“The Necklace” by Guy de Maupassant follows a young woman named Mathilde, who believes she was born into the wrong social class. As a middle-class woman “aroused in her deep regrets and hopeless dreams,” (Maupassant 172) Madame Loisel constantly lusts for luxury. Monsieur and Madame Loisel are later doomed with a life-ruining debt because of their reluctance to reveal the truth about a necklace that they lost. Maupassant uses an ironic twist in “The Necklace” to teach a diverse combination of moral lessons. Mathilde, Monsieur Loisel, and the reader learn that not everything is as it seems and that it is always best to tell the truth.
To begin, “The Necklace” reveals to the reader that not everything is as it seems to appear. Madame Loisel …show more content…
In reality, her social status is not as wretched as she conceives it to be. According to Short Stories for Students, “It is not the reality of wealth or high social class that is important for Madame Loisel, just the appearance of it” (168-69). This concept is displayed at the ball, where deception through appearance helps Mathilde to fool the other guests into believing she is a part of their class. In Short Stories for Students it is noted that the guests can “be said to value appearance over reality, since they have been beguiled by a woman whose charms have been brought out by such artificial means” (170). Just because Mathilde dresses like an aristocrat, which does not mean that she is one. Madame Loisel is much like the necklace that she wears to the ball. The necklace appears to be real diamonds when in actuality it is made of fake stones. Stones that are worth a mere fraction of the price that the unfortunate couple paid for the necklace’s replacement. The …show more content…
Maupassant uses irony with his “whip-crack ending” to affirm this moral. Someone of a Christian background may recall the words contained in the book of John which read, “Then you will know the truth, and the truth shall set you free” (Fire Bible, John 8:32). Although there are different religious views, meanings, and translations with any scripture, countless people have shortened this verse to become the phrase “The truth shall set you free.” Monsieur and Madame Loisel become slaves to their tragic debt because of their refusal to confess the truth to Madame Forestier. Mary Donaldson-Evans understood that Mathilde’s “decision to replace the necklace rather than confess the truth of the loss to her wealthy friend, does not appear incongruous, for she lives in fear of what others will think of her and cannot risk this blow to her fragile identity” (169). If the couple had told the truth about losing the necklace, the story would have had a completely different ending filled with less debt, hardships, and consequences. According to Short Stories for Students a “hamartia is an error in action or judgement that causes the protagonist to experience a reversal of fortune” (171). The decision to tell the truth, that could have twisted their fate for the better, was the hamartia of this story. Admitting that Madame Loisel lost the necklace sooner might not have led to a perfect fairy-tale ending,
To begin, “The Necklace” reveals to the reader that not everything is as it seems to appear. Madame Loisel …show more content…
In reality, her social status is not as wretched as she conceives it to be. According to Short Stories for Students, “It is not the reality of wealth or high social class that is important for Madame Loisel, just the appearance of it” (168-69). This concept is displayed at the ball, where deception through appearance helps Mathilde to fool the other guests into believing she is a part of their class. In Short Stories for Students it is noted that the guests can “be said to value appearance over reality, since they have been beguiled by a woman whose charms have been brought out by such artificial means” (170). Just because Mathilde dresses like an aristocrat, which does not mean that she is one. Madame Loisel is much like the necklace that she wears to the ball. The necklace appears to be real diamonds when in actuality it is made of fake stones. Stones that are worth a mere fraction of the price that the unfortunate couple paid for the necklace’s replacement. The …show more content…
Maupassant uses irony with his “whip-crack ending” to affirm this moral. Someone of a Christian background may recall the words contained in the book of John which read, “Then you will know the truth, and the truth shall set you free” (Fire Bible, John 8:32). Although there are different religious views, meanings, and translations with any scripture, countless people have shortened this verse to become the phrase “The truth shall set you free.” Monsieur and Madame Loisel become slaves to their tragic debt because of their refusal to confess the truth to Madame Forestier. Mary Donaldson-Evans understood that Mathilde’s “decision to replace the necklace rather than confess the truth of the loss to her wealthy friend, does not appear incongruous, for she lives in fear of what others will think of her and cannot risk this blow to her fragile identity” (169). If the couple had told the truth about losing the necklace, the story would have had a completely different ending filled with less debt, hardships, and consequences. According to Short Stories for Students a “hamartia is an error in action or judgement that causes the protagonist to experience a reversal of fortune” (171). The decision to tell the truth, that could have twisted their fate for the better, was the hamartia of this story. Admitting that Madame Loisel lost the necklace sooner might not have led to a perfect fairy-tale ending,