Hester was living a upper- class life while making a middle-class salary. Her family lived in a good neighborhood with a nice, big house. They also had a gardener and a nanny. Also the children all had very nice, expensive toys, such as the rocking horse. Hester also would buy the nicest furniture and food available. Mathilde, however, was only able to wish for such things. She had a loving, caring husband that would do anything for her. In fact, he did do everything. Monsieur Loisel was in charge of working, cooking, and even cleaning. He gave Mathilde all he could afford. For dinner, they had a very nice french soup. This is not enough for Mathilde all she could think about was having better with eloquent table settings. She did this with everything in her life. She deserved a richer husband, nicer furniture, and prettier clothes. Although both female characters were greedy and were punished for it, they each lived a very different
“To be happy in life you must learn the difference between what you want vs need” (unknown). Most people who can not decipher between want and need don not appreciate life and objects to the fullest. An imbalance of these things can cause unhappiness, bad relationships, and debt. Deciding between things people want and what is need can be hard. The pain of having an imbalance is shown in The Necklace, The Golden Touch, and Avarice.
However, in “The Necklace,” Mathilde has more respect and support from her husband than Nora in “A Doll’s House,” which causes the couple to have more serious and intelligent conversations. When her husband informs her about the party invitation, Mathilde asks for money from her
The narrator illustrates Mathilde’s quality of selfishness after her husband asks her how much money she would like for a dress by remarking, “She thought over it… going over her allowance... thinking also of the amount she could ask for without bringing immediate refusal” (222). This portrays Mathilde's greed because she knows she is asking for more money than she needs for a suitable dress. Later, readers discover Mathilde is careless. When she first finds out the necklace is missing, she and her husband have a conversation. Monsieur Loisel asks, “Are you sure you had it when leaving the dance…if you had lost it on the street, we'd have heard it drop. It must be in the cab… Didn't you notice it?” (225). Mathilde replies, “No” (225). Because she cannot recall where or when she loses her necklace, Mathilde can be described as careless or absent-minded. Finally, through this story we can see Mathilde's quality of dishonesty. When Mathilde returns the diamond necklace box with a different necklace inside it to Madame Forestier, she thinks to herself, “She didn't open the case...If she had noticed the substitution, what would she have thought? What would she have said? Would she have thought her a thief?” (227). Mathilde's dishonest behavior represents her fear of appearing ordinary in front of society, when in fact, taking Madame Forestier’s necklace to appear affluent is an act. Her actions, conversations, and thoughts let readers understand Mathilde's distinct
Values do change based on influences, people believe that people don’t change but i see it differently. I believe that if somebody wants to change they will, I believe that influences change people,this is not all people a lot of people will never change but if you get influenced or you want to change it is possible.
In both Guy de Maupassant's short story “The Necklace” and Nathaniel Hawthorne's “The Birthmark”, the theme of vanity as downfall is very prominent. Maupassant's use of the birthmark and Hawthorne's use of the necklace as symbols offer direct evidence to this theme. My goal in this paper is to compare and contrast the two main symbols of the short stories in question using evidence from the source material.
In the short story “The Necklace”, Mathilde Loisel’s excessive pride destories her merriment. Guy de Maupassant emphasizes Mathilde’s pridefulness when she does not
Everyone in life wants to fit in because why would anyone want to be left out? However, the fact that we want to fit in ruins some people's lives because of the limits they go to to accomplish our common goal. On the contrary, some lives are ruined by trying to stand out and not staying with the crowd. This is very clearly stated in two very different ways by Guy de Maupassant in the story “The Necklace” and by Ray Bradbury in “The Pedestrian”. In both of these stories we are shown that you should not get caught up in what others are doing.
A boy from my second grade class boasted about owning the world’s highest jump and, once challenged by another student, proved it to us by leaping off the playground swing while it was at its maximum height. The results were a broken leg and the regrets of an act of arrogance. Guy de Maupassant's short story “The Necklace,” Edgar Allen Poe’s short story “The Cask of Amontillado,” and Homer’s epic poem The Odyssey, illustrate a shared theme on excessive pride resulting in self-sabotage.
