Page 34 - DENG105_ELECTIVE_ENGLISH_II

Unit 2: The Necklace by Guy de Maupassant

5. Who said, “At most they were worth five hundred francs!”? Notes

(a) The First Jeweler (b) The Second Jeweler
(c) Mme. Forestier (d) Mme. Loisel
(e) M. Loisel

2.6 Important Explanations from the Text

(i) Frightened by the pains yet to come, by the black misery which was about to fall upon him, by the
prospect of all the physical privation and of all the moral tortures which he was to suffer, he went to
get the new necklace, putting down upon the merchant’s counter thirty-six thousand francs.
Explanation: These lines appear close to the end of the story, marks the beginning of the
Loisels plunge into poverty. Doomed to work for years to pay off his many loans, Monsieur
Loisel nonetheless buys the replacement necklace so that Mathilde does not have to admit to
her wealthy friend that she lost the original. Without complaining and with only this sick
feeling in his gut, Monsieur Loisel faces the bleak future and moves forward. Unlike Mathilde,
who cannot see the consequences of her actions and is oblivious to the sacrifices that her
husband has made on her behalf, Monsieur Loisel can see clearly what is in store. This passage
reveals the extent of his love for Mathilde—he knows he is giving up everything for her, and
it has all been for a goal he never understood. Where Mathilde is selfish, Monsieur Loisel is
selfless, and this purchase is his ultimate sacrifice.

(ii) What would have happened if she had never lost those jewels? Who knows? Who knows? How
strange life is, how fickle! How little is needed to ruin or to save!
Explanation : The above lines occurred near the end of the story, when Mathilde day-dreams
during her housecleaning. When Mathilde imagines the night of the party, she idealizes it,
even though this event led to her downfall. She seems to regret nothing about the night except
losing the necklace, and she fails to realize that it was her desire to appear to be someone other
than herself that ultimately ruined her. Despite her hardships, Mathilde has failed to learn
from her mistakes. Instead of asking herself what would have happened if she hadn’t lost the
jewels, she should be asking herself what would have happened if she hadn’t borrowed them
in the first place. Mathilde believes that life is fickle, but it is she herself who has acted
capriciously and brought about her own dire fate. Shortly after her reverie, she meets Madame
Forestier again and learns that the necklace had been worthless. Had she simply told Madame
Forestier she lost the necklace, she would have learned right away that it was costume jewellery
and would not have sacrificed everything to buy a replacement. Truly, little would have been
needed to save Mathilde.
(iii) She danced madly, ecstatically, drunk with pleasure, with no thought for anything, in the triumph
of her beauty, in the pride of her success, in a cloud of happiness made up of this universal homage
and admiration, of the desires she had aroused, of the completeness of a victory so dear to her feminine
heart.
Explanation : These lines appear near the middle of the story, during the party, when Mathilde
is happier than she had ever been or ever would be again. Mathilde has schemed and strived
to get to this moment: she wheedled money from Monsieur Loisel so that she could buy a new
dress and borrowed jewels from Madame Forestier so that she would not look poor among the
other women. And her angling has been successful—she is greatly admired at the party, and
all the men want to dance with her. This is the moment for which she has been born. In this
passage, her happiness is absolute. There is no thought of the past, nor any thought of the
party’s end, when she will return to her ordinary life. In the days that follow, she and Monsieur

LOVELY PROFESSIONAL UNIVERSITY 29