by Olga Golysheva
We often think about our feelings. They can change our life, view on the world and many other important things. People can love, be happy and smile but also they can have negative feelings such as lying, anger and hate. Especially, our children can see the negative side and they are very sensitive. In the first years of life children don’t know about the negative side of feelings, but unfortunately, when they get older they start to learn it. As I think, it is very important for humanity to see how it changes little world inside a child, because this experience builds his adult world. Anton Chekhov wrote a great story entitled “A Trifle from Real Life” which is a good example of how a child opens a new side of the negative world.
The whole story is very short and shows to the reader only a few hours of one family life, in which we can see how the world changed for a little boy called Aliosha. Aliosha is only 9 years old and lives with his mother Olga. Olga divorced from her husband, who is Aliosha’s father, and she has a lover, Belayeff. On one day, Olga wasn’t at home when Belayeff came to visit her. Aliosha met Belayeff and decided to talk to him as a child and opened to Belayeff his biggest secret. Belayeff promised to Aliosha to keep his secret, but he didn’t. The culmination of the story is when Aliosha saw how the adult very easy has broken his promise. This situation shows us that adults often don’t pay attention to what they said or promised. It is different from children who believe that a promise is one of the most important parts of adult behavior. Chekhov describes Aliosha’s feeling very clearly and simply. Also, the author points out that “it was the first time in Aliosha’s life that he had come roughly face to face with deceit” (p.57).
On the other hand, Chekhov describes the adult world. He showed what Belayeff thinks and what his reaction is toward hearing the truth. It very interesting that Belayeff cares only about himself and doesn’t see people around him. During the conversation between Aliosha and Belayeff, Belayeff walked nervously around the room and thought about his reputation in the society, the most important thing in his life. Belayeff didn’t see Olga crying in front of him and he didn’t care that small Aliosha cried and asked him about his promise: “You gave me your word of honor!” Belayeff responds: “Leave me alone! This is more important than words of honor. This hypocrisy, these lies intolerable!”(p.57). Belayeff is a typical selfish person, who left his feelings such as love, care about people. The same picture we can see about Olga. When she came to the room she started to think about herself and why Pelagia lied to her. This is a good illustration that adults don’t see children with their problems and feelings, but also, they cannot see and hear even each other.
In this sad, realistic and at the same time beautiful novel, the author shows us the truth of our life. I’m impressed such a spectacular way as illustration that the little and naive Aliosha’s world was broken by this first deceit in his life. However, it is connected to his adult world in the future, which we can see in his mother Olga and Belayeff, because children are learning from adults. Chekhov opens a different view on how people get such feelings as lying and selfishness. Unfortunately, it was true in the author’s time and it still is until nowadays. This is a great novella that can teach us about such important things in our life.
Work Cited
Chekhov, Anton. “A Trifle from Real Life.” Russia 1888. Rpt. in The International Story: An Anthology with Guidelines for Reading and Writing about Fiction. Ruth Spack. New York: St. Martin’s, 1994. 53-57.
"The Necklace": An Irony of Life
By Christianne Baerlein dos Santos Lima
The short story "The Necklace" was written in 1884 by a famous and talented writer named Guy de Maupassant, who was born into a family in Normandy, France in 1850. He studied with the famous writer Gustave Flaubert, while he was working in several ministries in Paris. Because of his unique style, he was considered one of the best writers in the 19th century. He also wrote essays, plays, poetry, and novels. His work has influenced many writers around the world, among them Anton Chekhov and Kate Chopin (46).
"The Necklace" is a short story about a woman who was a victim of herself at first, but who after hard years, understood some values in herself and also in her life. The story is set in Paris in a time when there were very distinct social classes primarily determined by one's birth. After the French Revolution (1789 - 1799), France became a Republic, but class distinctions remained an integral part of French society (46).
"The Necklace" tells of Mathilde Loisel, who by an error of destiny, or not, was born poor and winds up with a clerk for a husband. "She was one of those pretty and charming girls," who had "no expectations, no means of being known" and no dowry to wed some "rich and distinguished man"(46). She "suffered ceaselessly" because she was born in a family of clerks and married "a little clerk at the ministry of Public Instruction"(46). No woman of her rank would ever been conscious of or tortured by this poverty or even her husband. But she, she always dreamed of being rich, well dressed with jewels, living in a beautiful palace, loving nothing but that. Is this an irony or an error of destiny?
