If the chance were given, most people would accept the offer to have a wish come true, but wishes often come with consequences. In “The Monkey’s Paw” and “The Necklace” both stories have characters who seize the opportunity to have a wish granted, and must suffer the consequences. In “The Monkey’s Paw” by W.W. Jacobs, a married couple receives the mummified paw of a monkey that can allegedly grant wishes. They receive a warning of its darkness, but proceed nonetheless and in the end, their son dies because of their unintended wish. In “The Necklace” by Guy De Maupassant, a depressed young woman never stops complaining because she feels that she is poor and strives for beauty, fame, and money. Her carelessness eventually leads her to become …show more content…
Maupassant also shows that wishes come with consequences and can lead to drastic effects. The main character, Mathilde Loisel, has an ordinary life, yet she yearns for beauty, wealth, and greatness. “She had longed so eagerly to charm, to be desired, to be wildly attractive and sought after.” (p1). Madame Loisel was never satisfied with anything, even when her husband had gotten her an invitation to an exclusive ball she tossed it aside, as she had nothing to wear. Throughout the story, Mathilde borrows a diamond necklace from her friend, Madame Forestier, and loses it at the ball. She and her husband spend all of their life savings to buy her friend a new diamond necklace so that she would not tell the difference between the two necklaces. “Oh, my poor Mathilde! But mine was imitation. It was worth at the very most five hundred francs!...” (p7). This shows that because of her selfish desires, Mathilde had wound up much worse than the was in the beginning of the story. Unlike “The Monkey’s Paw”, Mathilde did not have a magical object to grant her wishes, but when she pursued what she wanted without thinking how it would affect others, she suffered the
In these stories the most noticeable similarity is that they both are centered around the three wishes and magical things that grant them. “He put a spell on it so that three separate man could have three wishes..” (Monkeyś Paw page 2). Similarly in the goldfish story, “If you found a talking goldfish that granted you three wishes, what would you wish for?” The fact that they are granted three wishes are the same, but they are granted by different things. In The Goldfish story they are granted by a talking goldfish, but in Monkeyś Paw they are granted by the cursed paw. This might seem like a little difference, but each one plays a role in the story line. This is because the character in The Goldfish [Sergei] is lonely and wants the goldfish to be its companion. This is why he struggled to give up his third wish, because as soon has the goldfish grants your third wish he is to be set free. This is the main part of this story and it would not make sense for a cursed Monkeyś Paw to
Just like a genie, right? Wrong. Thesewishes come with an outstanding price. The story proves that interfering with fate can have a disastrous outcome. “The Monkey’s Paw” uses literary devices to create a story filled with both suspense and horror..
Two stories may be very different, but very alike. “The Monkey's Paw” by W.W. Jacobs is relatively similar to another story named, “The Third Wish” by Joan Aiken. These stories are very different in tone but very similar in the main idea. In both stories a man acquires three wishes and must use more than one to fix previous wish mistakes. One is accidental death and another is a sad companion. Both stories tackle the, “be careful what you wish for” idea and both show that problems can be created from wishes.
The Simpsons episode “The Simpsons Treehouse of Horror II” is about a magical monkey’s paw bought by the Simpsons, a modern day family that lives in a town called Springfield. The family uses the paw to grant themselves four wishes. The wishes, they soon find out, all include repercussions that harm the family in some way. The book “The Monkey’s Paw” is about a family that is given a monkey’s paw by a friend that says it can grant three wishes. The family’s home in this story is Laburnum Villa, sometime in the past. At first the family is skeptical of the friends claim that the paw is magic saying, “If the tale about the monkey’s paw is not more truthful than those he has been telling us, we shan't make much out of it.”(Page 4, W.W. Jacobs). They then proceed to use the paw and are surprised to find that what they wish for is in fact granted but comes with terrible consequences. While “The Monkey’s Paw” and “The Simpsons, Treehouse of Horror II” both share similar plots, the settings of the stories and the
In the film and story of “The Monkey’s Paw” there was always a consequence to having their wishes granted. The text of “The Monkey’s Paw” by Jacob W.W for the first wish it two hundred pounds as a consequence for the wish Herbert dies. In says this in the text "I'm sorry—" began the visitor. "Is he hurt?" demanded the mother, wildly. The visitor
Other details in the story also have a similar bearing on Mathilde’s character. For example, the story presents little detail about the party scene beyond the statement that Mathilde is a great “success” (7)—a judgment that shows her ability to shine if given the chance. After she and Loisel accept the fact that the necklace cannot be found, Maupassant includes details about the Parisian streets, about the visits to loan sharks, and about the jewelry shop in order to bring out Mathilde’s sense of honesty and pride as she “heroically” prepares to live her new life of poverty. Thus, in “The Necklace,” Maupassant uses setting to highlight Mathilde’s maladjustment, her needless misfortune, her loss of youth and beauty, and finally her growth as a responsible human being.
