Comparing the Story of an Hour and the Necklace - Essay Example

Comparing the Story of an Hour and the Necklace Short stories are always very enjoyable to read. They are very concise but mostly have such a deep message resonating throughout the text that the reader is left pondering over an extension of the story to imagine the possible ending if they were novels instead. The works under consideration are meant to be compared because of their unique theme which reflects how two authors can write similar yet distinctive stories in different times. Kate Chopin’s “The Story of an Hour” and “The Necklace” by Guy De Maupassant are two such short stories whose themes centre around role of gender and marriage with special focus on the female characters. “The Story of an Hour” revolves around the female character Louise Mallard who has been gently told that her husband died in a railroad disaster, news which Richard, her husband’s friend learnt from somewhere. Since Mrs. Mallard is a heart patient she feels very depressed and seeks to sit in solitude as she learns about her husband Brently’s death. As the story unfolds one learns that Louise Mallard is in fact more “free” and utters the word repeatedly as she realizes that she will be independent from this time onwards. She fantasizes her freedom staring blankly out the window knowing that she would lose control when she sees her husband’s corpse. Her husband had been very loving and caring but probably his love for her suffocated her. As she comes out of her room and her husband enters the house the story turns dramatically ironic (Chopin 1970). Mrs. Mallard dies out of heart attack on the spot and the doctors think this happened out of happiness. “When the doctors came they said she had died of heart disease--of the joy that kills.” (Chopin 1970) The last scene is the most dramatic because Mrs. Mallard is expecting in the least that her husband will come to life. Whether it was Richard who should be held responsible or Mrs. Mallard’s fantasy, the fact remains that it was probably most likely the shock rather than the joy which killed Mrs. Mallard. Now consider the role of Mathilde Loisel in “The Necklace”. She constantly grieves about her simple life and fantasizes about extravagant life style with rich people and food surrounding her. Her husband is a simple man and is satisfied with his life. He appreciates her for the food which is cooked and never complains. Being in the Ministry of Education their lifestyle is modest. Mathilde is not satisfied on the other hand even when her husband proudly announces that they have been invited at a formal party held by the Ministry of Education. The irony in the story is more or less the same with regard to the female characters. Mathilde cries and gets her prize in the form of a dress but she is never satisfied. She wants jewelry as well. The necklace that she borrows from Madame Forestier teaches her a lesson of life. Since she is not familiar with the real jewelry she picks the cheapest one from her collection and wears it to the party why she loses it. Upon not finding the jewelry her husband takes the pain of selling everything out just to purchase an identical necklace worth 40,000 francs which leaves them poverty stricken for the next ten years during which her husband does three jobs and she takes over the heavy household chores because they have to let go of the servants. Tragically towards the end of the story she learns that the necklace which caused them such a downfall was never worth that kind of money (Maupassant 1992). That moment is rich in irony of fate which is irreplaceable as she has lost all her youthful looks and may never gain them back. The two stories discussed above bear a certain resemblance which cannot be spotted at a glance. But when it is read critically, the comparison starts to make more sense. Both Mathilde Loisel and Mrs. Mallard are apparently cheated by life. Mathilde was deprived of all the wonderful things life has to offer while Mrs. Mallard was very sensitive and enjoys the feeling of liberation despite the grief of her husband’s death. The freedom overcomes her grief but eventually takes her away with it. Both fantasize what they do not have and end up not getting it whole heartedly. Mathilde does get to wear a necklace and a new dress but this joy is limited to a single night. Her choice in jewelry is inexpensive because she does not know the difference between the real and artificial jewelry (Maupassant 1992). Mrs. Mallard only envisions her happiness in being out of the marriage bond which is confined to the one hour in which she also learns that her husband is alive. The only difference between the two female characters is that one experiences death while the other a lesson from life. Harold Bloom a famous critic writes about “The Necklace” in his work dedicated to Guy De Maupassant as one of the best short stories by the author in which the technique of inversion is employed. The conclusion of the story surprises the reader as it attacks the human vices and values. The female characters are being questioned for their complex thought process (Bloom 2004). Another lesson to be learnt by Mathilde is that what she thinks to be glamorous is very much inexpensive. She used to feel bad about visiting Madame Forestier because of her very own sense of inferiority. Towards the end of the story one learns that madame Forestier love simplistic things and that is why she possessed a necklace worth five hundred francs instead of thirty six thousand francs for which she bought the real diamond necklace for Madame Forestier (Leeming 1926) The wives’ individualities and is a theme which is seen in Chopin’s “The Story of an Hour”. Mrs. Mallard feels that she is freed and has achieved certain autonomy when the news of the death of her husband reaches her. .Chopin’s employs the technique of foreshadowing with remarkable care and precision. At the start of the story the readers know that something really bad is going to Mrs. Mallard (Anonym 2010). It is extremely difficult for Mrs. Mallard to control herself being a heart patient. The drastic end which comes in her life is because of the fact that she had fantasized too much about the fact that she would be as free as a bird flying and enjoying her independence which she would otherwise not have being a married person. This is merely an illusion for Mrs. Mallard as it is for Mathilde who knows that peace lies in simplicity but she still wants to see extravagance and richness around her. “She suffered endlessly, feeling herself born for every delicacy and luxury. She suffered from the poorness of her house, from its mean walls, worn chairs, and ugly curtains. All these things, of which other women of her class would not even have been aware, tormented and insulted her. The sight of the little Breton girl who came to do the work in her little house aroused heart-broken regrets and hopeless dreams in her mind.” (Maupassant 1992) One can see as mentioned in the text that Mathilde spent moments feeling lonely and self-piteous. She does not wish to remain idle but wants to move in a particular kind of class which according to her must possess everything material so that she may shower herself in material wealth. The more she thinks about herself as low the more jealous and wretched she feels towards her own lifestyle and eventually towards herself. The more she thinks about the people who possess material wealth the inferior she starts to feel. Her husband is however caring and satisfied with their life (Bloom 2004). One can consider this a result of communication gap which cause Mathilda to take impulsive actions. Her frustration generates a level of anxiety among the readers and they flinch when they learn what happens in the end. This is the tragedy of life which made Methilda poorer and most unwilling to face the world again. Mathilde is confused in the appearance versus reality of existence. Selfishness and greed have overcome her and she feels jealous towards those people who appear to be rich and happy. As a result she fails to enjoy what she already has. She learns from her own mistakes and eventually faces the irony of her life. She distances herself from her friends because she feels bad that she does not have enough to spend like her friends do. Surprisingly both the husbands in the stories are very cooperative and supportive. During the time when these stories were written, women had two positions in life. They could either get married or work like maids. This means that the society was also very conservative in this regards. The short stories “The Story of an Hour” and “The Necklace” both relate to the theme of the role of gender as well as the life after marriage. References Bloom, H. (2004). Guy de Maupassant. Philadelphia: Chelsea House Publishers Chopin, K., & In Seyersted, P. (1970). The complete works of Kate Chopin. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press Leeming, B. C. (1926). Imagination, mind's dominant power. New York: Schroeder. Maupassant, G. ., Kelley, G., & Artinian, A. (1992). The necklace. Mankato: Creative Education. Anonym. (2010). "The Story of an Hour" - Kate Chopin's voice against patriarchy. München: GRIN Verlag. Read More