One evening her husband took something special for her: an invitation for a ball at the palace of the Ministry. Instead of being delighted, as her husband hoped, she was really upset. She had no dress, no jewelry, nothing to put on her back, so she wondered and began to cry! In addition, he was in despair seeing Mathilde so upset, crying. After that, he decided to give her the money that he had laid aside, demonstrating his love, affection, and respect for her. But more than a new dress, she wanted a jewel, a beautiful jewel, no flowers, no fresh flowers as had suggested her husband, trying to convince her how stylish it could be.
"No, there is nothing more humiliating than to look poor among other women who are rich" -She was definitely not convinced. (48) At this moment her husband has remember her friend, Mme Forrestier, who was her former schoolmate at the convent, a very rich woman! Therefore, she did. She went to her friend seeking a glamorous, beautiful, and very superb jewel. After seeing many jewels, she discovered, in a black satin box, what she was looking for! The superb and wonderful diamond necklace!! "Her heart began to beat with an inmoderate desire," and she "remained lost in ecstasy at the sight of herself dressed in it." (49) Mme Loisel was so surprised; her friend had lent her that piece. She delighted and "sprang upon the neck of her friend, kissed her passionately, then fled with her treasure." (49) At the ball, she danced so passionately forgetting all, feeling the happiness of "complete victory," beautiful in her glory! (49) But the drama arrives at home!
She notices, she realizes that she had lost the necklace, the superb diamond necklace. She could not believe...her husband could not believe either! "They looked, thunderstruck, at one another." (50) After failing to find it, they decided that their only recourse was to replace the necklace. Going from jeweler to jeweler, they searched for a facsimile. Finally, they found, one as much similar that cost 36,000 Francs! To raise the money, Loisel uses all of his savings and borrows the rest, writing promissory notes and signing his name on numerous documents. He compromised all the rest of his life, risked his signature without even knowing if he could meet it. But they bought the necklace as a replacement!
Mathilde took it in a case to Mme Forrestier, who did not even open it to check its contents! Thereafter, the Loisels work hard to save and pay all their debts. Mathilde also "knew now the horrible existence of the needy... She came to know what heavy housework meant and the odious cares" of this kind of life! (51) Her husband worked the whole day and night and this life lasted for ten long and miserable years! Mathilde Loisel learns this lesson the hard way. I think she understood how to evaluate themselves and others based on who they are intrinsically, that is on their character and moral fiber, not on what they possess or where they stand in society.
Indeed, she learns that honesty, humility, and hard work are what shape character, not clothes, or jewels that a person wears or the high station into which he or she is born. We notice this when Guy de Maupassant describes Mme Loisel meeting her friend, Mme Forrestier on a Sunday, on the Champs Elysees, and she decided to tell her everything. What could be the harm? After all, she has paid for the necklace, working honestly, through humble labor to fulfill her obligation. Also looking older than her age, but with a "smile and joy which was proud and naive at once" (52). That makes us think about her pride alongside her friend, about how honorable she became. In addition, at the end of the story, the writer leaves us a surprise - when Mme Forrestier, strongly moved, took her two hands. "Oh, my poor Mathilde! Why, my necklace was paste. It was worth at most 500 Francs!" (52) It is dramatic! It is hard to imagine how Mathilde could have received this news. It was more than I expected in a short story, Guy de Maupassant uses irony to produce a surprise ending and leaves us the decision whether Mathilde is a victim of bad luck or fate, or of her own warped perception of the world as a place where success and recognition result from wealth and status.
De Maupassant attempts to teach his readers several different moral lessons. He shows us that Mathilde learns to operate within the restraints of poverty and not once does she complain. Maupassant asserts that the people who survive the misfortunes of life are somehow stronger and therefore actually benefit from their adversities. One lesson for Mathilde to learn is that vanity is worthless and people should be proud of who they are. Mathilde also needs to learn to be happy with what she has; the irony is that she lost what she has because she was not content with it.
