Does being truthful ever have more consequences than lying? In “The Necklace”, a short story by Guy de Maupassant, the main character Mme. Loisel and her husband hunt for the necklace that they lost after a party. In the second half of the 19th century Mme. Loisel was a in the lower class in a small city. The price really does pay when they can't find the necklace. Through plot development and characterization, Guy de Maupassant teaches readers that bad things will catch up to dishonest and greedy people. Mme. Loisel was very greedy and dishonest to her friends throughout the story, she always expects that she should always have the best that is available. To start, Mme. Loisel expresses and grieves over her dress that Supposably not good enough for this party that her husband got invitations for. “Oh, nothing. Only I don’t have an …show more content…
Mme. Loisel explains that the dress she has to go to the theater in isn’t good enough to go to the party. She expects that she should have the best, to go to this event with some very wealthy individuals. M. Loisel then spends his money that he was going to buy a rifle with to buy her this beautiful dress that she envisioned. She could’ve worn the theater dress that she already owned, but instead she decided that that wasn’t good enough for her. Secondly, after the couple had been searching for the diamond necklace for hours on the cold winter night, they decided to do something very inappropriate decision, “‘We’ll have to write your friend,’ he said, ‘to tell her you have broken the catch and are having it repaired’”(214). This suggests that Mme. Loisel was being extraordinarily dishonest to Mme. Forestier because she told her the catch on the
Loisel sadly possesses is being spoiled. In the story one of the ways her spoiledness is conveyed is when she refuses to go to the reception without a jewel to wear. In the text it states, “‘It is embarrassing not to have a jewel or a gem to wear on my dress… I’d almost rather not go to that party.” This reveals her spoiledness because after her husband went through all that trouble to get her a dress, invitation and shoes she almost won't go just because she doesn't have a necklace ethir. Another way her spoiledness is revealed in the story is when she receives an invitation, that her husband got her, to the reception. In the text it states, “Instead of being delighted, as her husband had hoped, she scornfully tossed the invitation on the table, murmuring ‘What good is that to me?’ This quote shows she is spoiled, because her husband probably worked really hard to get her that invitation and she just tossed it on the table like junk mail. These are all ways her spoiledness is portrayed in the story and how it has gotten her nowhere and only hurt others.
In the short story, “The Necklace,” a greedy and selfish woman brings financial ruin upon herself and her husband. They go from a comfortable lifestyle in a slightly shabby apartment to an impoverished existence in an attic apartment. Mathilde Loisel was born to a lower middle class French family, but she wished that she could have of noble birth. Her longing for a better life caused her great grief. When she could have been happy with her situation in life, instead she would dream of a grand home and wealthy, dignified friends. When she borrowed a diamond necklace from a friend and lost it at an elegant party, she brought downfall to her husband and herself. Not only does Guy de Maupassant use the necklace as a vehicle for the hard times that the Loisels had to endure, but he also uses it as a symbol to teach a lesson about the repercussions of greed, ruin, and regret.
Telling the truth will always prevent future conflicts. Author Guy De Maupassant who lived from 1850 to 1893 proves in the story of “The Necklace,” that no matter how bad a situation is, speaking with the truth is always best. Now, this author does not prove this theme directly. Instead, throughout various situations in the story the main characters are faced with a long-term conflict because decisions were not made with honesty. Mathilde and Loisel who is her husband, who works as a clerk at the Ministry of Public Instructions, were both faced with a conflict that could have been prevented. For instance, Mathilde asked her friend Mme. Forestier if she could borrow a beautiful piece of jewelry for a ball event her husband Loisel had been invited to. Unfortunately, Mathilde loses the borrowed necklace and suggest that since it belongs to her rich friend it was worth more than what they could ever afford. Mathilde and Loisel decide to not tell Mme. Forestier about the lost necklace and instead they buy her a similar one. However, the one they buy is worth a lot more than what the lost necklace was worth. They both end up working multiple jobs for 10 years in order to pay off the necklace. The moral of this story is that everyone should always speak with the truth, because Mathilde and Loisel could have avoided this conflict if only they had told Mme. Forestier about the lost necklace. Many factors such as lying, desiring other’s valuables, and being so attentive to what people might think, is a good way that a situation like Mathilde’s could have been avoided.
