Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The literary theme of loss
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The literary theme of loss
During the following week, while cooking food for dinner, Mme. Loisel heard a knock from the door, she walked out and opened the door. It was a man with a box "I have a package for a Mme. Loisel" said the man "Yes that is me" she responded. "Here you go" the man then left. Mme. Loisel took the package and sat down at the table " What is that ?" Mr Loisel asked. “ I don’t know" Mme. Loisel seemed suprise at first then her face looks really happy. She has a feeling that Mme. Forester is going give the necklace back She is happy, she feels wonderful. Of course, the necklace belongs to her 10 years ago. She loved that necklace and really hesitate when she have to gave it away that period of time Mme.Loisel opens the box. Her heart beats really …show more content…
Loisel frustrating, he did not know Mathilde and Mme.Forester did met each other “ Why did she do that ?” Mme.Loisel shaking her head fluently, but there is something other than that bunch of francs. It’s a letter from Mme.Forester "Dear Mathilde, I’m really glad that you tell me the truth after that several years but didn’t hope that it could be that dramatic. I know it been hard for you, your life has been difficult so I gave you 3000 francs to you with all of my love. I really not going to give back the necklace though, because it also your fault that you losted my necklace before. Your dear friend, Mme. Forester" Mme. Loisel and her husband realize out that how the life was on going. Mathilde herself notice that no one in this world can be so nice. They all mentalistic but in someway. She remember back to that time then, if she tells Mme.Forester the truth then her life would of not been ending with 10 years of hard life living and working in this decision.She looking at her hands, the beautiful 10 fingers was all cracked up. She remember her beautiful looks in the mirror, she start crying. She should realize it sooner. 10 years, it paid for her wealth, beauty, and
“The Necklace” gives a strong representation of what the story is about. When Madame Loisel was looking for jewelry with Madame Forestier, “She came
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 life. With an easy explanation, it explains how having material possessions doesn’t matter, because the moments we have are more valuable.
Mathilde Loisel is a woman who wants more than what she has, and is often dishonest. The short story The Necklace, by Guy de Maupassant, is about honesty and reveals that if you are honest, things turn out to be a lot better for you. Mathilde Loisel is unhappy with her current life, and her husband gets them an invitation to a party. She buys dresses with his money, and borrows a necklace from her friend, Madame Forestier. However, she loses the necklace and is dishonest, returning a substitute necklace to her friend and working for ten years with her husband to pay off the loans used to pay for it. She later learns if she had been honest, she would have not gone through that trouble. Madame Forestier, her friend of whom she had borrowed the necklace from, had owned an imitation of a necklace, not a real necklace.
A common literary device, symbolism is used in this story. Symbolism is when something has a greater meaning within itself. For example, the necklace is considered a symbol in the story. When looking at necklaces at Madame Forestier she finds one that just jumps out at her. She believes it is everything she wants in life. This is symbolic because it was only a necklace it could not fulfill all of her dreams of a rich high-class life. “She wasn’t at all convinced “No… There’s nothing more humiliating than to look poor among a lot of rich woman”. This quote is said before borrowing the necklace, but it is the reason she borrows it from Madame. Furthermore, the necklace is not really going to change who she ...
Charles asks her why she took them, and Mrs. Who simply quotes an answer. Mrs. Who is known for
Furthermore, the lifestyle both women want ends up in disaster however, one ends in death while the other in hard labor. In "The Necklace", the wife ends up losing her friend’s expensive necklace which causes her to work hard to earn enough money to pay of a new one. Due to all the work she loses her beauty. In contrast, whereas in "The Jewels" the constant attendance of the opera house during the winter causes her to die of inflammation which resulted a deep sorrow towards the husband. Both wife’s lived life differently. Both tries to find the best way to fulfill their desire for the good
When the plot progresses, she losses a necklace that she borrowed from her friend, and she cannot muster the courage to ask the price of the necklace so she can pay for a replacement. "You must write to your friend," he said, "and tell her that you've broken the clasp of her necklace and are getting it mended. That will give us time to look about us. “She wrote at his dictation. (4 Maupassant).
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
The Necklace by Guy de Maupassant told a tale about the deceptiveness of borrowed objects and the importance of communication. Maupassant used the characteristics of an emboldened haughty Matilda Loisel, who wanted so badly to bask in the aristocratic light, she got too caught up in her act that she lost an important borrowed necklace. If only she communicated better with said owner of the necklace she wouldn’t have ended up in the life she despised.
Patryk Chorzepa Mrs Masterson 11/16/15 Period 5 Journal 3 In this short story “The Necklace” by Guy de Maupassant, the author shows symbolism. The necklace symbolizes love in the story. It symbolizes love because he tried his hardest to get the necklace and that is what love makes you do, love makes you do many things. For example the author states,”He comprised the rest of his life….by the prospect of all the physical privations and of all the moral tortures which he was suffer, he went to get the new necklace…”
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.
Her Husband gets her an invitation to this luxurious party, but she is not content. In addition, she doesn’t have the correct jewelry or the correct outfit to wear, she doesn’t want to appear out of place among all the rich women who are attending. She goes to significant lengths in order to get the proper things for the party so, she borrows a necklace from her prosperous friend. She had a spectacular time being the center of attention at the party, however that is all ruined when on her way home she loses the necklace. Consequently, she spends the next ten years working off the debt to replace the necklace, she was quite unhappy.
The night of the ball came and Mathilde looked great; everyone admired her. The evening ended and everyone went home. Mathilde decided that she would look at herself in the mirror one last time before getting out of the clothes. When she did, she noticed the necklace that she admired so much was gone. Mathilde and her husband had to borrow thirty-six thousand francs from people they knew to buy another just like it so they could return it to the friend. Mathilde and her husband were deeply in debt. For ten years they worked day in and day out until finally the debt was paid off.
The author of The Necklace, Guy Maupassant, relates the many settings of his story to the protagonist, Mathilde Loisel, and her character development. The story begins in Mathilde’s apartment along the Rue des Martyrs, in Paris. Here, Mathilde lives with her husband, who works for the Ministry of Education, and the two live a comfortable life. Because Mathilde has a good sized apartment, a servant and many belongings, we could say she is a middle-class woman. However, instead of appreciating what she has, Mathilde spends her days dreaming of rich living and high society.
It took ten years for Mathilde and her husband to pay off the debt of buying a new necklace. Those ten years were not spent with the luxuries she experienced so many years ago at the party, nor were they filled with the simple things she once owned and despised. She came to know “the horrible existence of the needy. She bore her part, however, with sudden heroism.” When passing her rich friend again in the street, she was barely recognizable. Who she was the day she ran into her friend was not who she was the night she wore that necklace.