The+Necklace

1A

 * //See Ms Kemsley's notes and rewrites in bold italics//**

The Plot of "The Necklace" -
David M., Erin K., Erica

The plot of most short stories is condensed in length and of a more simplistic nature relative to novels. Guy de Maupassant’s, “The Necklace” is no exception. Starting with the exposition, the story has only three main characters, Madame and Monsieur Loisel––both very simple, “economical” characters that are among the lower-rank of society’s hierarchal ladder, and Madame Forestier, Mathilde Loisel’s affluent friend. A combination of 19th century language and lifestyle, as well as the life span of the author, dually suggest that the story’s setting takes place not only during the 19th century, but as many famous locations of Paris are mentioned in the story, Paris, France. In order to set the plot in motion, the inciting incident introduces the conflict. In “The Necklace,” the inciting incident is when the husband brings forth an invitation to a “select” event at the “palace of the Ministry.” Although, originally flustered by the idea, Mathilde eventually decides to go, but only under the condition that she looks like a proper lady; elegant and exquisitely dressed. Thus, the continually manifest conflict for the “poverty-stricken” couple, the inability to purchase such expensive items, develops the plot further. “It annoys me not to have a single piece of jewelry, not a single ornament, nothing to put on.” Mathilde’s lack of finances and her irritation with the situation provides both an external and internal element towards the conflict. When proceeding events in the rising action, like purchasing the sophisticated gown, and, most significantly, acquiring the diamond necklace transpire, Mathilde’s lack of income, the conflict, becomes even more apparent physically and emotionally. “The day of the ball drew near and Madame Loisel seemed sad, uneasy, anxious.” Suspense building, Mathilde and her husband attend the ball. “Madame Loisel was a great success. She was prettier than any other woman present, elegant, graceful, smiling and wild with joy.” Unfortunately, from the end of the masquerade onward, everything of the couple’s luck disintegrates. The climax and crisis simultaneously rear their heads when Madame Loisel, to her surprise, finds that the “superb diamond necklace” her friend, Madame Forestier lent her, is no longer around her neck. Unable to find the ornament or confess her mistake to Madame Forestier, for the sake of her pride, Mathilde buys a new, similar necklace for thirty-six thousand francs. Consequently, Madame and Monsieur Loisel are forced to live in debt for an entire decade, where Mathilde comes “to know what heavy housework meant and the odious cares of the kitchen.” Searching for the necklace and struggling through debt composes the falling action of the narrative. Finally, when Mathilde’s debts are paid, the denouement is introduced and the plot unknots. “Madame Forestier, deeply moved, took her hands. ‘Oh, my poor Mathilde! Why, my necklace was paste! It was worth at most only five hundred francs!”

To do better, this group needed to edit more carefully - there's lots of information that would be better in the setting or character paragraph. In addition, when asking the plot question be careful NOT to retell the story but to ANALYZE it. See my edited version below and look carefully for the changes://**
 * //This is a great paragraph that really identifies the plot stages well, and uses evidence to support ideas.

 T**//he plot of The Necklace is simple and traditional, but effective in keeping the reader's interest and developing themes. The exposition establishes characters and setting. Next, the inciting incident occurs when the husband brings forth an invitation to a “select” event at the “palace of the Ministry.” Mathilde wants to go but is upset by her poverty and says, “It annoys me not to have a single piece of jewelry, not a single ornament, nothing to put on.” Mathilde’s lack of finances and her irritation with the situation provides internal conflict which drives the plot forwards as she makes the error of caring so much about her appearance she borrows an expensive necklace. Suspense builds during the rising action as Mathilde prepares for the ball, “The day of the ball drew near and Madame Loisel seemed sad, uneasy, anxious.” Although Mathilde enjoys the ball, unfortunately, from the end of the masquerade onward, everything of the couple’s luck disintegrates. The climax and crisis simultaneously rear their heads when Madame Loisel, to her surprise, finds that the “superb diamond necklace” her friend, Madame Forestier lent her, is no longer around her neck. Unable to find the ornament or confess her mistake to Madame Forestier, for the sake of her pride, Mathilde buys a new, similar necklace for thirty-six thousand francs. Consequently, Madame and Monsieur Loisel are forced to live in debt for an entire decade, where Mathilde comes “to know what heavy housework meant and the odious cares of the kitchen.” Searching for the necklace and struggling through debt composes the falling action of the narrative. Finally, when Mathilde’s debts are paid, the denouement is introduced and the plot unknots. “Madame Forestier, deeply moved, took her hands. ‘Oh, my poor Mathilde! Why, my necklace was paste! It was worth at most only five hundred francs!”//**