Work CitedChekhov, Anton. “A Trifle from Real Life.” Russia 1888. Rpt. in The International Story: An Anthology with Guidelines for Reading and Writing about Fiction. Ruth Spack. New York: St. Martin’s, 1994. 53-57.
"The Necklace": An Irony of Life
By Christianne Baerlein dos Santos Lima
The short story "The Necklace" was written in 1884 by a famous and talented writer named Guy de Maupassant, who was born into a family in Normandy, France in 1850. He studied with the famous writer Gustave Flaubert, while he was working in several ministries in Paris. Because of his unique style, he was considered one of the best writers in the 19th century. He also wrote essays, plays, poetry, and novels. His work has influenced many writers around the world, among them Anton Chekhov and Kate Chopin (46).
"The Necklace" is a short story about a woman who was a victim of herself at first, but who after hard years, understood some values in herself and also in her life. The story is set in Paris in a time when there were very distinct social classes primarily determined by one's birth. After the French Revolution (1789 - 1799), France became a Republic, but class distinctions remained an integral part of French society (46).
"The Necklace" tells of Mathilde Loisel, who by an error of destiny, or not, was born poor and winds up with a clerk for a husband. "She was one of those pretty and charming girls," who had "no expectations, no means of being known" and no dowry to wed some "rich and distinguished man"(46). She "suffered ceaselessly" because she was born in a family of clerks and married "a little clerk at the ministry of Public Instruction"(46). No woman of her rank would ever been conscious of or tortured by this poverty or even her husband. But she, she always dreamed of being rich, well dressed with jewels, living in a beautiful palace, loving nothing but that. Is this an irony or an error of destiny?
One evening her husband took something special for her: an invitation for a ball at the palace of the Ministry. Instead of being delighted, as her husband hoped, she was really upset. She had no dress, no jewelry, nothing to put on her back, so she wondered and began to cry! In addition, he was in despair seeing Mathilde so upset, crying. After that, he decided to give her the money that he had laid aside, demonstrating his love, affection, and respect for her. But more than a new dress, she wanted a jewel, a beautiful jewel, no flowers, no fresh flowers as had suggested her husband, trying to convince her how stylish it could be.
"No, there is nothing more humiliating than to look poor among other women who are rich" -She was definitely not convinced. (48) At this moment her husband has remember her friend, Mme Forrestier, who was her former schoolmate at the convent, a very rich woman! Therefore, she did. She went to her friend seeking a glamorous, beautiful, and very superb jewel. After seeing many jewels, she discovered, in a black satin box, what she was looking for! The superb and wonderful diamond necklace!! "Her heart began to beat with an inmoderate desire," and she "remained lost in ecstasy at the sight of herself dressed in it." (49) Mme Loisel was so surprised; her friend had lent her that piece. She delighted and "sprang upon the neck of her friend, kissed her passionately, then fled with her treasure." (49) At the ball, she danced so passionately forgetting all, feeling the happiness of "complete victory," beautiful in her glory! (49) But the drama arrives at home!
She notices, she realizes that she had lost the necklace, the superb diamond necklace. She could not believe...her husband could not believe either! "They looked, thunderstruck, at one another." (50) After failing to find it, they decided that their only recourse was to replace the necklace. Going from jeweler to jeweler, they searched for a facsimile. Finally, they found, one as much similar that cost 36,000 Francs! To raise the money, Loisel uses all of his savings and borrows the rest, writing promissory notes and signing his name on numerous documents. He compromised all the rest of his life, risked his signature without even knowing if he could meet it. But they bought the necklace as a replacement!
Mathilde took it in a case to Mme Forrestier, who did not even open it to check its contents! Thereafter, the Loisels work hard to save and pay all their debts. Mathilde also "knew now the horrible existence of the needy... She came to know what heavy housework meant and the odious cares" of this kind of life! (51) Her husband worked the whole day and night and this life lasted for ten long and miserable years! Mathilde Loisel learns this lesson the hard way. I think she understood how to evaluate themselves and others based on who they are intrinsically, that is on their character and moral fiber, not on what they possess or where they stand in society.
