Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
What are the themes of finding identity in literature
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
If I got lost in a desolate desert , I would survive because I value things that are essential and beneficial for survival. King Tut would have died if he got lost because he values items like gold and jewelry, whereas I bring the essentials. This is a good habit because money does not bring happiness into anyone’s life. It is the moments that they spend with their family that bring true happiness into their life. When people value material possessions greater than their own or their family's survival won’t live a happy life. This essay will include “The Necklace”, “Civil Peace”, and “The Thrill of the Chase”. 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. With an easy explanation, it explains how having material possessions doesn’t matter, because the moments we have are more valuable. Even though Forrest Fenn had all of the money he could ever desire, he decided that a treasure hunt would be more valuable. He has brought hundreds of people and families together so they can discover the treasure he has hidden. He wrote a cryptic poem that had clues where to find the treasure and no one has found it. It said, “Anyone who dies with over $50 is a failure” which shows that wealth doesn’t make you a successful person, whereas leaving behind something other than wealth is
“I rather would be blind than then see this world in yellow, and bought and sold by kings that hammer roses into gold.” (King Midas Pg.462 Para.10) Many think that if they got what they wanted they would be happy, but if the world was all based on malterlistic things and everyone got what they wanted there would be chaos and no feelings just want and people would do crazy things to get what they want. Now a day’s people mistake malterlistic things for happiness. “The necklace”, “Ads may spur unhappy kids to embrace materialism”, And “Thrill of the chase” illustrates examples of materialism and show some base their happiness on it.
Everyone grows up with a dream, but everyone will not get the opportunity to do so, being born in the financial situation of their family. In third world countries people struggle to make money on a daily basis. These people want more than what they have, but to attain those extra luxuries, they have to sacrifice their current possessions.This is not possible in as sacrificing what they have can lead to starvation. They want a better future but they need to be able to live on a daily basis. It is called investment in the future vs temporary happiness. Attaining security requires risking one’s belongings to earn liberty and equality in the future. Although temporary contentment must be sacrificed to attain security in life, it must be one’s
Blinded by the self-destructive American dream of “Marie-Antoinette music-rooms and Restoration salons” and “toilet sets of pure dull gold” most murder their morals and harm others in the process (Fitzgerald 5.91). Whether rich or poor, two things can be assured: the poor want to be rich and the rich do not want to be poor. The result is a “rotten crowd” that has no true value, for it demoralizes itself to prosper economically, not realizing that the crisp dollar bills will be worthless in its grave (Fitzgerald 8.154). In the midst of economic depression, the thirst for wealth cannot be quenched; the need for copper coins is as persistent as snow in a Chicago winter. Desperate, hungry, and perhaps even angry, former farmers during the 1930s, who have lost everything to the demonic dust and claws of the capitalist bank, take the easy road and become “part of the monster” that tore them apart from their homes, snatched every last bit of self-sustenance they clung to, and most importantly, destroyed the unity of their families (Steinbeck 5.48).
Greed is a present theme throughout Maupassant’s short story ‘The Necklace’. Greed is a predominate trait in one character in particular, Mathilde Loisel. Mathilde wants to be wealthy and lives in a fantasy world built around this utopian world she builds in her head. Her husband does everything in his own power to accommodate to his wife’s delusions of being rich.