Point of View of The Necklace
Edwin Z, Reina M, Phillip I

A story based on class created in a scene of time which occurred during the 19th century where knowledge hasn’t been made available to all would require a well-built point of view in which the narrator or character provides the reader with information relevant to both the story and the meaning behind it. Guy de Maupassant wrote //The Necklace// in a third person, omniscient, point of view. The narrator expressed what each character was thinking during a certain point of time; Madame Loisel wished for wealth while her husband wanted to please her. This being the main idea for the first half of the story made third person, omniscient, an excellent choice. It enables a reader to identify the cause of the climaxes and add a bit of flavor to the story. Some would say that a first person, major, point of few would’ve been better. This would not apply to the entire story; the first person perspective would most likely contain an unreliable narrator. A stunning ending that will keep the reader pondering about earlier events over and over again could not be achieved as profoundly with an unreliable narrator. Having an omniscient character watching from above allows the reader to better understand each character, including their appearances, lifestyle, behavior, ambitions, and personalities in a more neutral perspective. It aids with the visualization aspect as both the characters and the omniscient narrator provides information about the story itself. All in all, the third person, omniscient, point of view enabled Guy de Maupassant to build up the suspense before revealing an astonishing ending. It helped with the overall piece and enhanced the overall reader’s experience.


 * //Generally a good paragraph and I especially like your comments on how using a different point of view would have changed the story. However, the first sentence is really confusing and there are some grammar errors. See below for my edited version:

Guy de Maupassant wrote //The Necklace //in a third person, omniscient, point of view. This allows him to establish the setting and describe the emotions of different characters. The narrator expresses what each character is thinking during a certain point of time; Madame Loisel wishes for wealth while her husband wants to please her. This being the main idea for the first half of the story makes the third person omniscient point of view an excellent choice. It enables the reader to see the irony and suspense of the story. Some would say that a first person, major, point of few would’ve been better. This would not apply to the entire story; the first person perspective would most likely contain an unreliable narrator. A stunning ending that will keep the reader pondering about earlier events over and over again could not be achieved as profoundly with a first person narrator. Having an omniscient narrator watching from above allows the reader to better understand each character, including their appearances, lifestyle, behavior, ambitions, and personalities in a more neutral perspective. It aids with the visualization aspect as both the characters and the omniscient narrator provides information about the story itself. All in all, the third person, omniscient, point of view enables Guy de Maupassant to build up the suspense before revealing an astonishing ending. It helped with the overall piece and enhanced the overall reader’s experience.//**