Indeed, she learns that honesty, humility, and hard work are what shape character, not clothes, or jewels that a person wears or the high station into which he or she is born. We notice this when Guy de Maupassant describes Mme Loisel meeting her friend, Mme Forrestier on a Sunday, on the Champs Elysees, and she decided to tell her everything. What could be the harm? After all, she has paid for the necklace, working honestly, through humble labor to fulfill her obligation. Also looking older than her age, but with a "smile and joy which was proud and naive at once" (52). That makes us think about her pride alongside her friend, about how honorable she became. In addition, at the end of the story, the writer leaves us a surprise - when Mme Forrestier, strongly moved, took her two hands. "Oh, my poor Mathilde! Why, my necklace was paste. It was worth at most 500 Francs!" (52) It is dramatic! It is hard to imagine how Mathilde could have received this news. It was more than I expected in a short story, Guy de Maupassant uses irony to produce a surprise ending and leaves us the decision whether Mathilde is a victim of bad luck or fate, or of her own warped perception of the world as a place where success and recognition result from wealth and status.
De Maupassant attempts to teach his readers several different moral lessons. He shows us that Mathilde learns to operate within the restraints of poverty and not once does she complain. Maupassant asserts that the people who survive the misfortunes of life are somehow stronger and therefore actually benefit from their adversities. One lesson for Mathilde to learn is that vanity is worthless and people should be proud of who they are. Mathilde also needs to learn to be happy with what she has; the irony is that she lost what she has because she was not content with it.
Maupassant, Guy de. “The Necklace.” France 1884. Rpt. in The International Story: An Anthology with Guidelines for Reading and Writing about Fiction. Ruth Spack. New York: St. Martin’s, 1994. 46-52.
Mathilde Loisel: Hero or Victim?
The Story of “The Necklace” by Guy de Maupassant
By Petra Heidl
At first it had surprised me that the story “The Necklace” was written by a man. To look deeper into the thoughts of women I would not actually expect of a man in those days. Well, the author, Guy de Maupassant, didn´t go deep into the thoughts of women psychologically but more in the thoughts of the nature of women on the surface. By the meaning of the surface it is the pride of beauty to be wedded by a rich and distinguished man, then envied by other women and finally being someone honored just by “achieving” something like self-esteem and inner values not by “being” someone which is identified by the social status.
It is a story about several topics like poverty, jealously, ambition, responsibility, loyalty, conscientiousness and irony. Guy de Montpassant pointed the attention to the experience of a couple who lives a simple life in kind of just middle-class poverty and then their experience after receiving an invitation to a ball in high-class richness. At first he describes her unhappiness at the beginning of the story: “She suffered ceaselessly, feeling herself born for all the delicacies and all the luxuries” (46). In this very beginning of the story she was already portrayed as a selfish, unsatisfied and mostly materialistic-minded woman.
While men are mostly honored by what they have done or achieved by work, women are mostly honored for their beauty, fineness, softness and self-sacrifice. Mme Loisel thought about herself having been born into the wrong class. I would go further and might say that in her deepest inner body she thinks that she is more worthy than she actually was. Mme. Loisel was a dreamer. As anybody knows it was not possible for a woman of her class to choose either a husband or anything else. The marriage with the clerk was not the worst choice; at least she has a Breton peasant, but she was not really honored to have one. It seems that this circumstance is not so important, but it really is. Later in the story, when she recognize that she could not afford any peasant anymore, she learned to honor, what to have and not what not to have.
The couple, coming from the lower class to one of the highest at the ball, fell suddenly into an even more lower class than before! Whereas Mme. Loisel is described as more trivial, her husband is in particular mentioned as a man loving his wife, showing respect and consideration, praising her for her qualities as a wife. In the scene where they are eating the dinner you can feel his pride in himself to be married to her. He declared with an enchanted air: “Ah, the good pot-au-feu! I don´t know anything better than that.” There is a tone of deep devotion in the story, knowing that he could not give her all that she wants to have.
Mr. Loisel seems to me that he wants to give her the feeling of being good, good enough and not to be poor and useless. Maybe they ate the pot-au-feu every third day, but he still likes it and acts as if it is the best dish in the world for him and that she did this for him. She is someone special for him; this was absolutely shown by Guy de Maupassant in the scene where he promised her the money for the dress (48).