Oates's Connie was a pretty, flirtatious, naive young girl who flaunted herself without any concern of what bad outcomes could happen. Oates had an idea of how to prepare young women from being aware of their situation, so they would not draw too much attention on themselves. In the case of Connie, she was not careful, and because of her unselfish awareness she was abducted and possibly taken to her death. Now with Jacobs characters in the "Monkey's Paw", they were desperate to gain an advantage in life by making 3 wishes. Jacobs was trying to convey that sometimes when something is too good to be true that it probably is not. Jacobs characters did not follow the wariness and in the process they lost their son. I feel that if you are not cautious and do not prepare or grab to surreality usually resorts into more harm than good. For those two situations, that was the outcome. One should be aware of what going on in life. If there are warnings of a series of events put in front of them take the threats as a clue and walk away or go where it is
In the “Monkey’s Paw”, the White family makes their first wish as to gain two hundred pounds.While the family just sees the wish as a funny joke except for the father who has actually felt the moving of the paw, an unexpected disaster comes with the arrival of the stranger from their son’s industry. The stranger comes with the unfortunate news that their son has been caught in the machinery and the compensation presented by the company which is exactly two hundred pounds as they wish. This situation is never coincident which just happens by chance, it is the result of wishing to the evil monkey paw. Even though the wish is fulfilled, the result is never imagined by anyone beforehand.
Guy de Maupassant expresses his theme through the use of situational irony. Guy de Maupassant says, “She suffered endlessly, feeling herself born for every delicacy and luxury. She suffered from the poorness of her house. All these things, of which other women of her class would not even have been aware, tormented and insulted her.”(De Maupassant). She is poor and thinks of herself too much and then he says "but she was as unhappy as though she had married beneath her; for women have no caste or class.”(De Maupassant). She wants more than she can get which will ruin her later in the story. When she lost the necklace by the end of the week they had lost all hope to find it. Loisel, who had aged five years, declared:
Maupassant delighted me with this story. I especially liked how he present the character Mathilde, she seemed to be extremely ungrateful with her mediocre life. She dreamed of wealth and fame and it seemed like nothing would please her. She focused so much on her desire to have social status that when she got the opportunity to go a social gathering with elite members of society, she would not go unless she had a fancy dress and fancy necklace. For one night, she felt like “somebody”. I found this story to display themes of gross vanity, irony and suffering. Because in the end Mathilde worked hard to replace the necklace that she presumed was real. She was never able to have another day of pleasure or go out to any other events. She made such a big deal of the one event, she lost herself in the feeling of being social accepted by a higher class in society.
Mathilde Loisel lived the life of a painfully distressed woman, who always believed herself worthy of living in the upper class. Although Mathilde was born into the average middle class family, she spent her time daydreaming of her destiny for more in life. especially when it came to her financial status. Guy de Maupassant’s short story, “The Necklace”, tells a tale of a vain, narcissistic housewife who longed for the aristocratic lifestyle that she believed she was creditable for. In describing Mathilde’s self-serving, unappreciative, broken and fake human behavior, de Maupassant incorporates the tragic irony that ultimately ends in ruining her.