**Characterization of The Necklace**
Nicole W., Stephane P., Erika L.

Like a typical short story, "The Necklace" has very few main characters. Mathilde is the protagonist of the story, the center of attention. The story starts off introducing the reader to her character and her wanting to be wealthy as she is poor. Mathilde is also the one who everything falls on, good and bad luck. Monsieur Losiel is neither a protagonist nor antagonist. In the story he is Mathilde’s husband and is the one who gets her the invitation to the ball. Madame Forestier is also neither a protagonist nor antagonist. She is merely a wealthier friend who lends Mathilde the necklace. Though her necklace is the cause of making the main purpose of Mathidle’s life to make enough money, she is not the antagonist; there is no antagonist in the story.  The author has focused this short story on the married couple, who both are very important. Mathilde Loisel believes that she should have been born in the higher class and "She felt made for that." It was obvious to see that she feels she deserves more than the life she has right now, more than being married to a "little clerk in the Ministry of Education." Because of her desire of wanting " to be envied, to be sought after", she is so concerned about her appearance at the beginning that made her feel she needs jewels to feel/look not so "poverty-stricken." It later caused her to lose the necklace her friend, Madame Forestier, let her borrowed and for the next ten years, she and her husband have to work very hard to pay off the debts they have when they brought another necklace, that's almost exactly the same one they had lost, to replace it. Even though it might not seem very clear, Mathilde does change and develop throughout the story as years pass by, making her a dynamic character, as well as a round character. It's not only that her appearance changed, because of all the heavy labour, but she also changes as a person and learns what it means to do hard work and for once, she takes responsibility for her mistake. Although Mathilde still has a little bit of that self-centered attitude, which is shown in the end with Madame Forrestier when she said, "Yes, I have had a pretty hard life, since I last saw you, and great poverty--and that because of you!" She learns that honesty is more important than what she looks like on the outside. While Mathilde is a round, dynamic character, her husband is a round static character. He also plays an important role in the story by helping her wife pay off the debts but even though he changes and grows old on the outside, his feeling toward his wife didn't change. In the end of the story, he still loves his wife because he cares for her, which means he didn't really change in the inside. Madame Forestier, on the other hand, is a flat static character. She is the one who lends Mathilde the necklace and got an identical one back in return. She wasn't mentioned throughout the whole story plot except when Mathilde approached her twice. We didn't get to know much about her, just the fact that she is nice enough to let her old friend borrow any piece of jewels she wants. Because she is a minor character, there wasn't any specific characteristics that shows possibilities of her developing/changing in the inside, and thus making her a static character.

While the author uses both indirect and direct characterization, he relies heavily on the latter, especially when it comes to the main character, Mathilde. In the exposition, he straightforwardly tells the reader what Mathilde is like. "She dressed plainly because she could not dress well, but she was unhappy as if she had really fallen from a higher station." "She had no gowns, no jewels, nothing. And she loved nothing but that... She would have liked so much to please, to be envied, to be charming, to be sought after... She had a friend, a former schoolmate at the convent, who was rich, and whom she did not like to go to see any more because she felt so sad when she came home." From just these descriptions, the author makes it clear that Mathilde is envious of the rich, and finds her current lifestyle to be unsatisfying and to some extent, shameful. The majority of the author's description of Mathilde is stated in a direct way, as opposed to showing what she is like through her actions. Her husband's character, however, is almost always indirectly described throughout the story. He gives Mathilde four hundred francs to buy a gown, when he is actually saving up the money to buy himself a gun. This shows the reader that he is kind and wishes to please Mathilde, putting her happiness before his. The author shows more of Monsieur Loisel's deep caring and devotion towards Mathilde when he spends hours frantically searching everywhere for the necklace that she lost, and then later collecting as much money as he can to buy the replacement. Not once does Mathilde thank him, but he continues to be a loyal husband and spends the next ten years of his life with her working off their debt. The author of The Necklace vividly describes the main characters using a good combination of direct and indirect characterization to enhance the story.


 * //Excellent. This is a very thorough and well written answer. In the assessment, you would not have time to write three paragraphs so you would have to edit more carefully - some parts are retelling the story and could be cut, but otherwise I like the detail.//**

Symbols and irony
Cindy S.,Joo Hyun Y.,Julia D.



