SHORT STORY REVIEW: The Necklace and The Hand-Puppet | Reader Response
“THE NECKLACE” AND “THE HAND-PUPPET” COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS
“How strangeness enters our lives” A woman with no expectations from life, feeling isolated from her family, her home, even from her own body goes through a psychological crisis after the morning her daughter shows up with a scary hand-puppet in the story of ‘the Hand-Puppet’. On the other side, there is another pretty and charming woman in the story of ‘the Necklace’ unsatisfied with her life, considers she deserves a better, luxurious life. She suffers the consequences of her obsession with looking wealthy and attractive when she loses the necklace which she borrows from her neighbor. Two different short stories which I expected to be children’s story because of their names have shocked me with their endings and psychological analysis. The use of complex words and going deep in characters’ minds shows that Guy de Maupassant and Joyce Carol Oates expect the implied readers are mature audiences of average intelligence. Children would not be able to grasp the deeper meaning behind the stories. Some parts of ‘the Necklace’ remind readers of other works. For instance, poor Mathilde attends to the party with a completely different look from her ordinary life, which reminds us Cinderella. Maupassant presents readers a moral lesson to be learned out of ‘the Necklace’. He aims to explain the deceptiveness of appearance. Mathilde deceives the people in the party by her appearance and she does not tell Mme. Forster that she replaced the necklace. The fact that the necklace she borrowed turns out to be fake proves that appearances are deceptive, and the true value depends on how we perceive issues. On the other hand, there is no such a moral lesson in the Hand-Puppet. Readers witness the inner psychological break-down of Lorraine and sympathize with her. Both stories easily fit readers’ pictures of the way life is: They are realistic, that’s why they leave a huge impression on readers. Those are very usual scenes that we see in our daily life. For example, with the integration of social life into our lives, life has turned into a show in which people display themselves as someone else. The narrators of both stories are third-person omniscient narrators who stand outside of the story and know the entire history of characters and can communicate the thoughts of other characters. The openings of the two stories are very judgmental in terms of the introduction of female characters and how they are positioned. ‘The Necklace’ starts with a very general, descriptive introduction of a “she” instead of giving the full name, so readers raise the question “Who is she?”. She is an ordinary woman who belongs to a family of employees with “no dowry, no expectations…”. Maupassant criticizes the social casting system here. Later, she is addressed to Mme. Loisel. She has a role in society as a wife of somebody. Then, she is referred by her name only in dialogues. The female character is distant to the readers; the narrator, at some parts, tells the story from the perspective of Mathilde but there is no voice of her, there are no instances of a stream of consciousness.
The setting is given in detail in the story to help readers understand the inner psychology of the characters. Mathilde suffers from the poverty of their dwelling and she dreams of a luxurious house. It can be concluded from her dream that she feels disconnected from her life. She is no other woman of her caste; she accepts herself different from the others. After telling her dream in detail, the narrator suddenly goes back to the reality. “She had no dresses, no jewelry, nothing.” The opposition of the reality and the dream makes the meaning stronger here; she dreams big, but she has nothing. Also, this kind of listing shows if you do not have dresses or jewelry, you are nothing; which is very judgmental. The Hand-Puppet, also, starts with a general introduction of “she”, which means that could be any women in such a position. In the opening, the character is introduced as “the mother”. There is no name and surname, just the mother. The social role is defined to her. Later, when she deals with her psychological problems, we have a reference to Lorraine Lake. She becomes herself and stands out for herself only when she is alone in her thoughts. The story starts indirectly but on the contrary to ‘The Necklace’, the voice of the character is heard by free-indirect or direct thoughts so that readers are closer to the character. The setting, the place they live in, is also given in detail in this story so readers get integrated with the suffocating area Lorraine lives in. After Tippi finishes her puppet show, she promises not to take her puppet to the school and goes to her room, her voice still echoes in Lorraine’s mind. Suddenly she says, “I’m the mother…I am not missus”. The sentence means a lot: she is afraid to be any woman to her daughter. She questions her role in life: she is not the woman she wants to be. “…a life without a husband, child; a ‘true’ life without the trappings of identity…” She believes her husband and her child restrain her from living her own identity. Later that morning, she goes through another breakdown when the gynecologist told her there is a nonmalignant tumor in her uterus. She does not like sharing private matters with “others”. She calls her family as “others”: she is completely alienated from her family. So, she does not share his disease to “the baby’s father”. This time, Lorraine gives a role to her husband just as the society gives her one. The crucial point in the story is when Lorraine said she is trapped in her body, she explains her feelings like “It’s just that my body isn’t my own,”. When the doctor explains they are going to apply a common medical procedure, Lorraine answers “Common as death?”. This is not the way a healthy person answers. She is too depressive to think about death, maybe a suicide. After her appointment, she goes to Tippi’s school and gets terrified when she sees her scaring other kids at the school garden. She does not stop her not to make her feel ashamed. She says, “That child is mad.”. She feels completely apart from her daughter: using the pronoun “that” proves the distance between them. When she arrives home, she smokes a cigarette at the attic lonely, with her thoughts. She hears Tippi come home but she perceives her sound as threatening: threatening her freedom. The setting is again suffocating. Lorraine stands in front of the window watching the scene. The story ends very ambiguously, the author leaves a gap for readers to fill in; however, the description of the setting, the suffering deep depression, and the position of the character may conclude that she has committed to suicide. “She saw herself climbing into the sky…”, “Her tall erect figure receded into the distance, and never a backward glance.”
