Wednesday, February 8, 2012

Shattered Dreams in Guy de Maupassant’s “The Diamond Necklace” (LIT 2100 Response Paper)

            Guy de Maupassant’s “The Diamond Necklace” is a story of deception, greed and martyrdom.  The main character, Matilda Loisel, is obviously unhappy with her station in life, so her husband gives up everything he has been saving for just to make her happy.  Her vanity shows that she firmly believes that her beauty was not being put to proper use.  She imagines that her looks and her charm belonged to high society instead of where she currently is on the social ladder.  Throughout the story, horrible things happen to those who covet what others have.  Although the necklace is not only beautiful but also a fraud, I will show how the necklace possesses the power of illusion, and how false assumptions about it shatter one’s dreams.
            Matilda’s dream was for the life of an aristocrat.  She is described as beautiful, yet took her looks for granted, disillusioned with the belief that everyone who is beautiful should be rich and upper class.  Her husband knew she longed for such things, so he went out his way to secure invitations for a party at the Minister of Public Instruction’s residence and even bought her a dress using the money he had been saving for a gun just to make her happy.  Unfortunately, her happiness had to come from someone she looked up to, Madame Forestier.  These scenes alone reveal and symbolize Matilda's apathy for the love and life her husband offers her, based on his lack of wealth (Drusset).  She showed appreciation to her friend, and all she did was lend her a necklace as opposed to buying her things like her husband has done for her.  It turns out that she loved the rich and looked down on what she considered to be poor; her husband.  She wanted to impart the illusion that she was rich, beautiful, and charming at the party.  Madame Forestier’s diamond necklace would suit her fine in accomplishing that feat, for it was also a fraud, just like Matilda.
            Losing the necklace brought about a realization to Matilda.  She wanted to be respected, and if she were to tell Madame Forestier that she lost her necklace, she would lose that respect.  She saw absolute value in the necklace since it was beautiful and presumably real, so she worked for over ten years to replace something she considered valuable with something just as authentic in her mind.  The box that the necklace came in even had the name of the jeweler who presumably sold it.  When they paid a visit to the jeweler, one hint to the fact that it was fake was disregarded when the jeweler said, “It is not I, Madame who sold this necklace; I only furnished the casket” (32).  She was not alone in this endeavor of compensation; her husband gave up his inheritance along with several years of his life and stood by her every step of the way.  In the end, Matilda was in denial when she encountered Madame Forestier after ten years.  She blamed Madame Forestier for how she and her husband have become impoverished by saying, “Yes, I have had some hard days since I saw you; and some miserable ones – and all because of you” (de Maupassant, 33).  However, it turns out that Madame Forestier did not respect Matilda enough to give her an authentic diamond necklace.
            Madame Forestier did not tell Matilda outright that the necklace was a fraud, since she probably wanted to convey the misconception that she was richer than Matilda gave her credit for.  The reader realizes this in the last quote of the story, “Oh!  My poor Matilda!  Mine were false.  They were not worth over five hundred francs!” (33)  Matilda thought if her friend was rich, then the necklace must be real, no questions asked.  She had the belief that if she questioned the quality of the necklace, she would insult her friend who has been nice enough to let her borrow it in the first place.  Matilda believed the jewels in the necklace were diamonds, therefore she perceived diamonds.  With these diamonds adorning her dress, she became infatuated with the illusion that she was rich; therefore others saw her as rich.  The necklace did not only look real, but it enhanced the perceptions of those around it like a mirage.  The years of disappointment would have been less severe if Matilda were more humble and willing to accept her fate, but her dignity was at stake if she were to reveal such a thing to a friend that she held in high regard.  Her dreams and ambition were shattered since they assumed the necklace was real, yet she still held onto those lingering memories of the party they attended before the necklace was lost.
            It would be no surprise that the reader would show contempt for someone as spiteful and condescending as Matilda.  She saw herself as a martyr, yet the true martyr all along was her husband.  He could have just left her with her debt, but he felt devoted to her because he loved her unconditionally (Drusset).  He helped her come up with reasons why they could not return the necklace, yet she never showed any appreciation for him throughout the story.  They were wealthy enough to have a maid, but they had to send her away since they could not maintain her services while making payments toward the replacement necklace.  In a way, the necklace put Matilda in her place, almost as if Karma was looking over her shoulder every step of the way.  Her dreams were shattered since her good looks diminished over time, and she was so far down the social ladder that her aspirations of aristocracy were beyond all hope.  After all, she was a pretender.  Matilda and the necklace share many common traits; they are beautiful, fake, and lost. 












Works Cited
Drusset, Alana. “Literary Analysis: The use of symbolism in “The Necklace,” by Guy de
Maupassant” Helium. 11 March 2008. web. 02 February 2012.

De Maupassant, Guy. “The Diamond Necklace” The Works of Guy de Maupassant. New York:
            Black’s Reader Service. pg. 28-33.

No comments:

Post a Comment