In the story The Necklace, the necklace itself is the symbol Mathilde’s greed for social status and money. In the beginning of the story, Mathilde thinks of herself as a high class lady and borrows the necklace from her friend to look richer than she actually is. However, she loses it and ends up buying a new necklace. As a result, instead of making herself look rich, she becomes poor and works to pay back the money she borrowed to replace the necklace. In addition, because she worked so hard, her appearance became rough and coarse. The necklace, although appeared to be very expensive and beautiful, was actually worth very little. However worthless it is, it costs the Loisels very dearly, so they had to work very hard to pay back the money they borrowed from the loaners, who charged a lot of interest. Guy de Maupassant reminds us that people should live within one's means. **//He also shows us that wealth is not a good goal in life - it is not as valuable as it appears.//**

In the short story The Necklace, cosmic irony was used. For example, before the ball, she borrowed the necklace so she could pretend to be richer and classier. However, because she wanted to fool all of the other guests into thinking she was rich like them, she was in debt for ten years. Also, Mathlide, who acts like a high class woman in the beginning, doesn't even notice the differences between a real diamonds and a fake diamonds, and situational irony occurs when she is told that the necklace she worked so hard to replace was made out of paste.

//**In this case, you may want to divide your answer into two short paragraphs, unless the symbol is ironic.**//

Themes of "The Necklace"
Dianna, Kenneth, Jordan, Antonio.

Snobbery is the foundation of Guy de Maupassant’s “The Necklace.” This is what separates different classes on the economic pyramid, and made all the difference to Mathilde Loisel. She claims to “suffer ceaselessly,” which is a thought of absolute self-pity caused by her overrating of a higher status. Madame Loisel’s refusal to accept reality and preoccupation of her own image is what throws her life into utter chaos. Because she has an extreme need for riches and expresses contempt for her middle class style, she loses all tolerance. Though her life is fortunate enough, she needs up and up on the social hierarchy. Mathilde knows nothing but things that are better and worse, even while she leads a typical middle class life. Her many snobbish traits provoke overreactions, which she in turn truly experience after her superficial aspirations are fulfilled. When Madame Loisel goes to the ball, she overachieves for no reason at all. Appearance of a great social class did not change anything, but only her feeling of superiority. This is what brought her downfall.


 * //The dominant theme of “The Necklace” is greed, one of the many flaws of human nature. Madame Loisel was thoroughly middle class, without lavish gowns or jewels, but still, she had a servant and attended theater for entertainment. When the Loisels received invitation to the ministerial ball, instead of being pleased, Mathilde wept because she could not be content with her theater gown, and after her husband gave up his 400-Franc savings for a new ball gown, Madame Loisel was upset that she had no jewelry, and would “rather not go at all”. Even when Madame Forestier had so many extravagant jewels to offer, Madame Loisel was satisfied with none except the diamond necklace. At the ball, when her husband enveloped her in modest wraps, she was filled with chagrin to see the other women with their expensive furs. After all, when one wish is satisfied, it doesn’t dispel the greed, it just leaves one wanting more.//**


 * //This is the best paragraph, above. Just add in some other ideas and bring it to a conclusion and you can cut the rest!//**

//**Themes of**// **The Necklace**
//Amy Z., Casey W., Angela L.

