Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The relationship between setting and character. the necklace by guy de maupassant
Realism and naturalism
The relationship between setting and character. the necklace by guy de maupassant
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Guy De Maupassant’s, “The Necklace” is a short story about a woman whose life is not what she feels she deserves. The woman, Mathilda, lives in an illusory world where appearances, objects, and associations have life changing powers. Each three of Mathilda’s “life changing powers” will touch on the themes listed; that it can be dangerous to be obsessed with materialistic things, be appreciative of what you have, and don’t be deceitful to others or yourself. Maupassant was influenced by the schools of realism and naturalist. If someone was to read Maupassant’s short story, “The Necklace” they would observe the influence of realism since this fictional story is about a realistic middleclass household in the 1870’s. Mathilda in the story desires …show more content…
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 …show more content…
The associations Mathilda makes with people is one of the major sources that seal her fate. Mathilda clearly associates her household with being poor and worthless. She dreads her everyday dinner with her husband; scoffing at her home, the average meal, the clear normality of their lives. She thinks of herself too highly, too pretty to be in the home of a lowly store clerk. Mathilda associate her own husband as being the essence of lower life because he does not make the lots of money to feed her inner desires. Since this is the case Mathilda associates the best she can with her friend Madame Forestier. Forestier is the lady Mathilda would like to be, beautiful and rich. By befriending Madame Forestier, Mathilda thinks she can get closer to becoming a lady of stature, grace, and riches. Madame Forestier has box and boxes of jewelry and is where Mathilda barrows the necklace from. Though Mathilda sees Madame Forestier as key to evolving, in reality Madame Forestier can do little to help her. The little Madame Forestier did do was lend a necklace, she has no power over Mathilda’s life, only Mathilda does. Mathilda has similar views of going to the ball. Mathilda refuses to go to the ball without a dress and necklace because she thinks all the other ladies there are going to have these things. There would be only shame to Mathilda’s name if she were to attend with
The Necklace is a great example of how our desires can create tragedy rather than happiness. Madame Forestier would have rather been idolized for her wealth instead of buying items that grant her survival. She says,”It’s just that I have no evening dress and so I can’t go to the party.” which explains well how she had a finite amount of money and thought material wealth was more important than happiness. If she only knew before that she would spend the next decade working off her debt, she would have never asked for the necklace and she would have had a happy life. Furthermore, wealth isn’t the only thing that brings happiness to a life.
...only to find out years later that the necklace was not made of real diamonds but glass. This story shows the social pressure put on those of lower classes and how they wish to be a part of the better group. Maupassant uses Mathilde’s obsession to drive her into poverty and shame. For the time, this story analyzes how hard one had to work to even attain any bit of fortune.
First, there is a demonstration of dramatic irony, when Mathilde returns a necklace to Mme. Forestier. After Mathilde lost the borrowed necklace, she replaced it and returned back to Mme. Forestier. However, Mme. Forestier did not know that Mathilde had “[replaced] that piece of jewelry.” (9). This shows that Mathilde cares about her reputation more than her friendship. Mathilde did not want anyone to know that she lost a borrowed necklace. It would have tarnished her reputation, and caused her a lifetime of embarrassment. It also demonstrates how Mathilde is materialistic. She also considers an item more precious than her friendship. As a result, she deceives Mme. Forestier and gives her a necklace that looks exactly the same. Additionally, Mathilde uses Monsieur Loisel’s saved money, which had been “set aside...to buy a rifle...” to buy a dress (5). Monsieur Loisel does not tell Mathilde about his intention to use the saved money. Since Monsieur Loisel does not tell Mathilde, he knows that she most likely would have taken it anyway. This shows her ungratefulness toward Monsieur Loisel and the
A common literary device, symbolism is used in this story. Symbolism is when something has a greater meaning within itself. For example, the necklace is considered a symbol in the story. When looking at necklaces at Madame Forestier she finds one that just jumps out at her. She believes it is everything she wants in life. This is symbolic because it was only a necklace it could not fulfill all of her dreams of a rich high-class life. “She wasn’t at all convinced “No… There’s nothing more humiliating than to look poor among a lot of rich woman”. This quote is said before borrowing the necklace, but it is the reason she borrows it from Madame. Furthermore, the necklace is not really going to change who she ...
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.
