More handpicked essays just for you.
symbolism essay on the necklace.
The Necklace by Guy de Maupassant Analysis
The Necklace by Guy de Maupassant Analysis
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: symbolism essay on the necklace.
In the short story “The Necklace” the journey of Mathilde Loisel is told. She was greedy and ungrateful. As the main character, her snotty tone and ungratefulness showed through. Overall as a character, she did not change; she is still greedy and ungrateful. As the main character, Mathilde was extremely greedy. Her husband received an invitation for him and his wife to an extravagant and higher up in the social class event; however, Mathilde was upset. Her husband gave her money for a new dress. She then had no jewelry, which led her going to Madame Forestier, a friend. Madame Forestier let her borrow a necklace. During the time of looking, Mathilde forgot to be grateful that her friend was letting her borrow the jewelry and wanted to see all
To start off with, Mathilde had many conflicts she had to face during the story. First, she was poor and low in the social class. In the textbook it says, “she dressed plainly because she could not afford fine clothes.” She does not have money to buy new clothes because she is poor. Secondly, she got invited to the ball but had no evening clothes. “Only I don’t have an evening dress and therefore I can’t go to the affair.” Mathilde is poor and does not own an evening dress and can’t afford a dress she thinks she can’t go to the ball. Next, she has no jewelry to wear. . “It’s embarrassing not to have a jewel or gem-nothing to wear on my dress. I’ll look pauper.” She has no jewels or gems to go with her dress. Finally, she overcame many conflicts
She thought that she had a horrible life when really she was a strong woman with a lucky life and a loving husband. Towards the end of the story it says, “Madame Loisel looked old now. She had become the sort of strong woman, hard, and coarse, that one finds in poor families”(Maupassant 300). Loisel was, again very poor from the ten years of trying to pay off her necklace debts, but not only is ten years older, she looks much older than that from the constant working. At the end of the story, she runs into the woman whom she borrowed the necklace from, and the woman says this, “Oh, my poor, poor Mathilde! Mine was false, it was only worth five hundred Francs at the most”(Maupassant 301)! Loisel, after all the hard working her and her husband did finds out the the necklace was false and worth thousands less than what she had payed off. At the end of “The Necklace” Madame Loisel is much older from the ten years of aging work, and realized that the hard life she thought she had before. She did not actually have until now, but all the hardships made her a stronger and tougher woman than
In “The Necklace”, Mathilde feels she has been born into a family of unfavorable economic status. She’s so focused on what she doesn’t have. She forgets about her husband who treats her good. She gets too carried away being someone someone
and Mme. Loisel cooperate to find what seems to be an exact replica of the lost necklace, which they must purchase and return to Mme. Forestier. Mathilde attempts to find a replacement for the necklace to prevent Mme. Forestier from realizing the original had been lost. The couple travelled “from one jeweler to another hunting for a similar necklace” (175). They went together to look for the necklace, which proves that they are exerting mutual effort. M. Loisel uses all means necessary to pay for the necklace. He “made ruinous deals” (187) and “risked his signature” (188) in order to pay for the expensive diamond necklace. Though Mme. Loisel lost the necklace, her husband uses his savings and takes out loans to help her pay for the replacement. The couple acquires the necklace and must return it to Mme. Forestier. M. Loisel brings the necklace home, and “Mme. Loisel took the necklace back” (199) to the owner. The couple collaborates to get the necklace into the hands of its owner. Mathilde and M. Loisel work together to replace Mme. Forestier’s necklace, and she is none the
When Mathilde goes to her friend’s house to borrow the necklace she is taken with its exquisite beauty and “her heart throb[s] with an immoderate desire” (para. 45). Although Mathilde does not know the value of the necklace at the time, it appears very luxurious. It exhibits precisely the characteristics that she wishes for others to perceive her as having. Later, when Mathilde loses the necklace, she does not want to tell her friend. She fears that Madame Forestier will mistake “[her] for a thief” (para. 91). Although she is not guilty of stealing, her fear of being viewed in such a way is enough to lead her to a decision that will change the course of her life. After ten years of arduous labor, Mathilde and her husband finally pay off the debt taken out to replace the lost necklace. Mathilde happens to run into Madame Forestier again. During this encounter, she learns the true value of the necklace when her friend states that the “necklace was paste” (para. 121) and “it was worth at most only five hundred francs” (para. 121). What a devastating blow – to find out that the very thing that still stirs up such feelings of royalty within her is a fake! This serves as the final proof that things are only as wonderful or awful as you believe them to