In the short story// The Necklace//, Guy de Maupassant illustrates several themes that can be applied to life outside the story: be content with what you have, one’s pride can be one’s downfall, and appearances can be deceiving—depicting society’s false values. A dominant theme in this story is to be satisfied with what life gives you, as money cannot buy happiness. In// The Necklace//, Mathilde Loisel, the wife of an economical clerk, yearned for all that she did not have—beautiful tapestries, gorgeous gowns, exquisite banquets and more. This desire tormented her endlessly: “Mathilde suffered ceaselessly, feeling herself born to enjoy all delicacies and all luxuries” (de Maupassant 1). __After being invited to a ball hosted by the Minister of Public Instruction, Mathilde borrows her affluent friend’s diamond necklace, wishing to appear wealthy and admired in the presence of others. However, she loses the necklace and, with too much pride to confess that she had lost it, Mathilde replaces the necklace with one that is newly purchased for thirty-six thousand francs, much of which was borrowed from various sources. She condemns herself and her husband to a life of poverty as they struggle to earn money to repay their debts. A decade later, after everything has been paid off, Mathilde encounters Madame Forestier (the friend whose necklace she had lost), and learns that the necklace had been a fake—worth only five hundred francs.__ If Mathilde had been happy with what she had and not so proud, she would not have been driven to borrow Madame Forestier’s jewelry or lost it subsequently, eliminating the need to replace it and the decade of hard work and toil she endured thereafter. Also, if Mathilde had not been so proud, she could have told her friend of her accidental disaster. Madame Forestier is depicted as a kind woman, so Mathilde could have, no doubt, avoided the dire consequences by simply being honest and not so consumed by pride. When Mathilde first laid eyes upon the necklace, she at once assumed it was genuine, but it proved to be simply an imitation. At the party, she also perceived everyone as truly kind people, as they treated her well due to her beauty. However, just as the necklace proved to be unauthentic, it is implied that the people, too, were fake, portraying society’s tendency to judge people by their outer appearances rather than their personality and inner values. __Theme is an important literary element that allows readers to connect and use the ideas of the story in their own lives.__


 * This is mostly an excellent paragraph but I would suggest two changes. Firstly, cut the underlined chunk which is mostly retelling the story rather than analysis. Secondly, change the final sentence to relate back to the topic sentence. For example: Therefore, we can see that the three main themes of the story work together to try to teach us a moral lesson about what we should value in our lives.**//

**Characterization Of The Necklace**
//Junee Kim, Regan Plekenpol, Iris Hung//

=
//Guy de Maupassant uses many forms of characterization to create and develop the characters in his short story, “The Necklace.” The protagonist of the story is Mathilde Loisel. She is round character. She has many traits and she seems like a real person to the reader. The author, Guy de Maupassant, uses both direct and indirect characterization to create and develop Mathilde Loisel.//======

=
//Maupassant uses direct characterization primarily in the exposition; he describes her beauty, personality, and her poverty. “The girl was one of those pretty and charming young creatures…” (Maupassant, 1) The author emphasizes that she was not happy with her position and viewed herself as poor. “Mathilde suffered ceaselessly, feeling herself born to enjoy all delicacies and all luxuries. She was distressed at the poverty of her dwelling” (Maupassant, 1)//======

=
//The author also uses Mathilde’s speech, thoughts and actions to allow the reader to form their own opinion of the character. This is called indirect characterization. “No; there’s nothing more humiliating than to look poor among other women who are rich” (Maupassant, 2) .The author primarily uses indirect characterization in this short piece of writing.//======

=
//Mathilde is a dynamic character, in the beginning of the story she is charming and obsessed with being wealthy. However, after losing the necklace she is forced to pay off her debt and to do so she has to adapt to a more poverty- stricken life. Mathilde becomes rough and strong and loses her lovely charm. ““She had become the woman of impoverished households- strong and hard and rough.” (Maupassant, 4)//======

=
//However sometimes she still thinks back to the days when she was charming and wealthier and wonders what her life would have been like if she hadn’t lost the necklace. “…Sometimes…she thought of that gay evening of long ago, of the ball where she had been so beautiful and so admired.” (Maupassant, 4) Mathilde has changed but not completely. Her husband is a static character and doesn't go throughout the story. The author describes him indirectly through his content outlook on his average lifestyle, and his support of his wife when she loses the necklace. He searched for long hours and gave up most of his income over the years to pay back the loss. He is a flat character because we don't know much about him, other than how he interacts with his wife, the protagonist. The author tells us, directly, that he is a poor, ministry clerk, and that Mathilde did not marry into wealth. “she had no way of being married to any rich or distinguished man; so she let herself be married to a little clerk of the Ministry of Public Institution…” (Maupassant, 1)//======