In the short story “The Necklace”, the main character, Loisel, is a woman who dreams of greater things in her life. She is married to a poor clerk who tries his best to make her happy no matter what. In an attempt to try to bring happiness to his wife, he manages to get two invitations to a very classy ball, but even in light of this Loisel is still unhappy. Even when she gets a new dress she is still unhappy. This lasts until her husband suggests she borrows some jewelry from a friend, and upon doing so she is finally happy. Once the ball is over, and they reach home, Loisel has the horrible realization that she has lost the necklace, and after ten years of hard labor and suffering, they pay off debts incurred to get a replacement. The central idea of this story is how something small can have a life changing effect on our and others life’s. This idea is presented through internal and external conflicts, third person omniscient point of view, and the round-dynamic character of Loisel. The third person limited omniscient point-of-view is prevalent throughout this short story in the way that the author lets the reader only see into the main character’s thoughts. Loisel is revealed to the reader as being unhappy with her life and wishing for fancier things. “She suffered ceaselessly, feeling herself born for all the delicacies and all the luxuries.” (de Maupassant 887) When her husband tries to fancy things up, “she thought of dainty dinners, of shining silverware, of tapestry which peopled the walls…” (de Maupassant 887) As the story goes on her point of view changes, as she “now knew the horrible existence of the needy. She took her part, moreover all of a sudden, with heroism.” (de Maupassant 891) Having the accountability to know that the “dreadful debt must be paid.” (de Maupassant 891 ) This point-of-view is used to help the reader gain more insight to how Loisel’s whole mindset is changed throughout her struggle to pay off their debts. Maupassant only reveals the thoughts and feelings of these this main character leaving all the others as flat characters. Loisel is a round-dynamic character in that Maupassant shows how she thought she was born in the wrong “station”. “She dressed plainly because she could not dress well, but she was as unhappy as though she had really fallen from her proper station.
At the beginning of Maupassant’s story he goes through a long wish list of all the fine things Mathilda dreams of having. Mathilda believes that those objects hold power to shape and enrich one’s life. Only by having these object does she think she will be happy. Though these objects hold no true power she is blind and pursues them anyways. Mathilda managed to receive a desirable dress and a necklace for the ball being held. These objects in a sense did have powers to be true. The powers of illusion and deceit was their cunning trait. She attended the ball with her lavished items, she received all the praise, and all the excitement she dreamed of. To this degree the objects were successful at fooling others at the ball that she was a high aristocratic woman who could afford such pleasantries. So in reality the objects don’t work as she would believe in her delusion. The necklace in particular has a major impact on Madame and Monsieur Louisel. After Mathilda loses the necklace the couple cooperate to keep it secret and replace the fancy necklace with a new one. This puts them in extreme poverty, hardship, and a sense false righteous sacrifice. The necklace held this unseen power to flip their old middle class life into the lowest ends of poverty. Although the object itself still did little to nothing but be. In all truth, Madame and
The moral of Guy de Maupassant’s story “The Necklace” seems to be suggested by the line, “What would have happened if Mathilde had not lost the necklace?” If Mathilde had not lost the necklace, or in fact, even asked to borrow the necklace, she and Mr. Loisel would not of been in debt ten long years. Because Mathilde had to borrow the necklace to make herself and others like her better her and Mr. Loisel’s economic situation had become worse than it already was. I think that the moral of the story is that people need to be happy with what they have and not be so greedy.
Guy De Maupassant’s short story The Necklace portrays an example of destiny as well as the consequences of a person’s decisions. The non-escaping reality of fate becomes apparent during the direst of situations. The hunger for possessions considered out of reach can drive a person to become resentful and angry, and therefore, turning one against his or her destiny. Although Maupassant’s leading lady Mathilde desperately desired a lifestyle she believed could have been achieved, the fate of her life ultimately over-shadowed the decisions she made. Fighting what is conclusively unchangeable can be proven to have an ironic outcome on the choices made in everyday life.