Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The problems of poverty
Functionist view on poverty
The problems of poverty
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The problems of poverty
As Michael Jordan, a former basketball player, once said while speaking about failure, “ I can accept failure, everyone fails at something. But I can’t accept not trying.” This statement means that even though there may be a chance of failure, you must always try your best. In “The Necklace”, Guy de Maupassant shows readers of the importance of perseverance. In Maupassant’s work of literature, Madame Loisel is a poor, unhappy woman because she is unwealthy. She believes that she deserves more than she can afford. When her husband brings her tickets to a gala, she is less than happy. Madame Loisel exclaims that she does not have a suitable dress, so her husband uses the money, which he had saved to buy a new rifle, to buy her one. Later, Matilde …show more content…
Before Matilde was required to work to solve her problem, she was a lazy, irritable woman. As she begins doing back-breaking labor such as, “...the laundry, washing shirts and dishcloths ...; she took the garbage down; took the garbage down to the street every morning and carried water upstairs, stopping at every floor to get her breath” (pg. 341), Madame Loisel slowly starts to grasp onto the value of work . Matilde had never worked a day in her life, so by her hard work, she is slowly showing her perseverance. As Madame Loisel works, she changes her old ways of just lounging and being lazy. Madame Loisel became a woman of diligence through her dedication to work. As Matilde’s work ethic changes, so does her ethical …show more content…
Madame Loisel took ten years to pay everyone back, and in those ten years, she could have given up and forgotten to pay those she owed money to. Madame Loisel could have easily left her husband to fend for himself, but she did not. Instead, Matilde took responsibility for her actions and paid all the money that she owed “...including the usurious rates and the compound interest” ( 341). Madame Loisel could have easily neglected to pay the others back considering she had already given the necklace back. By paying everyone back, she shows that her former behavior has become ethical. The “old” Matilde would have most likely deemed that paying everyone back would have been too much effort and not worth her time. Yet, this “new” Madame Loisel has a different perspective and changes her ways. In addition to an attitude change, Matilde also sacrifices so
“She grieved over the shabbiness of her apartment, the dinginess of the walls, the worn-out appearance of the chairs, the ugliness of the draperies. All these things, which another woman of her class would not even have noticed, gnawed at her and made her furious.”
Mme. Loisel’s lack of an outfit suitable for a ball creates a conflict which can be overcome only by collaboration. Mathilde’s realization of her lack of an appropriate dress leads her to ask her husband for money. Though she would like to have as much
Details about the modest apartment of the Loisels on the Street of Martyrs indicate Mathilde’s peevish lack of adjustment to life. Though everything is serviceable, she is unhappy with the “drab” walls, “threadbare” furniture, and “ugly” curtains (5). She has domestic help, but she wants more servants than the simple country girl who does the household chores in the apartment. Her embarrassment and dissatisfaction are shown by details of her irregularly cleaned tablecloth and the plain and inelegant beef stew that her husband adores. Even her best theater dress, which is appropriate for apartment life but which is inappropriate for more wealthy surroundings, makes her unhappy. All these details of the apartment establish that Mathilde’s major trait at the story’s beginning is maladjustment. She therefore seems unpleasant and unsympathetic.
In the story, Guy de Maupassant clearly and effectively proves that people come before materialistic items. Such literary devices such as symbolism, situational irony, and juxtaposition are used to prove the theory. Symbolism was expressed through the necklace having a greater meaning within itself. The situational irony was expressed in three different ways. Mme. Loisels’ beauty, her judgment of character, and that her old life she hated, turned out to be greater than what was to come her way. The juxtaposition was shown through her and her husband marriage and values. In conclusion, people always have values that can change, or stay the same. Sometimes people’s values are poor and misleading, but it doesn’t mean they are not a good person at heart.
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
He borrowed “asking a thousand franc from one , five hundred from another” (Maupassant 3) to spend the next ten years of his and Mathilde Loisel life to repay the thirty thousand to everyone they have had borrowed from. After completing the long and dreadful ten years of hard labor Mathilde Loisel quiensidently ran into Mme.Forester to only find out that the necklace she had worn that night was fake and worthless. Being a female that has absolutely no authority over her assets and has no say what so ever in where the are placed thus meaning that she is practically worthless. Realizing all of this it is no longer astonishing that Mr.Loisel went out of his way to borrow 36 thousand francs in loans without the permission from his wife Mrs.Losiel. She understand the fact that they would have to repay these outstanding loans and had spent the next ten years of her youthfull life paying back all the money that was owed. In efforts to pay of this debt Mrs. Losiel works around the house and does her daily duties with no intensions of having control over her finances and accepts that the debt of her husbands is a debt of
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.
