Skip to main content

How is Madame Loisel responsible for her own suffering in "The Necklace"?

Madame Loisel is responsible for her own suffering because she wanted more than she had, and she wanted people to believe she had more.  If she had not been putting on airs, she would not have gone into debt.  If she had told the truth, she would not have gone into debt.


Madame Loisel’s first problem was that she was not satisfied with her lot in life.  Few people are, I guess, but she seemed to feel that she was born into the wrong social class.  She deserved more than she got.  Even when her husband tried to help her feel better by getting her invited to a party for the rich, she was upset because she didn’t have the right dress or jewels.  She wasted all of the money they had saved on a dress, and borrowed a jewel from a friend.



She had no clothes, no jewels, nothing. And these were the only things she loved; she felt that she was made for them. She had longed so eagerly to charm, to be desired, to be wildly attractive and sought after.



At the ball, people do pay attention to her.  She loves it.  Then I suppose you could say she gets an attack of irony, or karma.  She loses the necklace.  Instead of owning up to it, she pretends that nothing happened but a broken clasp.  Then she replaces it with another necklace like nothing happened.  The problem is that this was a diamond necklace, and the Loisels can’t afford it, so they go into debt.


Years later, Madame Loisel runs into her friend and finds out the necklace she lost was fake.



"Oh, my poor Mathilde! But mine was imitation. It was worth at the very most five hundred francs! . . . "



By this time, Madame Loisel looks so old and haggard her friend barely recognizes her.  She has had to fire all of her servants and work hard to pay off the debt.  Whatever beauty and social standing she had is gone.  It’s sad, but it is all her own fault because if she had told the truth they would have just had a good laugh and gone on with their lives.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Is there a word/phrase for "unperformant"?

As a software engineer, I need to sometimes describe a piece of code as something that lacks performance or was not written with performance in mind. Example: This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. Based on my Google searches, this isn't a real word. What is the correct way to describe this? EDIT My usage of "performance" here is in regard to speed and efficiency. For example, the better the performance of code the faster the application runs. My question and example target the negative definition, which is in reference to preventing inefficient coding practices. Answer This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. In my opinion, reads more easily as: This coding style leads to unmaintainable and poorly performing code. The key to well-written documentation and reports lies in ease of understanding. Adding poorly understood words such as performant decreases that ease. In addressing the use of such a poorly ...
Post a Comment
Read more

A man has a garden measuring 84 meters by 56 meters. He divides it into the minimum number of square plots. What is the length of the square plots?

We wish to divide this man's garden into the minimum number of square plots possible. A square has all four sides with the same length.Our garden is a rectangle, so the answer is clearly not 1 square plot. If we choose the wrong length for our squares, we may end up with missing holes or we may not be able to fit our squares inside the garden. So we have 84 meters in one direction and 56 meters in the other direction. When we start dividing the garden in square plots, we are "filling" those lengths in their respective directions. At each direction, there must be an integer number of squares (otherwise, we get holes or we leave the garden), so that all the square plots fill up the garden nicely. Thus, our job here is to find the greatest common divisor of 84 and 56. For this, we prime factor both of them: `56 = 2*2*2*7` `84 = 2*2*3*7` We can see that the prime factors and multiplicities in common are `2*2*7 = 28` . This is the desired length of the square plots. If you wi...
Post a Comment
Read more

What warning does Chuchundra issue to Rikki?

Chuchundra, the sniveling, fearful muskrat who creeps around walls because he is too terrified to go into the center of a room, meets Rikki in the middle of the night. He insults Rikki by begging him not to kill him. He then insults him by suggesting that Nag might mistake Chuchundra for Rikki. He says, "Those who kill snakes get killed by snakes."  He issues this warning to Rikki not to help keep Rikki safe but as a way of explaining why Rikki's presence gives him, Chuchundra, more reason to fear.  Chuchundra starts to tell Rikki what Chua the rat told him--but breaks it off when he realizes he might be overheard by Nag. He says, "Nag is everywhere, Rikki-Tikki." Rikki threatens to bite Chuchundra to get him to talk. Even then, Chuchundra won't overtly reveal any information. But he does say, "Can't you hear, Rikki-Tikki?" This is enough of a clue for the clever mongoose. He listens carefully and can just make out the "faintest scratch-s...
Post a Comment
Read more