She comes from a good family that works for what they have. She marries a good hard workingman. But, Mathilde is not happy the way she is living and she daydreams about having the glamorous life. From having fancy tapestries, grand banquets to tall footmen. One day her husband, M. Loisel, comes homes extremely excited to show his wife an invitation that he has received to go to a fancy ball. She is not happy because she has nothing to wear and she doesn’t want to show up looking ugly with house full of rich people. She got the dress she wanted but then was not happy because she needed jewelry to go with this dress. Mathilde went to her rich friend to borrow jewels from. Of course she went with the most extravagant piece of jewelry, a diamond necklace. Showing up to the fancy ball with everybody adoring what a beauty she is, Mathilde was finally satisfied. When she got home after the fancy ball, she noticed that the necklace she borrowed was missing. Looking franticly for weeks, Mathilde then decided she had to replace the necklace. Replacing the necklace took everything they had and more. Mr. and Mrs. Loisel then became extremely poor with no money to there name. They then had to sell everything had and both now had to work. This went on for about ten years. Mathilde had no beauty to her anymore, she had to work, and do the house keeping. The
Mathilde lives in an illusive world where her desires do not meet up to the reality of her life. She yearns for the status of being upper class, and she believes that her beauty and charm are worthy of much more. Mathilde spends her life doing everything in her power to create the dream life she has always imagined, to be beautiful, rich, and admired. Her husband provided her with a well-off lifestyle that she neglected and treated poorly due to her selfishness and greediness, and took advantage of his hard work at the first chance possible. When presented with the invitation to the party, she immediately rejects the request due to her fear of others judging her “middle class appearance”. But her loving husband offers her the hard earned money he had been saving up so she can treat herself to a brand new dress for the party. Her actions are centered around the happiness of herself, and have no good intentions towards her husband or
Guy de Maupassant’s “The Necklace” tells the story of Mathilde Loisel: a less-than-fortunate woman who believes she was destined for a life of luxury, and is thus dissatisfied with her life. Through Mathilde’s unhappy personality, the morality at the heart of the story is addressed; who you appear to be does not define who you are, but rather the way you go about
Mathilde and Loisel were married at a time when individuals were joined together more by financial status then love. Mathilde was from a poor household and daydreamed that she was destined for more in life, including marriage. Guy De Maupassant, the author of " The Necklace" describes a relationship between two people with different dreams and how desires can alter your life. Distinguishing between reality and dreams can bring relationships closer together with respect for one another.
The late Irish poet Oscar Wilde once stated, "In the world there are only two tragedies. One is not getting what one wants, and the other is getting it" (qtd. in The Quotations Page). This quote accurately describes human nature to the extent that man is never fully satisfied with his current possessions. In fact, most people who rely on materialistic items for happiness are typically desolated and miserable. Guy de Maupassant enlivens these assertions in his short story, "The Necklace." Maupassant reveals his ingenious style through a portrayal of a battle with morality, in which the central character, Mathilde Loisel, struggles with excessive wants that ultimately doom her to perpetual despair.
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.
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 conflict began when Mathilde attended a party wearing a necklace she borrowed from a rich friend, which was discovered lost by the end of the night. Mathilde finally got a glimpse into the life she believed she belonged to, but both she and her husband paid for it heavily for many years to come. The necklace she borrowed and lost served as a gateway into that world, and as a hasty exit out of it.
Loisel repaid the necklace together with their sweat and tears. Mathilde didn’t have a choice; she had to change from a vain, ungrateful, material, bored wife, into a hardworking proud and loving wife. She even says, right before she runs into Mme. Forestier, “What would have happened if she had not lost that necklace? Who knows? Who knows? How life is strange and changeful! How little a thing is needed for us to be lost or to be saved!”(39) In that quote I saw 2 things, when she asked herself what would have happened if she didn’t lose the necklace, she doesn’t go into some fairytale about what life she could be living, she just accepts what she is now, even if it’s not the easiest life in the world. At the very end of that quote “How little a thing is needed for us to be lost or to be saved!”(39) The fact that she added “or to be saved!” to her thought, tells me that she realizes that she was vain and unappreciated and that she lacked character, but now she is grateful, even though it was such a terrible thing, she was grateful that she was able to say that she was a better person now, even after everything that happened to her than she ever “dreamed” of being before. Guy de Maupassant certainly described a very difficult hardship for Mathilde in “The Necklace” but in the end, everything that happened to her, made her a much better and stronger woman inside and out. This story teaches a very important lesson, you have no idea what you can do and who you can become, until your chips are down and you’re put between a rock and a hard
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