The plot in ‘The Necklace’ proceeds completely different from ‘The Hand-Puppet’. While ‘The Hand-Puppet’ mostly focuses on character analysis, ‘The Necklace’ focuses on the events. Mathilde’s husband gets an invitation to a party at a palace. Although her husband expects her to be happy, she does not want to go to the party because she does not want to be seem poor. She is so dissatisfied with her life that even the most beautiful dress in her closet does not seem beautiful to her. She buys a new expensive dress and borrows a diamond necklace from her friend, Mme. Forester. She becomes the most attractive woman at the party just as she imagines. “She danced with delight… in the triumph of her beauty, in the glory of her success.” Her happiness is absolute. She does not think of the party’s end and when she will return to her ordinary life. After the long night of the party, they head home. She realizes she has lost the necklace. They replace a new one which costs forty thousand francs, by getting into debt, and she brings it to Mme. Forester. Mathilde was not thankful for her previous life, in which they earned enough money to maintain their lives but now they have lost everything. In ten years of debt, she has lost her beauty, their apartment and she has realized she is one of those “other” women she is always afraid to be. She considers “What would have happened if she had not lost that necklace?” Whereas, this is not the right question to be asked. What would happen if she told her friend the truth? One day, she comes across Mme. Forester who is still young and attractive, yet she does not recognize her. She tells how Mathilde has changed. Mathilde tells her she has lost the necklace and what they have been going through for the last ten years. Then Mme. Forester explains that the necklace she has lent is false. Mathilde never presumes that the necklace is fake because Mme. Forester is a rich, high social woman. It seems that everything is not what they look like. The ending of ‘The Necklace’ presents a great irony: Mathilde spends years working to pay back the debt and she finds out ten years of misery is for a worthless necklace. As a seductive young woman in her previous life, she believes she deserves more than a middle-class life. Her desire for wealth and status destroys her. While she deceives people in the party by her look, she gets deceived by the look of the necklace. This is the perfect irony that makes readers surprised at the end.
Both stories have some gaps and an imaginary or a personal material missing. Looking at the title of ‘the Necklace’, readers imagine different pictures of necklaces. Till the end of the story there is no detailed description of the “superb necklace of diamonds”. The ending of the Hand-Puppet is vague. I personally do not like uncertainty in stories, but it is not because the author fails to tell the events, but it is made on purpose. The author accepts readers as co-producers by leaving a gap at the end. Regarding characters, the father is missing in the story of the Hand Puppet but again it might also be planned because the father has no active role in Lorraine’s life except for being the father of Tippi. The stories of the two women who are both dissatisfied with their lives impress readers by raising some questions in their minds.