He had planned it for himself to buy a gun for a little shooting the summer with several friends, which she did not know at all, and I would infer, most of the men living in that decade would have rather used it for themselves though. And sleeping while he waited for her at the ball, while she had a good time and danced, was also an act of deep respect and love. The author points out the husband´s feelings for her quite finely and sensitively with just a few sentences. Also her friend Mrs. Forestier is mentioned as a kind and helpful person. Without thinking of herself she lends her jewelry without even asking anything of Mme.Loisel. They weren´t in contact so often because Mme.Loisel felt ashamed of herself next to Mme.Forestier’s wealth.
But Mme.Loisel didn´t recognize that she had a great treasure already: a loving husband, a normal life standard, enough to eat, her health and a helpful friend. Then the story turns from a “dream-based” one into a “reality-based” one. The disaster happens: By losing the necklace of her friend, she went through a lot of real-life situations she had not experienced before. She has to take responsibility now. For her dreams? For the necklace? I will go further and say that she is compared to the necklace, she is like the necklace.
For the ball she gets dressed like the rich women and hides her “real” self behind a facade. From the outside she appears wealthy and cannot be distinguished from the others. The necklace is the same. It looks precious from the outside, but it is not as valuable as it seems to be. Mme. Loisel is not true this evening in her existence like the necklace. She is fake like the wonderful shining necklace, which shines the beauty to the outside. But while the fake necklace is a real illusion, Mme. Loisel shines brightened from the inside. It is her attitude, her charisma, which actually captivated the rich people, all the people. A fake necklace brings out the real Mme. Loisel. There is a saying: Clothes make people. On contrary I would say: inner beauty does not need expensive clothing.
When she loses the jewelry she learns all of a sudden that she has another side, a side of heroism; swallowing all the dreams, she recognizes the truth. Therefore, she has to pay for the debts. She has to pay also for her loving husband who took such a heavy burden onto his shoulders and for her friend, who trusted her so much to lend her jewelry. (Of course we know now, why she didn´t take it seriously). She learned to work hard, but she also learned self-esteem, being proud of what she achieved and not what she “had.”
That the jewels were paste was at first a tragedy. They were as fake as her dreams and herself. Then the tragedy helps her to find out what really counts in life and between relationships. To be honest and humble could make you proud from the inside and in fact makes her proud and also satisfied, which she never was before.
The message behind the story for me is that there exist false values and real values. False values are if you judge people based on what they possess or where they stand in society. Mme. Loisel learned this lesson the hard way. Real values are honesty, humility and also hard work which will shape one´s character, not the clothes or jewels of a person or the class into which one is born.
The moral reminds me also of another story and a statement which was written there. This statement is one of the most wonderful clarifications of the cooperation of human beings. The book is well-known . The title is The Little Prince and there it is said: “Don´t see only with your eyes but also with your heart. The essentials are invisible.” You have a connection to someone if you have faith in him or her, if you have experiences with the person. This inner connection makes a person special to you and you can see with your heart. One of the quotations of the author, Guy de Maupassant, is: It is the lives we encounter that make life worth living. The story “The Necklace” shows exact a story with this quotation as a theme.
In comparison with the story of “The Necklace” we could say that in her desperation and sad feelings Mme. Loisel just looked on the surface of people. She couldn´t even think of anything else: she sees just clothes, jewels, high standing. But these marks cannot tell you the inner attitude of someone, if he or she is honest, helpful and lovely. And they cannot make you happy. In the end, she learns this truth.
Guy de Maupassant tales in general were very objective and highly controlled in style. He writes simple episodes from everyday life, which revealed the hidden sides of people. He wants his readers to think and understand the deeper, not obvious meaning of facts or reality to analyze the people choices but also their experiences.
Work Cited
Maupassant, Guy de. “The Necklace.” France 1884. Rpt. in The International Story: An Anthology with Guidelines for Reading and Writing about Fiction. Ruth Spack. New York: St. Martin’s, 1994. 46-52.
Maupassant, Guy de. “The Necklace.” France 1884. Rpt. in The International Story: An Anthology with Guidelines for Reading and Writing about Fiction. Ruth Spack. New York: St. Martin’s, 1994. 46-52.
