More handpicked essays just for you.
The necklace story
Analysis of the short story the necklace
The relationship between setting and character in the necklace
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The necklace story
The Characteristics of The Necklace and button, button “The Necklace” by Guy de Maupassant and “button, button” by Richard Matheson have many similarities, as well as differences. The individual stories provide valuable lessons and entertainment for the reader. While the stories share a common theme, their respective authors provide a dissimilar point of views and characterizations. While “button, button” may not be as well written, the theme of the story complements it making for a slightly more impressing piece. Button, button and The Necklace have homogeneous ways of characterization, similar settings, but in the end, the way the stories are resolved are very diverse. First of all, both authors write the stories with similar characters. The character’s decisions are alike, and they have similar traits. Both Norma and the woman from button, button believe that they should have money. Norma says “Suppose it is genuine offer?”(Maupassant 6). This shows that she thinks that she and Aurthor should get the money and push the button. This is so they can take a fancy trip. The woman in The Necklace feels that “She [i]s entitled to all the delicacies and luxuries of life” (Maupassant 1). The characters are …show more content…
From what the story states, Norma and Aurthor live in an apartment in New York. This means that they most likely are not the richest family. The story takes place in a small, cheap apartment, and so does The Necklace. In this other story, the woman describes her house, which is the main setting of the story, as worn-out and ugly. She suffers because of the “poorness of her house as she look[s] at the dirty walls, the worn-out chairs and ugly curtains” (Maupassant 1). The stories mainly take place in these old, small houses, so the settings of the two stories are one thing that they have in common. However, the Necklace ends with not only a different setting but with a
“The Necklace” gives a strong representation of what the story is about. When Madame Loisel was looking for jewelry with Madame Forestier, “She came
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.
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.
"The Necklace" should be considered the greater story out of the two since, it has a deeper connection with the reader and its ending is better overall. For the ending it states, "Mme. Forestier, quite overcome, clasped her by the hands. 'Oh, my poor Mathilde. But mine was only paste. Why, at most it was worth only five hundred francs!' " (Maupassant). In other words, Mme. Forestier told Mme. Loisel that her original necklace was a fake and valued at 500 francs. This illustrates that Mme. Loisel went through so much to find out that the original necklace was a paste and not the real deal. This impacts the story by helping "The Necklace" to be called great, a good ending makes a good story. Another element that makes "The Necklace" great is the connection between it and the reader. In the story it states, "Each month notes had to be paid, and others renewed to give more time. Her husband labored evenings to balance a tradesman's accounts, and at night, often, he copied documents at five sous a page. And this went on for ten years. Finally, all was paid back, everything including the exorbitant rates of the loan sharks and accumulated compound interest" (Maupassant). To put it differently, after ten years of hard work M. and Mme. Loisel were able to pay back all the money they owed, even with all the interest piled up. This depicts that people will go through great lengths to keep the truth a secret. This
It is said that “everything that shines isn't gold.” A difficult situation can result a vast illusion that is not what one thought it would be, which leads to disappointment and despair. Just like Guy De Maupassant stories, “The Necklace” and “The Jewel.” In the first story, the protagonist, Mathilde Loisel’s need for materialistic fulfillment causes her hard labor which ends her natural beauty. In the second story, the husband Monsieur Latin ends up living a dreadful life due to the passing of his wife and her admiration for jewels. “The Necklace” and “The Jewel” both share many similarities such as the unconditional love each husband haves toward their wife, the necessity each wife haves towards materialistic greed, the beautiful allurement
Maupassant, Guy de. “The Necklace.” [First published 1884.] Rpt. The Story and Its Writer: An Introduction to Short Fiction. Ed. Ann Charters. Compact 6th ed. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2003.
Authors choose to use symbols for various reasons in short stories. It is a way for them to use on object or idea to convey many different meanings to the audience. In “The Necklace,” the author Guy de Maupassant uses a very lavish looking necklace as his main symbol. The necklace helps defining what type of woman Mme. Loisel is. It also acts as the central conflict of the story. The symbolism that is used throughout this story is crucial to revealing the theme and understanding the main character.
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.
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.
...” does not fully include any fairytale elements, so there is no possible way for it to even be considered as a modern ‘fairytale’. Though the story does hint at a few rudiments of fantasy, there is not nearly enough proof, or even suggestive implications of such to allow anyone to feel that this is a fairytale. Overall, all the evidence (or lack thereof), supports the conclusion that “The Necklace” by Guy de Maupassant was not intended to be a modern fairytale, but instead a twisted and broken version of one.
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.
The theme of “The Necklace” is greed. I’ve observed that Ms.T_ has a really adamantine job. She is a teacher that a lot of kids have problems with, since they do not want to do what she wants them to do. These kids are lazy and don’t care about anything but their own selves. Ms.T_ wanted us to get on social media for our finals, well kids decided they were going to rant over this because they thought they were not learning anything. Little did they know Ms.T_ has plenty up her sleeve. They thought it would be a superior idea to go tell Ms.H_ because they thought they were going to make everyone’s lives better.
As I did research on how others interpreted the story, the same conclusion would pop up. The necklace was used as a symbol of higher class of wealth. We use symbolic items to try and fit into societies belief of “fancy”. The deeper meaning is within the true value of the necklace. It is a fake just as she is! She is trying to be something she is not and ends up losing the necklace which holds a false value as well. This is why a person should not take everything as it
In “The Necklace” it says, “He threw over her shoulders the wraps he had brought for going home, modest garments of everyday life when shabbiness clashed with the stylishness of her evening clothes. She felt this and longed escape unseen by the other women draped in expensivefurs.” (Maupassant, 229) She had on an expensive dress that made her happy but this one piece of shabby clothing ruined it all and made her