Telling the truth will always prevent future conflicts. Author Guy De Maupassant who lived from 1850 to 1893 proves in the story of “The Necklace,” that no matter how bad a situation is, speaking with the truth is always best. Now, this author does not prove this theme directly. Instead, throughout various situations in the story the main characters are faced with a long-term conflict because decisions were not made with honesty. Mathilde and Loisel who is her husband, who works as a clerk at the Ministry of Public Instructions, were both faced with a conflict that could have been prevented. For instance, Mathilde asked her friend Mme. Forestier if she could borrow a beautiful piece of jewelry for a ball event her husband Loisel had been invited to. Unfortunately, Mathilde loses the borrowed necklace and suggest that since it belongs to her rich friend it was worth more than what they could ever afford. Mathilde and Loisel decide to not tell Mme. Forestier about the lost necklace and instead they buy her a similar one. However, the one they buy is worth a lot more than what the lost necklace was worth. They both end up working multiple jobs for 10 years in order to pay off the necklace. The moral of this story is that everyone should always speak with the truth, because Mathilde and Loisel could have avoided this conflict if only they had told Mme. Forestier about the lost necklace. Many factors such as lying, desiring other’s valuables, and being so attentive to what people might think, is a good way that a situation like Mathilde’s could have been avoided.
Guy de Maupassant is a realist whose claim to fame is the style in which he conveys political and socioeconomic themes in his literary publications. He achieves his writing style by putting small unfortunate life events under a spotlight. His literary performance is described in his biography from Cambridge, the writer says “He exposes with piercing clarity the small tragedies and pathetic incidents of everyday life, taking a clear-sighted though pessimistic view of humanity” (Halsey, par. 1). Guy de Maupassant’s story The Necklace is a great representation of the style he uses. In The Necklace the main character Mathilde Loisel a beautiful but impoverished woman married to a clerk is in conflict with her lack of wealth and desire to acquire
“The Necklace”, narrated by Guy de Maupassant in 3rd person omniscient, focuses the story around Mathilde Loisel who is middle class, and her dreams of fame and fortune. The story is set in 19th century France. One day, Mathilde’s husband brings home an invitation to a fancy ball for Mathilde; to his surprise Mathilde throws a fit because she doesn’t have a dress or jewelry to wear to the ball. M. Loisel gets her the beautifully expensive dress she desires and Mathilde borrows a diamond necklace from Mme. Forestier, a rich acquaintance of Mathilde. Mathilde goes to the ball and has a night she’s dreamed of, until she gets home from the ball at 4 A.M. to find
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.
I decided to analyze the short story The Necklace by Guy De Maupassant. It was very complex in the way it was written. The use of complex words did make it a little difficult to read. Once you got past the wording, you was able to grasp the meaning and understanding of the story. The Necklace was meant to teach the reader or audience a lesson. This is why I found it fascinating to write about.
At many places in the story he shows the irony of Madame Loisel’s situation. From the time of her marriage, through her growing years, Madame Loisel desires what she does not have and dreams that her life should be other than it is. It is only after ten years of hard labor and abject poverty that she realizes the mistake pride led her to make. At that point, the years cannot be recovered. In my opinion, the moral lesson of the necklace story is that we should not judge people on appearances because they may appear to be rich and successful and they may not be. It also explains us we should not pine after material possessions, but realize we are happy with what we have and we must be satisfied with what we have and what we are. We must be honest enough to confess his mistake instead of running from situations and turning back. There’s nothing wrong in have wishing though and dreams, but you must know your limits and your condition as
The moral of Guy de Maupassant’s story “The Necklace” seems to be suggested by the line, “What would have happened if Mathilde had not lost the necklace?” If Mathilde had not lost the necklace, or in fact, even asked to borrow the necklace, she and Mr. Loisel would not of been in debt ten long years. Because Mathilde had to borrow the necklace to make herself and others like her better her and Mr. Loisel’s economic situation had become worse than it already was. I think that the moral of the story is that people need to be happy with what they have and not be so greedy.
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.