Use evidence you have gathered from both passages “The Necklace” and “The Bet” to write an essay analyzing how dialogue in each passage functions to reveal aspects of the character. You should discuss more than one character from each passage.
Mathilde Loisel thinks she should be incredibly wealthy. However, by the end of the story, she is completely impoverished. Madame Loisel is introduced as “. . . feeling herself born for every delicacy and luxury” (1). Her conceited belief that she not only wants riches, but deserves them, is what ultimately leads to her losing everything she had. The reader gets a feeling of satisfaction and justice when her arrogant mentality is brought to a sudden halt. Situational irony also is used when Mathilde and her husband work so hard to return a fake diamond necklace. Mathilde has her night of extravagance with high class officials wearing her friend Madame Forestier’s necklace. When she loses it, her and her husband find another just like it, but since they cannot afford it, they must take out loans from whomever they can. After ten years of paying off their severe debt, Mathilde runs into Madame Forestier again and comes clean about losing the necklace. When Madame Forestier realizes how much her friend had worked to return her necklace, she says “‘But mine was imitation. It was worth at the very most five hundred francs!’” (10) . This realization adds to the sense of justice the reader gets. She still longs for total riches, even in abject poverty, ignoring all of the events that come after her night of wealth. Mathilde’s self centered belief that she should have riches means that the
Surprise in a story can create a whole new feeling. It can make the story funny such as in “The Ransom of Redchief” by O. Henry. It can also cause the tone to be sad and make the reader feel sympathy for specific characters like in “The Necklace” by Guy de Maupassant. Authors use situational irony to cause these feelings. In these two short stories, both authors display situational irony to create emotions for the reader.
In an effort to be the richest of the rich for one night, Mathilde subjects herself to a life of misery. Her loss of Madame Forestier’s necklace makes her come to know “the ghastly life of abject poverty...And this life lasted ten years”(7). Mathilde suffers through years of poverty solely because she wants to feel wealthy. Mathilde also believes that her misery is justified because the necklace she loses is extremely expensive, but she learns that this is also untrue. When Mathilde has completely paid off her debt, she meets Madame Forestier again and tells her of all the troubles she went through to get her necklace back. When Madame Forestier hears this, she exclaims, “Oh my poor Mathilde! But mine was imitation. It was worth at the very most five hundred francs!...”(8). Mathilde wasted a decade of her life, her beauty, and her youth on a necklace that was only imitation. The situational irony of Mathilde’s mistake creates a feeling of sympathy in Guy de Maupassant’s “The
To demonstrate, the main character Mathilde Loisel believes that she deserves to be the richest of the rich despite being already pretty well off. Instead of her wish coming true, she ends up becoming the poorest of the poor. After losing her friend Jeanne Forestier’s diamond necklace at a gala she has attended, Mathilde and her husband buy a replica so it would seem nothing was wrong. However, this course of events brings them poverty for the replacement necklace costs 36,000 francs. They were forced to sell their grand home and move to a flat at the top of the building where they work hard every day. Mathilde was no longer as beautiful and youthful as before, the author states “Madame Loisel looked old now. She had become like all the other strong, hard, coarse women of poor households (7).” Her husband now works two jobs while Mathilde scrubbed the floor and washed the dirty linen by hand when before they had a maid to do their laundry. Furthermore, to make the situation even more ironic, this harsh life could have been easily avoided. As Mathilde was deciding which necklace to wear to the gala, she faces a variety of beautiful golds and riches that cost more than she could ever imagine. The one she chose from the noble collection, however, was the cheapest one. Though the diamond necklace may look beautiful, it was made with faux diamonds. Upon finding
The protagonist of ‘The Necklace’, Madame Loisel, live a rather steady, ordinary middle-class life in the beginning of the story. However, she views that she is intended for a luxurious life, and, therefore, does not cherish what she has. She takes a step forward to her desires, as she was invited to a ball where all the upper-class woman would be, yet she was unhappy with the fact that she does not even have a stone to put on. With her greed for attention, she asks one of her upper-class friends, Madame Forestier, for a necklace that she could borrow for the ball.