The setting is given in detail in the story to help readers understand the inner psychology of the characters. Mathilde suffers from the poverty of their dwelling and she dreams of a luxurious house. It can be concluded from her dream that she feels disconnected from her life. She is no other woman of her caste; she accepts herself different from the others. After telling her dream in detail, the narrator suddenly goes back to the reality. “She had no dresses, no jewelry, nothing.” The opposition of the reality and the dream makes the meaning stronger here; she dreams big, but she has nothing. Also, this kind of listing shows if you do not have dresses or jewelry, you are nothing; which is very judgmental. The Hand-Puppet, also, starts with a general introduction of “she”, which means that could be any women in such a position. In the opening, the character is introduced as “the mother”. There is no name and surname, just the mother. The social role is defined to her. Later, when she deals with her psychological problems, we have a reference to Lorraine Lake. She becomes herself and stands out for herself only when she is alone in her thoughts. The story starts indirectly but on the contrary to ‘The Necklace’, the voice of the character is heard by free-indirect or direct thoughts so that readers are closer to the character. The setting, the place they live in, is also given in detail in this story so readers get integrated with the suffocating area Lorraine lives in. After Tippi finishes her puppet show, she promises not to take her puppet to the school and goes to her room, her voice still echoes in Lorraine’s mind. Suddenly she says, “I’m the mother…I am not missus”. The sentence means a lot: she is afraid to be any woman to her daughter. She questions her role in life: she is not the woman she wants to be. “…a life without a husband, child; a ‘true’ life without the trappings of identity…” She believes her husband and her child restrain her from living her own identity. Later that morning, she goes through another breakdown when the gynecologist told her there is a nonmalignant tumor in her uterus. She does not like sharing private matters with “others”. She calls her family as “others”: she is completely alienated from her family. So, she does not share his disease to “the baby’s father”. This time, Lorraine gives a role to her husband just as the society gives her one. The crucial point in the story is when Lorraine said she is trapped in her body, she explains her feelings like “It’s just that my body isn’t my own,”. When the doctor explains they are going to apply a common medical procedure, Lorraine answers “Common as death?”. This is not the way a healthy person answers. She is too depressive to think about death, maybe a suicide. After her appointment, she goes to Tippi’s school and gets terrified when she sees her scaring other kids at the school garden. She does not stop her not to make her feel ashamed. She says, “That child is mad.”. She feels completely apart from her daughter: using the pronoun “that” proves the distance between them. When she arrives home, she smokes a cigarette at the attic lonely, with her thoughts. She hears Tippi come home but she perceives her sound as threatening: threatening her freedom. The setting is again suffocating. Lorraine stands in front of the window watching the scene. The story ends very ambiguously, the author leaves a gap for readers to fill in; however, the description of the setting, the suffering deep depression, and the position of the character may conclude that she has committed to suicide. “She saw herself climbing into the sky…”, “Her tall erect figure receded into the distance, and never a backward glance.”
The plot in ‘The Necklace’ proceeds completely different from ‘The Hand-Puppet’. While ‘The Hand-Puppet’ mostly focuses on character analysis, ‘The Necklace’ focuses on the events. Mathilde’s husband gets an invitation to a party at a palace. Although her husband expects her to be happy, she does not want to go to the party because she does not want to be seem poor. She is so dissatisfied with her life that even the most beautiful dress in her closet does not seem beautiful to her. She buys a new expensive dress and borrows a diamond necklace from her friend, Mme. Forester. She becomes the most attractive woman at the party just as she imagines. “She danced with delight… in the triumph of her beauty, in the glory of her success.” Her happiness is absolute. She does not think of the party’s end and when she will return to her ordinary life. After the long night of the party, they head home. She realizes she has lost the necklace. They replace a new one which costs forty thousand francs, by getting into debt, and she brings it to Mme. Forester. Mathilde was not thankful for her previous life, in which they earned enough money to maintain their lives but now they have lost everything. In ten years of debt, she has lost her beauty, their apartment and she has realized she is one of those “other” women she is always afraid to be. She considers “What would have happened if she had not lost that necklace?” Whereas, this is not the right question to be asked. What would happen if she told her friend the truth? One day, she comes across Mme. Forester who is still young and attractive, yet she does not recognize her. She tells how Mathilde has changed. Mathilde tells her she has lost the necklace and what they have been going through for the last ten years. Then Mme. Forester explains that the necklace she has lent is false. Mathilde never presumes that the necklace is fake because Mme. Forester is a rich, high social woman. It seems that everything is not what they look like. The ending of ‘The Necklace’ presents a great irony: Mathilde spends years working to pay back the debt and she finds out ten years of misery is for a worthless necklace. As a seductive young woman in her previous life, she believes she deserves more than a middle-class life. Her desire for wealth and status destroys her. While she deceives people in the party by her look, she gets deceived by the look of the necklace. This is the perfect irony that makes readers surprised at the end.
Both stories have some gaps and an imaginary or a personal material missing. Looking at the title of ‘the Necklace’, readers imagine different pictures of necklaces. Till the end of the story there is no detailed description of the “superb necklace of diamonds”. The ending of the Hand-Puppet is vague. I personally do not like uncertainty in stories, but it is not because the author fails to tell the events, but it is made on purpose. The author accepts readers as co-producers by leaving a gap at the end. Regarding characters, the father is missing in the story of the Hand Puppet but again it might also be planned because the father has no active role in Lorraine’s life except for being the father of Tippi. The stories of the two women who are both dissatisfied with their lives impress readers by raising some questions in their minds.
REFERENCES
Oates, J.C. (1995) The Hand-Puppet", The Collector of Hearts: New Tales of the Grotesque. New York, Penguin Group Ltd, 1998, s 35-45
https://americanliterature.com/author/guy-de-maupassant/short-story/the-necklace
https://www.bartleby.com/essay/The-Necklace-PKJYVFSQUDS5
https://americanliterature.com/the-necklace-study-guide
Zey.
Comments
Post a Comment