Situational irony occurs throughout most of The Necklace; it appears when Madame Forestier lends Madame Loisel a diamond necklace since “[she’s] upset because [she] haven’t a single piece of jewelry or a gemstone or anything to wear with [her] dress.[She’ll] look like a pauper. [She] almost think[s] it would be better if [she] didn’t go” and lets her borrow it for a ball one night so Madame Loisel can fit in; however, she ends up losing the necklace(174).Madame Loisel was not informed of the fact that the diamond necklace was actually fake. In a panic, Madame Loisel and her husband work hard and pay the loans off for many years trying to replace the necklace only to find out it wasn’t real; they gave up their decent lifestyle and had to save up for ten years. The situational irony is the fact that Madame Loisel thought that if she borrowed the diamond necklace it would help her become closer to the life she wanted, but the necklace ended up putting her and her husband into poverty and without the life that she longed for, instead. The ten years of poverty that Madame Loisel and
Speaking on Wealth, Lady Philosophy says, “wealth cannot make a man free of want and self-sufficient, though this was the very promise we saw it offering” (83). Moreover, Philosophy points out that the gathering of wealth does not stop people from taking that wealth away (83). Indeed, by its very nature, wealth seems contradictory. If we collect wealth, we believe we will be self-sufficient and free of want, so we hoard it; But “being miserly always makes men hated” (65). In its acquisition, wealth takes away from others, as it is a limited thing, and only brings hatred and paranoia to those who gather it. “[I]t is only when money is transferred to others in the exercise of liberality and ceases to be possessed that it becomes valuable” (65). The acquisition of wealth, then, is folly and can never grant true happiness.
All that glitters is not gold. A lesson Mathilde Loisel had learned during her journey of discovering the greed. Greed is a curse that blocks people’s vision from seeing the realistic value of things...
This story could be interpreted as though it was trying to convince the reader that being content could have much smaller ties to money than the average person would like to believe. Toward the beginning of the story the young man had been berated with rude remarks by strangers as he walked through a well off side of town.
“The Necklace” ends up to be a very ironic story as it explains why valuing the more important things in life can be very effective towards a person’s happiness. One example of the story’s irony is when she is at the party dressed as a beautiful and fancy woman. ‘She danced madly, wildly, drunk with pleasure, giving no thought to anything in the triumph of her beauty, the pride of her success…’ (pg 193). This is a form of dramatic irony because Guy explains earlier that Mme. Loisel is just a middle class woman who dreams of a wealthy life, but she is just alluding herself as a luxurious woman. Another example of irony in the story is when Madame found out that the necklace was paste. On page 196, Mme. Forestier, Ma...
Instead they rely completely on money to be happy. People often do not appreciate what they have, and they feel like they deserve better, and they complain instead of making the best of what they have. It is not necessary to be rich to enjoy life. Often those who have everything tend to live miserably. People can become too attached to money to the point that they forget about enjoying life and caring for their family. The theme of materialism is shown throughout the story of “The Rocking Horse Winner” to explain how being too attached to money can ruin people’s lives.
“Jewellery is not just any ordinary commodity like fruits or breads but it’s a product with emotions and sentiments attached to it”
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
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.
In the tale The Happy Man’s Shirt, a central theme is that riches do not guarantee happiness. The prince in the story, a boy who lacks nothing is shown to be depressed for no discernible reason. This is demonstrated when the king confronts his son, the prince. “‘What on earth do you lack?’ asked the king. ‘What’s wrong with you?’ ‘I don’t even know myself Father.’” (Author Page). Even though there is nothing that the prince could desire for he is still deeply unhappy. This emphasizes that wealth is not everything and sometimes it is better to live simply. The next instance occurs when the king, desperate for a solution seeks out happy people. He comes upon a neighboring king with a very prosperous kingdom. He seems to be the solution
The world of materialism is like a gigantic mall of life. In this mall of materialism, each store tries to sell its own product with a claim to uniqueness. A store may attempt to sell success in the business world, while another might advertise sure fame in the Hollywood arena. Some stores in the industry of lottery and gambling endeavors to sell a mass of cash. Regardless of the claimed uniqueness of the variety of products in the world of materialism, all attempt to guarantee the same promise, true meaning and significance in life. However, in The Pearl, John Steinbeck conveys the truth that materialism, as an answer to people’s quest for what is good, is merely a counterfeit of that which is good found in the wholeness of the family itself. This truth is portrayed in Kino’s discovery, possession, and lost of “The Pearl of the World.”