There are two men discussing a short story that they had previously read. These two people have different points of views; however both their opinions about the story are relevant. The story in which they are discussing is entitled “The Necklace”, by Guy de Maupassant, a French writer. The first man is named Trent, he believes in a functionalist society where everything does not just co-exist, they work well together. Along with this belief, he thinks that things happen for a reason; good or bad it is the will of fate. He is friends with another man named Trevor who is a realist, he believes that life is hard and that nothing is ever handed to any one on a silver platter. Trevor knows that you have to work for whatever you have, and he does not want to take anything for granted. He believes that you make your destiny, and he does not accept the belief in fate. The two individuals discuss the main focus of the story, and both have different views.
Trent: It’s funny how things turned out for the poor Loisel family (De Maupassant). Although they were not poor to begin with, it was because they tried to disrupt the status quo, that’s why things got bad.
Trevor: The reason why things got bad was because Madam Loisel chased after something that was non-existent, instead of looking at what she had or her situation.
Trent: That’s kind of the same thing, I think. It’s exactly what I said.
Trevor: No, you believe that the focus of the story was on Madam Loisel and how she felt about life. What I was trying to say is that the necklace in the story is symbolic, and that it’s the idea of wealth and security that is the center thesis of the story.
Trent: How is that different? Madam Loisel coveted the necklace, and it turns out to be fake. Sort of like how she lived her life, or at least fantasized about it.
Trevor: It’s different because they both represent a different thing. The focus is really on the necklace, though.
Trent: The entire story revolves around Madame Loisel. How could you say that it’s the necklace? It’s obviously about this lady who was too concerned about her image and status in life (De Maupassant).
Trevor: True, the story was more about her. However, it is entitled “The Necklace”, and that object is the cause of their conflict You’re right though, about what the image of Madam Loisel represents.
Trent: Right, it is called that. But, Madame Loisel, at that time, might have also represented Paris during that time. Madam Loisel was too concerned about being rich, but not so much about being part of nobility It’s like, she wanted to get more than what she was born with. But, she wasn’t aiming higher that “comfort” or a posh life.
Trevor: She could, very well, represent those things. However, her attitude towards the lavish life is kind of more important than who she projected herself to be. It was like, she saw money or wealth differently that it made her sick. I mean, her husband was content Instead of taking a look at the real world and how awesome her husband is, she felt sorry for herself and thought that she deserved more. I don’t even think she deserved such a nice guy as a husband.
Trent: Yeah, she should have just been happy about where she was, since it was because she got too carried away with things that everything went bad.
Trevor: Yes, she did get carried away. But, if she looked at her situation in a constructive way, and instead of being a brat or an illusionist about it, she could have done something to make things better.
Trent: No, I think the whole point of the story was to show why people shouldn’t try to climb the social ladder. Things work the way they do, and that’s why you don’t mess with your destiny.
Trevor: Who is to say that her destiny was to be poor? If they never had the necklace to lose, they could have worked their way up. Eventually, Madame Loisel agreed to do manual labor which allowed them to save up. Imagine if they never had to pay for that necklace! That’s why the point of the story is the necklace itself.
Trent: The necklace is just an object of lust and greed to show who Madame Loisel really is.
Trevor: No, the necklace is so much more than that. It’s a symbol for the emptiness that wealth will give you. You see, they worked so hard to pay the necklace off. Madam Loisel would reminisce about that one night she felt rich. But, in reality the necklace that she wore was fake the whole time So, what gave her that feeling of high society? It was all in her head.
Trent: So, the necklace represents emptiness?
Trevor: It could, but it also represents desire, greed and falseness.
Trent: See, those are the things that Madame Loisel projected. Therefore, it’s almost as if the necklace represented her, making her the focus of the story.
Trevor: Madame Loisel represents the many people who think that money is the answer for everything. She is like the necklace personified. The necklace shows us that she was happy for a brief moment, but she suffered much longer after that because of that necklace.
Trent: So, the necklace was sort of bad luck?
Trevor: Maybe. Greed does always bring bad luck.
Trent: So, the necklace is an object which represents money, glamour and the high life. But, it’s fake.
Trevor: It kind of goes to show that a life like that isn’t always all that it’s cracked up to be. The necklace also teaches Madame Loisel to work hard and appreciate what she had before (De Maupassant).
Trent: The necklace being fake isn’t revealed until the end, this doesn’t have to have meaning or a moral. It’s too obvious to say that money and wealth is fake. It’s kind of a bit too cliché to say something like that.
Trevor: That’s not the only message that it teaches. Hard work and appreciation is a resounding theme. This was also somewhat of a “coming of age” story where the character shows resilience or even self efficacy after the event.
Trent: So, the necklace could mean a lot of different things? That kind of makes sense. It’s sort of like saying that greed will keep you wanting more until you fall and reach the bottom.
Trevor: And, of course, like any story, the moral comes at the end. It’s a great twist, really. The readers are as frustrated as the characters during the revelation.
Trent: Taking a look at the deeper meaning of the necklace makes sense. I guess that means it’s the more important aspect of the story.
Trevor: I don’t think there’s such a thing as “more important” when it comes to stories like these. However, there is a focus.
Trent: I guess it’s true that they could have worked hard for a nice living.
Trevor: Yes, if she didn’t spend all that time day-dreaming and feeling sorry for herself, maybe she and her husband would be a bit wealthier than they were.
De Maupassant, Guy (1884). “The Necklace”. The East Of The Web. Retrieved http://www.eastoftheweb.com/short-stories/UBooks/Neck.shtml