A Pair Of Silk Stockings

In “The Necklace”, Mathilde Loisel is a woman who cannot tolerate her lower-class status, believing “herself born for every delicacy and luxury”(82). Mathilde’s vain materialistic goals, make her bitter and unhappy. The main point of irony in the story is the fact that Mathilde borrows the necklace and looses it. The necklace was very expensive, or so she thought, so she ended up in poverty

“The Necklace” develops the theme of irony through Madame Loisel’s constant need for money and jewels. The first example of irony is when she borrows the necklace to appear wealthy, then loses all her wealth. When Madame Loisel begins to worry about how she will appear to the other wealthy people, her husband tells her to go borrow jewelry from her friend, Madame Forestier (Maupassant 4). The very

People who are driven by greed end up focusing on what they do not have instead of being grateful for what they do have. This is relevant in the short story “The Necklace” by Guy de Maupassant because Mathilde Loisel ends up losing everything she owns just because she lets greed drive her decisions and get the best of her. When receiving an invitation to an extravagant ball, she declines because she says she does not have anything nice to wear. In the beginning of the short story she says, “There is nothing more humiliating than looking poor in the middle of a lot of rich women.(Maupassant).” The reader sees how she puts value in possessions and what others think of her. After finding a dress and then borrowing a necklace that she thought

“But you didn’t give me as much as you gave him. isn’t my money as good as his? Don’t you know they always give men more?”(Page 168)

Her husband tries and tries until he comes up with a great idea to give her an invitation to a ball. She cheers up a little until she realizes she can’t afford a dress. Her husband asks how much and had given her the money to purchase herself a nice dress. She has the dress but still doesn’t feel pretty nor happy after she put the dress on. She wanted more than just the dress which was jewels but didn’t have any. Someone suggested that she should use flowers, but didn’t find happiness in the flowers. Madame Forestier offer Mathilde to borrow her diamond necklace, which gave her the emptiness that she needed to feel happy. She had a great night and was on her way home when she went to feel for the necklace but found that it was gone. She started to panic and retraced her steps but couldn’t find it anywhere. She and her husband went from jeweler to jeweler to find the exact necklace and to replace it. They worked and worked until they had paid it off and returned it to Madame Forestier. She was a little annoyed since she had got it a few weeks after the ball. Eventually she admitted to what she had done and was surprised with what she was told. She was informed that the necklace was a fake. That it was costume jewelry. In this story the Madame was an outsider towards Mathilde. Mathilde didn’t know who she was and had taken the necklace to wear for the

She thinks that because her friend is rich and beautiful, that her material items would extend with that wealth. Instead, it shows Madame that even the richest of people do not always have to have genuine items. Madame realizes that she does have fun at the party even if she is not wearing all authentic things, the opposite of what she thinks she is wearing. A third ironic happening, is when she has been working to pay off the money for the necklace for a decade. Madame clearly admits to her friend on page 196 how she loses the necklace, and has been paying it back for ten years. As someone is reading the story, they will find it silly how Mme. is working for something when she is usually having people, mostly her husband, do things for her. Instead, she is working to pay off the money that she has spent on a replacement necklace. The turnout of the story changes Madame’s views on how silly, textile items, are not always needed for someone to be happy.

Once inside the store, Sylvia can no longer ignore the blinding imparity between the rich and the poor. Her discovery of an overly priced toy clown prompts her to consider what could be bought for its price: "Thirty-five dollars could buy new bunk beds for Junior and Gretchen’s boy. Thirty-five dollars and the whole household could go visit Granddaddy Nelson in the country. Thirty-five dollars would pay for the rent and the piano bill too" (605). Sylvia is forced to finally address the socioeconomic inequality that works against her while simultaneously conferring certain luxuries on the rich: "Who are these people that spend that much for performing clowns and $1000 for toy sailboats? What kinda work they do and how they live and how come we ain’t in on it?" (605).

Now consider the role of Mathilde Loisel in “The Necklace”. She constantly grieves about her simple life and fantasizes about extravagant life style with rich people and food surrounding her. Her husband is a simple man and is satisfied with his life. He appreciates her for the food which is cooked and never complains. Being in the Ministry of Education their lifestyle is modest. Mathilde is not satisfied on the other hand even when her husband proudly announces that they have been invited at a formal party held by the Ministry of Education. The irony in the story is more or less the same with regard to the female characters. Mathilde cries and gets her prize in the form of a dress but she is never satisfied. She wants jewelry as well. The necklace that she borrows from Madame Forestier teaches her a lesson of life. Since she is not familiar with the real jewelry she picks the cheapest one from her collection and wears it to the party why she loses it. Upon not finding the jewelry her husband takes the pain of selling everything out just to purchase an identical necklace worth 40,000 francs which leaves them poverty stricken for the next ten years during which her husband does three jobs and

