The Meaning of Love in The Necklace and The Lady with the Dog - Essay Example

?The Meaning of Love in “The Necklace” and “The Lady with the Dog” Introduction Love is an eternal bond and conquers all. It is the strength that separates us from robots. “The Necklace” by Guy de Maupassant is an excellent example of true love. In “The Necklace,” the love between a husband and wife is portrayed and how the husband, Monsieur puts up with the wishes of his love, Mathilde Loisel. “The Lady with the Dog” only endorses the power of love; however, the plot hints more towards self-love, where Dmitri tramples over the norms of society and pursues his love interest Anna and for the first time finds happiness and solace for himself. This paper analyzes what love means in both accounts. Both stories portray that love is an eternal fulfillment and happiness; however, these rewards only await those who are willing to sacrifice everything. Dmitri sacrificed his norms and Monsieur sacrificed his own priorities. The middle class families and society of the nineteenth century were rather conservative. People used to stick to rules and liberal thinking was not as much prevalent as it is today. The plot of “The Necklace” takes place in France somewhere in the 19th century. The important thing to note about this time is people’s values on modesty. Women were kept at homes and according to present day standards, that practice can be deemed as something that deprived women of their rights. Monsieur proved his love for his wife with his actions. The events in “The lady with the Dog” also take place in the 19th century setting among middle class people in Russia. Dmitri was notorious for having affairs with every woman who was willing to have one despite his marriage. “The Necklace” Monsieur Loisel (“The Necklace”) Monsieur is a humble man earning average salary as a clerk. He is not rich; however, he does possess the greatest wealth of all, staying content and happy with what one has. He is highly appreciative of his wife; he loves her and always supports her. His nature is like a blotting paper: he accepts all the harshness of life and his wife with love and contentment. When both husband and wife sit for dinner at the round table, Monsieur’s wife notices that the table cloth has been used three times without washing while Monsieur uncovers the tureen in a happy mood: “Oh! The good potpie! I know nothing better than that”(10). Monsieur is a man who is accustomed to adjustments if something is not available; on the other hand, his wife gets irritated when she does not get something. When Monsieur brings home the invitation to the party, his wife gets sad as she does not have matching (expensive) jewelry to wear with the dress. He is a little surprised as to the awkwardness in wearing flowers instead of jewelry that match the color of the dress. After all, is not it common sense? But to his wife, it is not. Monsieur accepts things as they are, not what he wishes them to be. If they did not have money to get expensive jewelry, he considered it a fact of life and not something to whine or cry about. In the end, Monsieur is the one that comes up with the plan of buying a similar necklace when Mathilde loses the original one, and arranges the money through loan and mortgages. The money he gives Mathilde for her fancy dress was meant to pay for a gun that he so wanted, but against his wife’s happiness his own wishes meant nothing to him. He quietly gives up his life while paying for the necklace without a word of complaint. Mathilde is very lucky to have such a wonderful husband but she never realizes it. She is so consumed in her self-made misery that she never knows that Monsieur loves her unconditionally. Mathilde Loisel (“The Necklace”) “She was one of those pretty and charming girls, born by a blunder of destiny in a family of employees” (7). Mathilde is a charming beautiful woman, born in the family of clerks, and this is where the problem starts. She blames her fate that she is born in a middle class family, which is why she is always at war with herself and with the people around her. She spends her time dreaming about all the luxuries of life she does not have but pays no attention to the ones she has – a comfortable home and a loving husband. But she does not find pleasure in what she has, and her cravings get stronger causing her and Monsieur pain and bringing turmoil to their otherwise calm life. She appears irritated throughout the book except for one occasion when she goes to the party wearing the borrowed “necklace.” Ther, she appears to belong to the high society she always wanted to live with all her life. The irony in her happiness is that the happiness was fake, very short life, and it disappeared with a snap of the finger. But there is no arguing as to what that moment meant to Mathilde. She kept living in that moment all her life. The necklace she wore at that party was borrowed from her friend, and the jewels of the necklace were fake, but Mathilde did not know. Perhaps that is the real irony of the story. She felt ecstatic over something fake, all strengthening the argument that happiness is just an illusion, or a state of mind and nothing else. Mathilde’s happiness was tied to the material world. Whether fake or real, it never mattered to her. All she knew was that she was giving the impression that she belonged to the elite class of the society. “The Lady with the Dog” Dmitri Gurov (“The Lady with the Dog”) “The Lady with the Dog” revolves around a 40 year old married man from Russia, Dmitri Gurov, who has a low opinion of women. He works at a bank, reads newspapers and frequently visits various pubs and clubs. He has turned extremely repulsive towards his wife and constantly is having affairs with other elderly women. He just wants to live his life to the fullest; self-indulgence is his craving. “…at every fresh meeting with an interesting woman this experience seems to slip out of his memory, and he was eager for life, and everything seemed simple and amusing” (3). He finds happiness by staying away from home and his wife, trying to immerse himself in the crowded Moscow streets. He has not only turned bitter toward his wife but also toward the whole female sex. He considers them of “lower race” but later contradicts himself because deep down inside he feels more comfortable in the company of women than in the company of his own sex. Anna Sergeyevna Anna Sergeyevna is the love interest of Gurov, who is rather young and naive as compared to Gurov. She is married to Von Diderits but clearly she is not satisfied with him; she immediately connects with Dmitri and they both start a romantic relationship. She constantly lives in the fear that her husband will take her away and if she has physical relation with Gurov, she will lose her respect in Gurov’s eyes. After she sleeps with Gurov, she says: “You will be the first to despise me now” (8). She mostly spends her time in an oblivious state of mind. She is unhappy with her husband but does not know herself what to do. She finds some comfort in Gurov but still has many doubts and fears. Conclusion I agree with the way love has been portrayed in “The Necklace” through Monsieur. Love needs to be unconditional; it can be one sided. There is no mathematical equation that says love is supposed to be equal and opposite to work. If I analyze the story with a biased mind, I would say that Mathilde did not deserve such a loving husband, but if the husband is happy in serving or even suffering for his wife, then who are we (the readers) to question love? On the other hand, “The Lady with the Dog” is not exactly a love story. Dmitri is unhappy with his bossy wife. Anna does not feel happy with her husband. It seems as if both of them are looking for a better company, not love. Dmitri turns bitter towards women because he does not have “husband wife talk” with his wife but does not mean that his longing for the company of a woman that understands him has died. For these reasons, he is constantly on the lookout for fresh romance, and finds a strong one in the form of Anna. Dmitri is sort of a charmer and Anna fell for his charms. Dmitri needs this sort of company, and later their so called “love” is tested as the story never shows them living happily ever after. The story ends where both these characters are lost in their head thinking about their insecurities they feel toward each other. I absolutely agree with the definition of love from Monsieur in “The Necklace” but completely disagree with calling Dmitri and Anna “hooking up” in “The Lady with the Dog.” Works Cited Chekhov, Anton Pavlovich, and Patrick Waddington. “The Lady with the Dog.” N.p.: Bradda Bks., 1964. Print. Maupassant, Guy de, and Isak Dinesen. “The Necklace.” London: Pushkin, 1999. Print. Read More