Instead she married a simple middle class man and lived a middle class life. All the while she dreamed of living the life of the rich. With beautiful gowns and glittering jewelry. Oh how happy she thought she would be. Then one day it happened that she and her husband where invited to a dinner ball. Her husband, Mr. Loisel thought this would make his wife so very happy since this is what she spent all of her time day dreaming of. Here it was, the thing that consumed her finally at her door step, but she was not happy. In fact, Mathilde was even more distraught because it brought to her attention that she had nothing proper to wear. Mr. Loisel sympathized with his wife and knowing he had money set aside for a new shot gun, he gave her 400 francs. This was enough money for a pretty dress, not too fancy, but pretty because he knew this would be a rare occasion.
In Guy De Maupassant short story, “The Necklace,” he uses the necklace as a symbol of deceptive appearance. There is proof in this story that one’s appearance can be deceiving. The significance of theme is that throughout, it reveals which is that looks can be deceiving. Mathilde and the necklace itself are two pieces of evidence that shows that appearances can be deceiving. The reader gets the impression, from the author’s description of the necklace that it is stunning and very expensive. However, after a shocking surprise, the appearance of the necklace is what it appeared to be.
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:
Values are spread all around the world, and many people’s values differ. These can lead to people being judged, or indirectly characterized by other people. In “The Necklace” Mme. Loisel is a beautiful woman with a decent life, and a husband that loves her, and only wants to make her happy. She is not rich but she makes it along, she insists of a better, wealthier life. When her husband gets her invited to a ball, she feels the need for a brand new fancy dress and tons of jewelry. When the couple realizes they cannot afford jewelry as well, they search out to borrow her friend, Mme. Forestiers’ necklace. She comes to notice she no longer has the necklace on when she leaves the ball. This later troubles her, as she has to work for a long time to collect enough money to buy a new necklace. This story describes the relationship between a couple, who have different dreams, and how desires can revamp your life. Guy de Maupassant, the author of “The Necklace” uses literary devices to prove people come before materialistic items.
While at the market she sees across the way a familiar looking woman walking with a child she approached the woman but the woman hadn’t recognized Madame Loisel. “She went up to her ‘Good morning, Jeanne.’ The other did not recognize her, and was surprised at being thus familiarly addressed by a poor woman. ‘But… Madame…’ she stammered ‘I don’t know you must be making a mistake.’ ‘No… I am Mathilde Loisel’ Her friend uttered a cry.
This piece of evidence shows us that even though she has been given a chance to attend a ball and wear an expensive dress, Madam Loisel still desired more. It shows that a greedy person will always want more and more. Furthermore, greed is still relevant in the
This also showed that wealth and status cannot buy true happiness and peace. Being honest may have not brought the wealth Madame Loisel wanted but it would have produced happiness in the end. At the end of novel after Loisel finds out that the necklace was never real it then commences to click that her and her husband hard work was in vain. Another edification in this is to be content and grateful with the things given to you and appreciate them because love, family, and jubilance hold a greater value than money and materialistic things. In the end it was evident that Loisel missed out on her youth and no longer had the opportunity to have the family she wanted.
Despite her husbands attempts to reconcile, Mathilde and her selfishness could not be mollified. When Mathilde and her husband were invited to an exclusive and extravagant social gathering, she demanded that she be given a large sum given money in order to purchase a new dress. Mathilde also requested to borrow lavish jewelry from her wealthy friend, Madame Forestier. While at this gathering Mathilde managed to misplace the expensive jewelry provided by her friend. In despair Mathilde could not bring herself
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.
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.
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
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.