Foremost, the characters had believed that wearing and possessing expensive goods leads to a person’s happiness. As explained by the narrator, to achieve joy, every single day Madame Beaumont would wear, “A beautiful dress… Always there were red flowers at her shoulder” (63). Madame Beaumont has bought a dress that she cannot pay for. Not only did she purchase this dress to look good, but ultimately it was in order to achieve happiness. She later on understands symbolizing oneself a certain way does not matter in comparison to personality. Joy is achieved by personalities around an individual. Moreover, The Hotel Lotus, on Broadway offers a dream of luxury, however only to those who can afford it. Madame Beaumont believes the hotel is a symbol of happiness which certainly is incorrect. As her trip is approaching conclusion, Madame Beaumont admits, “For a year I’ve been planning to come here. Each week I put aside a little of my pay… I wanted to have the best of everything” (65). Madame Beaumont thought that luxury and wealth symbolize enjoyment and immense joy. She had used all her money in order to come to a hotel and be happy. Nonetheless her mindset has altered as she now has learned that the people one associates themselves with and the way one chooses to live life is the major aim. Symbolizing wealth does not bring happiness; Madame falls in love and later recognizes

“She so much longed to please, be envied, be fascinating and sought after” (de Maupassant 67). The main character desires to be at the center of attention, she wants to be coveted by others. In his fictional short story titled, “The Necklace,” Guy de Maupassant writes about how the lusting for more may cause people to be blinded and unable to see/value the treasures they already have. The story begins with an introduction of a lady who daydreams about the happiness that materialistic yearnings can bring her, forgetting her situation and social class. After taking her husband’s recommendation to borrow jewelry, specifically a diamond necklace, from her close friend Madame Forestier to wear alongside her dress at the evening reception, the main character later discovers that she had lost the necklace. Following their failure to find the necklace, Madame and Monsieur Loisel devise a plan to borrow money to replace the necklace with another and in doing so, fall into years of debt. Moreover, Maupassant uses direct characterization, imagery and situational irony to further depict why you should be grateful for what you already have before it’s too late.

The author of A Pair of Silk Stockings explores female roles based on what other people believe due to stereotypes. In this short story Mrs. Sommers finds $15 which is a sizable about of money to her in New York. She and her family are on the poorer side of New York. At first Mrs. Sommers has no clue on what she should do the money she had just come to. She is thinking about her children and that they could use new skirls because she had seen a beautiful new pattern in a market window, or caps for her boys and sailor-caps for her girls (Chopin 1). She thought of them due to the fact that that is what mothers and wives do in the 1800’s, they but their children and husband before thinking of themselves. She thought back to the time when she wasn’t

In paragraph eight, Chopin begins to use personification as well as imagery. Mrs Mallard “young, with a fair, calm face” (158) is sitting in the armchair with a “dull stare in her eyes” (158) which “indicated of intelligent thought” (158). Reading this, the reader can form an idea of what Mrs Mallard looks like, and we understand that there’s something going on in Mrs Mallards head, something changing everything in her mind. Mrs Mallard is still struggling to figure it out but “she felt it, creeping out of the sky, reaching towards her through the sounds, the scents, the color that filled the air”. From this we understand that she is beginning to realise it, and her soul is beginning to fill with happiness of freedom, which is in all the sounds, smells and things she sees. For one moment, however, she is somewhat afraid of feeling happy about her freedom and “she was striving to beat it back with her will” (159). This shows that Mrs Mallard is a “product” of her time, and is striving to feel what is socially accepted. She realizes that society would determine her thoughts of freedom inappropriate, but she can’t stop herself from feeling that way.

Madame Loisel’s pride demands more: “It annoys me not to have a single jewel, not a single stone, nothing to put on. I shall look like distress” (Maupassant 2). Ironically, it is Monsieur Loisel who suggests that his wife borrow jewelry from Madame Forestier, and subsequently has to spend the next ten years borrowing money to replace it. As May puts it, “Her husband exhausts his meager inheritance and then borrows the rest, mortgaging their life away to buy a replacement for the necklace” (May 7). Monsieur Loisel sacrifices everything to salvage his wife’s pride.

Firstly, the theme of Money over Love is first introduced in The Kiss through the character Miss Nathalie. Miss Nathalie is a pretty and beautiful girl who manipulates people in order to get what she wants. Nathalie is in a relationship with Brantain who is not so good looking however, she is dating him because he is a wealthy man. As Nathalie and Brantain are sitting in the dark room speaking about going to a reception Mr. Harvy enters the room and kisses Miss Nathalie on the lips. The Dark room is a symbol that symbolises the relationship Nathalie has with Harvy. Kate Chopin first uses simile throughout the short story when Nathalie explains to Brantain about the kiss, "Mr. Harvy is an intimate friend of long standing. Why, we have always been

Malthide dreams of being with the rich people. Her minor husband brings home an invitation to a prestigious dinner for the rich one day. Instead of being ecstatic, as he thought she would be, Malthide breaks down. Malthide believed that she was in a situation in which she could not spend her time at the dinner. She had no expensive dress or jewelry to wear so that she could like the others, but she possessed beauty and grace. Her husband offered her the dress she had, but she could not accept it, as it was cheap. Her false value of what one “should evaluate themself” (Cummings), only caused her more grief. In the end, she bought a dress and borrowed a necklace from a rich friend of hers. However, after the dinner party, she was missing the necklace that she borrowed. Malthide and her husband bought a replacement for it, which costed a fortune for them. They had to suffer the consequences of