The Chrysanthemums by Steinbeck and the Necklace by Maupassant - Book Report/Review Example

12 May 2007 'The Chrysanthemums' by J. Steinbeck and 'The Necklace' by G. Maupassant In 'The Chrysanthemums' by John Steinbeck and 'The Necklace' by Guy de Maupassant the authors create similar portraits of protagonists which make these works much alike. The short stories were written in different period of time but depict similar problems and life grievances experienced by women. Thesis Elisa Allen and Madame Loisel are excellent wives but they are limited by social position, low role of women in society and marriage. Madame Loisel in "the Necklace" and Elisa Allen from "The Chrysanthemums" have different views on dressing and women culture. Elisa's entrapment is deeply rooted in character, and her psychology is complicated by the fact that she both dresses and addresses her work in her garden in a mannish fashion. Furthermore, in her encounter with the tinker, it is the freedom of his man's life on the road that appeals to her as much as, if not more than, his maleness (Miller 69). Steinbeck depicts her: "Her figure looked blocked and heavy in her gardening costume, a man's black hat pulled low down over her eyes, clod-hopper shoes, a figured print dress almost completely covered by a big corduroy apron , the seeds and the knife she worked with". In contrast, Madame Loisel is depicted as a feminine character who values good dressing and jewelries. "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" (Maupassant). Both of them are beautiful and passionate women who try to preserve their self-identity and uniqueness (Allen 57). Both women are faced with life troubles but unable to solve them. Elisa is manipulated by the tinker into playing the female role, finding him some work to do and thus catering to his maleness, before he will complete the pretended transaction by accepting her unwanted flowers--which he, of course, abandons heartlessly. It is on the strength of this bit of dramatic self-delusion that Elisa indulges in her narcissistic cleansing, admiring, and adorning of her body. Following Leigh (2007) "Elisa shows this through her appearance and station in life. She's a farmer's wife making her part of the typical middle-class family of the time. She's shown as hardworking, but not outside of her own gender role" In contrast to Elisa, Madame Loisel lost the necklace but says nothing to her friend. Even with this avowed risk of failure, such desire is a shaky foundation on which to construct a life. "She took off the garments in which she had wrapped her shoulders, so as to see herself in all her glory before the mirror. But suddenly she uttered a cry. The necklace was no longer round her neck!" They searched in the folds of her dress, in the folds of the coat, in the pockets, everywhere. They could not find it" (Maupassant). Both women are limited by their class location which influence their life and have a great impact on their destinies. Desire to change their personalities and self-identity causes problems for both housewives. Elisa is enough of a person by this time--a woman with a man's sense of freedom, that she can even consider going with Henry to the fights, and one can only guess what rewards poor Henry might have reaped later had she indeed gone. Only moments after the not-unexpected finding of the discarded chrysanthemums along the road, Elisa subsides into a state of "crying weakly-- like an old woman" Following Miller (1972), "It is a honor to the perceptiveness of Steinbeck's presentation of the equivocal nature of human sexuality to note that after half a century or more, critics have not by any means run out of things to say about this little story" (p. 69). Similar to Elisa, Madame Loisel is a passive victim suffered from poverty and lack of support (Allen 58). In whatever manner these stories show, the fact that men do not understand them whether or not they seek to is not enough of a commonality to generalize further. Elisa is a masculine heroine while Madame Loisel is a feminine. Elisa is also depicted as sensually attractive, part of a narrative strategy to make her independence and competence appear more threatening because her autonomy implies a certain freedom and responsiveness. Subsequent descriptions of Elisa, who directs household affairs for herself, highlight the way representations of the competent, self-sufficient woman combine masculinity with sensuality to suggest the dangers of female independence (Fenstermaker 35). "Even her work with the scissors was over-eager, over-powerful. The chrysanthemum stems seemed too small and easy for her energy" (Steinbeck). In contrast, Madame Loisel is a feminine character but she is forced to work hard earning money. She came to know the heavy work of the house, the hateful duties of the kitchen. She washed the plates, wearing out her pink nails on the coarse pottery and the bottoms of pans. She washed the dirty linen, the shirts and dish-cloths, and hung them out to dry on a string (Maupassant). It is possible to say that Elisa is a happier character limited by class location and low status of women in the society. In contrast, Madame Loisel has to work hard for ten years paying off the debt. "Madame Loisel came to know the ghastly life of abject poverty. From the very first she played her part heroically. This fearful debt must be paid off. The servant was dismissed. They changed their flat; they took a garret under the roof" (Maupassant). From the very beginning readers are faced with the psychological importance of class location for both protagonists. Put all of these together the author creates a complicated emotional mix. In both works protagonists