Character Analysis: The Diamond Necklace

Every story has two sides. Madame Loisel from The Diamond Necklace wasn 't the only one who made a mistake. Laurie from Charles ' actions could have been stopped if someone noticed how he was acting. It will show that just because Markwardt from The Man with No Eyes was wrong, it doesn 't mean Parsons was right. There aren 't just two sides, and that one side is right and the other side is wrong. It is our actions that are wrong and right, not the whole person. This essay will analyze the characters decisions and whether they were right or wrong. It will prove that everyone does right and wrong things, and not just one person is at fault. It will also show that it 's better to learn from your mistakes, and that some of the characters do and

She should have realized that taking the money her husband saved up was wrong. She should have been more protective of the necklace, because it was borrowed and (believed to be) expensive. Her husband did not help either. He was the one who told her to lie and replace the necklace instead of tell the truth about losing it. Mrs. Forestier might have told her that her necklace was a fake, and saved her a lot of trouble. In those ten years that they spent paying for the necklace, Mrs. Forestier should have noticed they were having a financial problem, and helped out a bit. In the end, even if just one of these things was changed, the story would have been different, but that doesn 't mean it would be better. Madame Loisel and her husband would have had a better life, but Matilda would have never learned to appreciate what she had. Mrs Forestier would have gotten her original necklace back, but she wouldn 't have had a diamond

He cost someone his sight, costing as well as his own, then lied and sold himself as a victim to get money, instead of working to earn it. When Markwardt was telling his story, Mr. Parsons could have interrupted and said that he worked at C-Shop too, and maybe they knew each other. In the end, it would save Markwardt the embarrassment and shame, but it wouldn 't have changed the fact that they were both blind. It 's impossible to place all the blame for them both being sightless on Markwardt. Perhaps the people in the factory could have worked together to escape without being harmed. Most likely, they were only thinking about themselves. The reader knows Markwardt was. He thought only of himself, to get himself out, and he didn 't care if he trampled people and threw them out of his way on his way out. Was Parsons only thinking of himself? Well, he wasn 't helping anyone else escape when Markwardt pulled him down. There was a lot injured, and Parson most likely passed at least one person on his way out. The point is, he could have been helping someone, but he wasn 't, and that was