The Necklace, the Piece of String and the Devil

The Necklace, The Piece of String and The Devil

In these three stories, the characters are part of the working class. The way the author portrays these individuals is always in an unflattering light, calling them peasants, petty, clodhoppers, avaricious and implying they smell and are dirty. An article about the author describes his attitude.

“Although Maupassant came from a well-to-do Norman background, his disillusioning experiences as a private in the Franco-Prussian War served to harden his soul against the lower class. In addition, his years of sharp scrutiny of their Norman ways and mores—their everyday habits—strengthened his cynical attitude toward them. It is generally agreed that he was misanthropic, but never more so than when he set his sights on those Norman men and women.” (“The Piece of String Themes” E-Notes)

De Maupassant’s characterizations of the people who inhabit his stories are based on a stereotype of the underclass; his intention seems to be to convince us to dislike them as much as he does. An article in Simply Psychology on stereotypes states, “[Stereotyping] makes us ignore differences between individuals; therefore we think things about people that might not be true (i.e. make generalizations).” (“Stereotypes” Simply Psychology) Judging people by their station in life is tantamount to having a caste system. This kind of attitude is diametrically opposed to the way we as Americans think; and as a Christian, it is certainly not in keeping with my beliefs. Although De Maupassant’s intention is for the reader to dislike the characters in his stories, his disdain for his subjects sets them up as underdogs, compelling me to sympathize with them. An article from Psych Central explains, “Researchers propose that those who are viewed as disadvantaged arouse people’s sense of fairness and justice — important principles to most people… The researchers were seeking to understand why people are drawn to the Rocky Balboas and the Davids (versus Goliaths) of the world.” (“Why Do We Root for the Underdog?” Psych Central News)

In all three stories the common theme is trouble or suffering. Although the situations are different in each story, they all evoked in me feelings of sympathy, empathy and compassion. One explanation of the difference between these emotions expresses it this way, “Sympathy focuses on awareness; Empathy focuses on experience; and Compassion focuses on action.” (“Empathy, Sympathy, Compassion: What’s the Diff?”) Psychology Today describes it, “With empathy, I share your emotions; with compassion I not only share your emotions but also elevate them into a universal and transcending experience. Compassion, which builds upon empathy, is one of the main motivators of altruism.” (“Empathy Vs Sympathy” Psychology Today)

The characters’ underdog status demands that I make some connection with them if I am to be on their side. In each story, the connection with the character is different, causing my response to be altered; my level of concern is dictated by the qualities of the individual and their diverse situations.

The first of the three stories, The Necklace, is the story of a beautiful young woman, Matilda Loisel, who is married to a clerk. She feels that she is living “out of her class” and “suffer[ing] incessantly” (De Maupassant 28) because they only have moderate means. Her husband on the other hand is quite content. Recognizing Matilda’s desire for more, he obtains a coveted invitation to a party but it does not make her happy because she doesn’t have a dress to wear. He gives her money for a dress but then she is unhappy because she doesn’t have any jewels. He suggests she borrow some from her wealthy friend, Madame Forestier, which she does, but then she loses the necklace on the night of the party. They feel they must purchase another necklace to replace the one Matilda lost, but they need to borrow a fortune to do so, leaving them in poverty, buried under a mountain of debt. To pay what they owe, they must leave their home and move to small attic rooms, they let the maid go and must work very hard for ten years to pay off the debt. At the end of that time, Matilda sees her friend, Mrs. Forestier when she is out walking one day, but her friend doesn’t even recognize her because she has lost her beauty and aged so much from all the hard work she has done over the years. Matilda explains the truth about losing the necklace all those years ago, and how her circumstances had been so reduced. In response Madame Forestier says, “Oh, my poor Matilda! Mine were false. They were not worth over five hundred francs!” (De Maupassant 33)

Matilda’s preoccupation with what she doesn’t have blinds her to all that she does possess. “This endless coveting ultimately leads to Matilda’s downfall and, along the way, yields only fleeting happiness. It is so persistent, however, that it takes on a life of its own—Matilda’s coveting is as much a part of her life as breathing.” (“The Necklace” Sparks Notes)

Matilda’s inability to see all that she has makes me feel sympathy for her in almost the same way I would feel sympathy for someone who was born blind. While I may not be able to truly empathize with Matilda because I don’t have a shared experience with her, I can understand the difficulty in which she and her husband find themselves. There are many people in our current economic climate in similar situations through misfortune or some other circumstance.

My viewpoint is influenced by my faith in God and belief in the Bible as God’s word. The Bible directs in the book of Colossians, “So, as those who have been chosen of God, holy and beloved, put on a heart of compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness and patience;” (New American Standard Bible, Colossians 3:12)

The Piece of String is the story of Maitre Hauchecome, an older peasant who comes to the town of Goderville on market day. He is seen picking up a piece of string in the street and later when it is announced that the mayor’s pocketbook is lost, he is accused by his enemy of picking it up and keeping it. The next day the pocketbook is returned by a farmhand who found it in the road, but still, Maitre Hauchecome is not acquitted. He continues to proclaim his innocence to anyone who will listen, but the more he denies having anything to do with taking the pocketbook, the more people believe that he did. This goes on for some time until he is so distraught that he takes ill and dies from the distress he endures. His last words as he lies dying are, “A piece of string, a piece of string-look-here it is, M’sieu the Mayor.” (De Maupassant 38)

My reaction to Maitre Hauchecome goes beyond mere sympathy; I feel empathy with him because I have a similar experience. It is