=
//The extensive use of different forms of characterization is essential in creating Maupassant’s character, Loisel, in his story. Using both direct and indirect characterization, he portrays dynamic, and round characters that are not only is significant to the story but also to the overall quality of this piece of literature.//======

=//Characterisation and Irony//= //HaeMin Cho, Sally Park, Charles Li Wang, David and Kelvin Ip//

==

//Setting of "The Necklace"//
//Tracey Z. and Sarah D. Taking place during 1880s, the setting of the short story, "The Necklace", reveals the contrast between the rich and the poor within Parisian society. In the beginning, the story is set in Mathilde Loisel's house, exposing her lack of money and property. The quote, "She was distressed at the poverty of her dwelling, at the bareness of the walls, at the shabby chairs, the ugliness of the curtains," paints a picture of a couple with very few assets. The setting therefore also helps to set the mood within the story. The poor state that Mathilde is in makes her angry and upset at her social position. Mathilde's dreams of delicacies and luxuries are shattered by the irreconcilably low salary her husband earns as a clerk. However, the invitation to the Minister of Public Instruction's party gives an opportunity for both the reader and the main characters to catch a glimpse of life within the wealthy and prosperous. A milieu of elegance can be felt within the setting. Exotic Oriental tapestry, tall bronze candelabra, with footmen adhering to every need create a sense of luxury and comfort. The two different worlds contrast with each other and represent the class difference within Paris. These settings differ so greatly that pity is almost felt upon Mathilde because the reader can perceive that she will never attain this type of life. The name of the road the Loisels live on is called Rue des Martyrs, translating to Road of Martyrs. This setting also gives a sense of irony to the story--the Loisels had to suffer throughout, first with Mathilde's want of living an upper class lifestyle and later slaving away to pay back their debts. The story, taking place during the 1880s, also shows the restraints on upward class mobility during that time period. Therefore, the setting clearly allows the reader to recognize the disparity between the upper and lower classes and giver greater imagery to the story.//


 * Very good! Well done - concisely written**

//**Characterization and Setting of "The Necklace" Time Y., Nah Young, Luke W. ** The main characters are Mathilde Loisel and Monsieur Loisel. Mathilde was both the antagonist and the protagonist. She leads the story on, but she is opposing herself, because due to her greed she is leading herself into a harder life. According to the story Mathilde is a round but static character, for we know her characteristics but she doesn’t change through the story. “ Mathilde suffered ceaselessly, feeling herself born to enjoy all delicacies and all luxuries.” The author did not present Mathilde directly; instead he used many dialogues to present Mathilde’s personality. “It annoys me not to have a single piece of jewelry…I would almost rather not go at all.” Mosieur Loisel is neither protagonist nor antagonist. Also he is a round but static character, because we know he loves his wife to the point that he didn’t want his wife to ruin her life. However, he also loves his wife too much, that he couldn’t see his wife go to the invitation without a gown and a piece of jewel.

//**I don't agree that Monsieur Loisel is a round character - we hardly know anything about him except he puts up with his wife with the patience of a saint!**

//The story took place in older times in France, Paris. The way the setting affected the story was that since it was in the older times, the classes, the rich and the poor were divided well. For example, Mathilde’s house seemed like a poor house: “She was distressed at the poverty of her dwelling”, while the party she has gone to was a very fancy, upper-class kind of party. Thus, through those “old” setting, that her house was shabby and had bare walls, the author emphasized the contrast between the poor and the rich, and some of the conflicts occurring between them.// **Your ideas are okay here but the paragraph on setting further up explains this a bit more clearly.**

