish Catchers, the Net Makers, the Fish Skin Curers, the Seaweed Collectors. And that is what we were called. My name was Cleft Watcher. No, why did it matter if several people had the same name? You can always tell by looking at someone, can’t you?

My name Maire is one of the new words.

We didn’t think like that, no, we didn’t, that every person had to have a name separate from all the others. Sometimes I think we lived in a kind of dream, a sleep, everything slow and easy and nothing ever happening but the moon being bright and big, and the red flowers washing down The Cleft.

And, of course, the babies being born. They were just born, that’s all, no one did anything to make them. I think we thought the moon made them, or a big fish, but it is hard to remember what we thought, it was such a dream. How we thought has never been part of our story, only what happened.

You get angry when I say Monsters, but just look at yourself. Look at yourself–and look at me. Go on, look. I am not wearing the red flower belt so you can see how I am. Now look at The Cleft, we are the same, The Cleft and the Clefts. No wonder you cover yourselves there, but we don’t have to. We are nice to look at, like one of those shells we can pick off a rock after a storm. Beautiful–you taught us that word and I like to use it. I am beautiful, just like The Cleft with its pretty red flowers. But you are all bumps and lumps and the thing like a pipe which is sometimes like a sea squirt. Can you wonder that when the first babes like you were born we put them out for the eagles?

We always used to throw deformed babies there, on that rock, the sloping rock just past The Cleft itself. One side of The Cleft rises out of the Killing Rock, yes, that’s what we call it. We didn’t keep damaged babies, and we didn’t keep twins. We were careful to limit our numbers because it was better that way. Why was it? Because that’s how it has always been, and we never thought to change things. We did not have a lot of births, perhaps two or three to a cave in a long time, and sometimes a cave had no babies at all in it. Of course we are pleased when a baby is born, but if we kept all the babes born there would be no room for us all. Yes, I know you say we should find a bit of shore where there is more room, but we have always been here, and how could we move from The Cleft? This is our place, it has always been ours.

When we put out deformed babies the eagles came for them. We did not kill the babes, the eagles did it. An eagle keeps watch on that peak over there–can you see it? That little speck there, it is a great big eagle, the size of a person. We put out all the newborn Monsters and watched as the eagles carried them off to their nests. That time went on, we believe, and it went on, because the Old Shes (your name for them) were worried because there were so many fewer in the caves, so many Monsters had been born, more than babes like us, the females.

Males, females. New words, new people.

And it went on, instead of waiting for a birth with pleasure, we were afraid, and when one of us saw that the babe was a Monster, she was ashamed and the others hated her. Not for ever, of course, but it was a terrible thing, the moment when a Monster appeared at the moment of giving birth. There were fewer of us catching fish and gathering seafood. The Old Shes were complaining they were not getting enough to eat. Yes, we always fed them and gave them the nicest bits to eat. I don’t know why, we just did. Suddenly there were only half the number in the Fish Catchers’ cave, and some of the others who were not Fish Catchers had to become Catchers.

I agree, it was strange we never thought to wonder what was happening on the other side of the Eagles’ Hills. You always talk as if we are stupid, but if we are so stupid how is it we have lived for so long, safely and well, so much longer than you, the Monsters, have. Our story goes back and back, you tell us so, but your story is much shorter. But why should we have moved about and looked for new things, or wondered about the eagles? What for? We have everything we want on this part of the island–your word for it, you tell us it is a large island. Well, good for you, but what difference does that make to us? We live in the part of the island where we watch the sun drop into the sea every night, and watch the moon grow pale as day comes.

A long time after the first Monster was born, we saw down on that part of the seashore nearest to the Eagles’ Hills one of the Monsters, one of you. It had tied around its waist one of the fish-skin cloths we wear at the time of the red flower. We could see that under the skin was the lumpy swelling thing we thought was so ugly. This was a Monster we had given birth to, grown up. How had that happened? The Old Shes said we should lie in wait and kill that Monster next time it appeared on the shore. Then there was disagreement among the Old Shes, and some said we should climb up to the hills where the eagles lived next time we put out a Monster to die, and watch where the eagles took it. And some of us did that. They were very afraid, that is in the story we make the youngsters learn. We were not in the habit of roaming about and certainly never as far as the Eagles’ Hills. No one had gone so far before. Yes, I know it is not more than a comfortable walk.

They saw the eagle carry the Monster in its claws up to the hills where the nests are but instead of dropping the baby in a nest the eagle went on and carried the baby down into a valley where there are huts. We had never seen a hut or any shelter because we had always had our caves. The huts seemed like some kind of strange animal, and very nearly frightened us into running back home. The eagle took the baby down, and

Enjoying the preview?
Page 1 of 1