Although Madame Loisel isn’t wealthy or part of the social class that is considered high, she tried to do everything to make herself appear as if she is. She believes that her beauty can bring her as far as becoming wealthy or being able to socialize with the wealthy. The ball is important to her because for once her appearance is equivalent with the fantasy of rising above middle class she has dreamt up in her head and “[she] was a success. She was the loveliest of all; elegant, graceful, smiling, and radiant with joy. All the other men looked at her, asked who she was, and wanted to be introduced to her… [t]he triumph of her beauty and the glory of her success enveloped her in a sort of cloud of happiness made up of all the compliments” (175). The reality is beneath her appearance because she is not wealthy, nor is she actually happy with the life she lives on a daily basis. She easily deceives everyone with her appearance to make it seem as if she does have money. Uncontrolled self-absorption can distort lives to those who worry about their appearance too much. Another example of how appearances can be misleading is the necklace that Madame Loisel borrowed. It appears as if it is made of real diamonds but instead it is fake jewelry. The fact
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:
A common literary device, symbolism is used in this story. Symbolism is when something has a greater meaning within itself. The example of this in the story is the necklace. When looking at necklaces at Madame Forestier she finds one that just jumps out at her. She believes it is everything she wants in life. This is symbolic because it was only a necklace it could not fulfill all of her dreams of a rich high-class life. “She wasn’t at all convinced “No… There’s nothing more humiliating than to look poor among a lot of rich woman”. This quote is said before borrowing the necklace, but it is the reason she borrows it from Madame. The necklace is not really going to change who she is in reality. The necklace ...
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.
Around the world, values are expressed differently. Some people think that life is about the little things that make them happy. Others feel the opposite way and that expenses are the way to live. In Guy de Maupassant’s short story, “The Necklace”, he develops a character, Madame Loisel, who illustrates her different style of assessments. Madame Loisel, a beautiful woman, lives in a wonderful home with all the necessary supplies needed to live. However, she is very unhappy with her life. She feels she deserves a much more expensive and materialistic life than what she has. After pitying herself for not being the richest of her friends, she goes out and borrows a beautiful necklace from an ally. But as she misplaces the closest thing she has to the life she dreams of and not telling her friend about the mishap, she could have set herself aside from ten years of work. Through many literary devices, de Maupassant sends a message to value less substance articles so life can be spent wisely.
It is said that “everything that shines isn't gold.” A difficult situation can result a vast illusion that is not what one thought it would be, which leads to disappointment and despair. Just like Guy De Maupassant stories, “The Necklace” and “The Jewel.” In the first story, the protagonist, Mathilde Loisel’s need for materialistic fulfillment causes her hard labor which ends her natural beauty. In the second story, the husband Monsieur Latin ends up living a dreadful life due to the passing of his wife and her admiration for jewels. “The Necklace” and “The Jewel” both share many similarities such as the unconditional love each husband haves toward their wife, the necessity each wife haves towards materialistic greed, the beautiful allurement
In “The Necklace,” Mathilde’s internal struggle is with herself. She mentally battled with the physical and financial limitations placed on her, but more with her own soul. She was unhappy with her place in life and could not accept the simplicity of her station, believing it to be truly beneath her. “All those things… tortured her and made her angry. “ Her husband’s blatant acceptance of their place only fueled her frustrations further.
The Necklace also displays distinctive realism in the use of socioeconomic influences which are essential to the plot. The major conflict in the story would be absent and the theme would not be obtainable without Mathilde Loisel’s insecurity about her own socioeconomic reputation. An example of Loisel’s self-deprivation nature is presented when she realizes she does not have a necklace, she says “I shall look absolutely no one. I would almost rather not go to the party” (Maupassant, sec. 3). Another example of the self-conflict caused by social pressure is Loisel’s immediate attempt to replace the necklace and her reluctance to speak to her friend Madame Forestier about the necklace for ten whole years. If she were not conflicted by societal pressures she might have avoided the whole situation altogether. The Necklace establishes a realistic difference in value between the necklaces and proposed clothing. Her husband proposes flowers which were valued 10 franks so in any case if she had chosen the flowers there would have been an insignificant economic loss. Her decision not to tell her friend about the necklace ends up costing her seven times the worth of the original. The roses symbolize the simpler things in life to the theme of the story. Mathilde Loisel’s withered appearance at the end
At many places in the story he shows the irony of Madame Loisel’s situation. From the time of her marriage, through her growing years, Madame Loisel desires what she does not have and dreams that her life should be other than it is. It is only after ten years of hard labor and abject poverty that she realizes the mistake pride led her to make. At that point, the years cannot be recovered. In my opinion, the moral lesson of the necklace story is that we should not judge people on appearances because they may appear to be rich and successful and they may not be. It also explains us we should not pine after material possessions, but realize we are happy with what we have and we must be satisfied with what we have and what we are. We must be honest enough to confess his mistake instead of running from situations and turning back. There’s nothing wrong in have wishing though and dreams, but you must know your limits and your condition as
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.