//Point of View of "The Necklace"//
//Sherman C., Katrina C. Allyn X. In the short story "The Necklace", Guy de Maupassant tells the story through an omniscient third person narrator. The narrator starts the story with "The girl was one of those”. In this quote, "The girl was one of those" shows that the narrator is omniscient, in other words, all-knowing about many different characters.// **But this quote only shows he knows about one character! Sometimes it is better to use evidence from the story rather than a quote//.// For example, the story is not told from Mathilde's point of view yet the omniscient narrator communicates her character very well//.//**//In this story, the narrator refers to all the characters as ‘he’, ‘she’, or ‘they’. The narrator focuses on Mathilde Loisel and her thoughts. The narrator focuses on relaying Mathilde Loisel's thoughts and ideas throughout the story. However, the narrator does not overtly tell the readers the feelings and thoughts of the characters, or judge the actions of the characters. Although the narrator simply just tells the series of events of this story in an impartial way, the author uses indirect characterization, leaving the judgement of the characters' actions up to the readers. An advantage of using// **t****he** //third person point of view is that it conveys information much more easily and quickly to the readers. Readers can also get a better understanding of the story because the narrator can be at any location at any time of the story, describing the events. On the other hand, the disadvantage is that since the narrator is not one of the characters of the story, he is limited from interfering. 'Very well. I will give you four hundred francs.' When Loisel decides to give the money he saved for himself to buy a gun to Madame Loisel, the narrator does not imply overtly about the nature of Loisel, but through indirect characterization, Loisel's nature, thoughts, and feelings are conveyed. In this case, readers can perceive that Loisel is generous, loves his wife, and wants to make her happy. Thus the omniscient third-person point of view of this story allows the readers to create their own distinct thoughts about the about the feelings, thoughts, and natures of the characters through the author's use of indirect characterization.//


 * Good - some nice evidence about Monsieur Loisel here.**

=//Symbolism and Irony in "The Necklace"//=

=
//In “The Necklace”, the author uses symbols and irony to create an interesting story. The most obvious and main irony in this story is the fact that Ms. Loisel bought Madame Forestier a real diamond necklace, instead of the fake diamond necklace Ms. Loisel lost. After Loisel lost the necklace, she did not know it was a fake one, because she went looking for a real diamond necklace. “… A string of diamonds that seemed to them exactly like the one they had lost. It was worth forty thousand francs…” (Maupassant, 3). However, when Loisel had repaid the debt and confessed to Madame Forestier what she did, Madame Forestier actually said that her diamond necklace was not with real diamonds, and that Loisel had to work for 10 years for something not worth more then five hundred francs: “Oh, my poor Mathilde! Why, my necklace was paste! It was worth at most only five hundred Francs!”(Maupassant, 5). Even though Mathilde’s reaction is left out, we can see that Mathilde had worked all those years for nothing, and had replaced Forestier’s fake, cheap, necklace, for a genuine diamond necklace.//======

=
//In fact, one of the symbols in the story was also the necklace. The necklace represented all of Mathilde’s dreams, beauty, and materialistic attitude. “She thought of long reception halls hung with ancient silk, of the dainty cabinets containing priceless curiosities and of the little coquettish perfumed reception halls made for chatting at five o’clock with friends…”(Maupassant, 1). Loisel had many dreams of fancy and of things that the rich had, however she was not rich, and had to live a simple life. However, after she loses the necklace, and buys a new one to replace the lost one, she loses all of these dreams. This symbol is rather ironic due to the fact that after Mathilde loses the necklace, her attitude changes, she starts to look older and less pretty, and she eventually loses the extravagant dreams she had. “She bore her part, however, with sudden heroism. That dreadful debt must be paid. She would pay it.”(Maupassant, 3).//======

=
//Another symbol is the main character herself. Mathilde represents the sexism and lack of power women had in the 19 th century. Mathilde felt that she was “born to enjoy all delicacies and all luxuries.” In the 19 th century, women did not work in any labor or industrial services. Thus, the women at that time did not have many belongings. The women who did work were often laughed at or ridiculed because women were thought to only know how to cook, clean, mother children, and other chores around the house. They were considered to only stay in the house and not go out.//======

**Good! Well done//**
= =