are the only characters to sustain a conflict with the harsh materialistic world supported by its dogmas (Miller 72) The main difference is that Elisa is limited by class location while Madame Loisel depends upon life circumstances and fate. To put things another way, Elisa often does not play by the rules, she manages to achieve autonomy. For Elisa, the garden and Chrysanthemums become a symbol of independence and freedom (Miller 69). For Madame Loisel, work reflects a new social change in women labor. Men's work and women's work are often kept separate in Steinbeck. Maupassant does not separate women and men work portraying that Madame Loisel has to work hard all her life paying off the debts. The main similarity is that both women take care about their husbands but do not have children. The character description with that same peculiar mixture of particularity and universality with which Steinbeck began the sketch. "The chrysanthemums are Elisa's children, she nurtures and cares for them on a daily basis. They're protect from outside forces by the little white fence that surrounds them and she "destroys" any pests" (Leigh 2007). Though all of critics are analyzing the same character, the differences in the conclusions drawn about her are obvious. These conflicts may be attributed to the levels of discourse in the story that compete for definition, for privileged acceptance by the reader (Miller 69). The fiction does not offer an authoritative or absolute statement on the woman's character. 'Unity of effect for Maupassant in "The Necklace" is utterly dependent on information unavailable to the reader--i.e., that the necklace is paste--and thus the reader's "discovery" depends entirely on an absence, a trick of concealment, as in a bad murder mystery" (Allen 57). What Maupassant reveals in that emotional outburst is that neither the context of the play nor the context of the woman's life allows her full humanity; for this reason, her portrait is incomplete. Elisa and her appearance does not change greatly in contrast to Madame Loisel whoc becomes older and less attractive. Maupassant describes: "Madame Loisel looked old now. She had become like all the other strong, hard, coarse women of poor households" (Steinbeck). On the other hand, Elisa and Madame Loisel not only represent important alternative social roles and influences, but as the proto-heroines of sentimental fiction, they also suggest different plots and conclusions. Elisa's story suggests that she will give up her rebellion, return to her marriage (Fenstermaker 35). For both housewives, work is the only possible way to solve their problems. For Elisa, work helps her to overcome depression and low social image. For Madame Loisel, work is the only possible way to pay off the debts. Elisa as mysteriously possessed of the ability to order the garden of herself through the powers of the imagination. As the women recall together their domestic and aesthetic memories, they use almost the same language. Marriage shows that most women rely upon successful match in order to achieve high social position. Maupassant describes: "She [Madame Loisel] was one of those pretty and charming girls born, as though fate had blundered over her, into a family of artisans. She had no marriage portion, no expectations, no means of getting known, understood, loved, and wedded by a man of wealth and distinction; and she let herself be married off to a little clerk in the Ministry of Education". The short story suggests that women rely on marriage limited by social laws and traditions. The common ground between the sexes, therefore, is getting smaller, and the institution of marriage is beginning to fall to pieces. Madame Loisel seems curiously fresh and naive and it is essential to Madame Loisel and the new woman she represents - of social identity her experience has left her unchanged. Madame Loisel represents a new, mutant, development of female human nature. Madame Loisel must herself submit to her own class degradation as a sign of her femininity. Steinbeck depicts a collapse of the distinction between the bourgeois and patriarchal discourses as a means of containing the threat of the emerging new woman. The story itself represents the threatened collapse of these seemingly stable cultural encodings of identity. Critics (Allen 57) admit that Maupassant does not portray an anxiety about female competence in the domestic woman, who must be humbled in a violent way, and then inscribed within the domestic order through a process of menial labor. Both short stories are poised between traditional and emerging privilege; they set the stage for the works that construct the middle-class woman as 'manager'. The gap that had been opened in the construction of women -between patriarchal and bourgeois discursive formations, produced other historical and potential representations. Certainly, both short stories have been tied to a changing role of women. That dissatisfaction has been linked, especially, with the repression of female labor. Both characters are excellent wives. Marriage and family life have a crucial impact on life and destinies of Elisa and Madame Loisel. Works Cited 1. Allen, G. Maupassant and the American Short Story. Studies in Short Fiction. Spring 1996: 56-58. 2. Fenstermaker, J.J. Literature in the Composition Class. College Composition and Communication, 28, (Feb., 1977): 34-37 3. Leigh, C. Women in the Face of War: John Steinbeck's "The Chrysanthemums". 2007. 12 May 2007 4. Miller, W. V. Sexual and Spiritual Ambiguity in 'The Chrysanthemums'. Steinbeck Quality 5 (4), 1972: 68-75. 5. Maupassant, G. The Necklace. 12 May 2007 6. Steinbeck, J. Chrysanthemums. 12 May 2007 Read More