Marxism in Guy de Maupassant’s “The Necklace”
- cleocuizon
- Feb 9
- 4 min read
Synopsis: This article presents a brief analysis of Maupassant's work and its prominent representation of Marxist elements, including a substantial representation of socialism and its correlation to the Marxist critique of a society dominated by capitalism.
Written By: Cleo Cuizon
Date: Feb 09, 2024
An analysis of “The Necklace” through a Marxist view would involve the plot and characters emphasizing features of social classes. The theoretical approach in Maupassant’s story offers social and materialistic wealth concepts, weighing on a more pessimistic view. Madame Loisel becomes the central point of examination as she contributes to the author’s message about social aspirations and their detrimental fate. Using a Marxist approach in Maupassant’s story will discover the essential application of capitalism and socialism and its involvement in sharing the author’s criticism about wealth.
Marxism's Prevalence in Madame Liosel:
Based on Kar Marx’s method, Marxists argue how people perceive and experience the world solely depends on the economic structure of society (Bertens, 69). As socialism divides the community-based social classes, each rank’s form of lifestyle receives a stereotypical feature that impacts their perception of one another. Marx’s conclusion about socialism pertains to this aspect, where “‘It is not the consciousness of men that determines their existence, but their social existence that determines their consciousness.” (Bertens, 69). He indicates how one’s mindset relies on the social lifestyle they either reside in or desire to attain. In the story, socialism occurs through Madame Loisel’s approach to wealth. She aspires wealth for the idea of materialistic and social desires:
“...she was thinking of delicate repasts, with glittering silver, with tapestries peopling the walls with ancient figures and with strange birds in a fairy-like forest; she was thinking of exquisite dishes, served in marvelous platters, of compliment whispered and heard with a sphinx-like smile, while she was eating the rosy flesh of a trout or the wings of a quail.” (Maupassant, 1907)
Her visions of luxury are influenced by the economic structure she lives in, where the items she fantasizes about derive from societal wealth in the Parisian community. Her background significantly influences her perspective on wealth, which she aspires to join due to the beneficial aspects of its lifestyle. This correlates with Marx’s conclusion of socialism, where Madame Liosel’s awareness of her social state determines her consciousness to desire for something better.
A Materialistic Consequence & Marxist's Critique:
However, her aspirations led to a dark path once Monsieur Loisel, her husband, received an invitation to the Ministry’s official reception. The opportunity becomes the cause of her downfall as she loses a diamond necklace borrowed from Madame Forester. Years after the incident, Monsieur and Madame Loisel paid their debts and replaced the jewelry they lost. However, Madame Forestier not knowing anything, Madame Loisel confesses her mistake. The ending then embodies an essential lesson about materialistic and social desires as Madame Forestier replies to Madame Loisel’s suffering, “Oh, my poor Mathilde. But mine were false. At most they were worth five hundred francs!” (1907). Madame Loisel’s outcome embodies Mauppassant’s message regarding the toxic views of luxury, along with its consequences demonstrated by Madame Forestier’s brutal truth.
The couple’s outcome pertains to the capitalist aspect of Marxism. Marxists argue how the concept derives from the capitalist system approaching laborers as the production of units rather than human beings (70-71). In the plot, the idea of wealth symbolizes the capitalist while the couple represents the laborers of their luxurious desires. Their obstacles after succumbing to temptations depict the author’s intention in their roles, where they become “victims of ironic necessity, crushed by a fate that they have dared to defy yet still struggling against it hopelessly” (Turnell & Dumesnil, 2019). Due to Madame Loisel’s obsession with her desires and negligence for the necklace, they became victims of their tragic fate after defying their mistake and risking their current savings to avoid destitution. Another aspect of capitalism is to influence laborers to “realize their identity with the nature that they master, while at the same time, [achieving] free consciousness.” (Chambre & McLellan, 2019). Upon realizing the impact of their doing, Madame Loisel was described to be aged and continuously reflecting on the night when she lost the item (1907). By becoming aware of her condition —after forces that separate their consciousness from this realization— the individual “[finds] the conditions of their fulfillment, of the realization of their true stature” (Chambre & McLellan, 2019). Madame Loisel experienced this understanding when she paid off the debt by replacing the lost necklace and knowing the true worth of the object. Thus, the hardships endured resulted in her full awareness of materialistic desires and their significant consequences.
Conclusion:
Maupassant’s input of socialism and capitalism criticizes the influences of wealth due to toxic materialistic and social desires, as shown through the characters. The protagonist demonstrates these ideas of high social class, where the author poses a negative view of their lifestyle. The Marxist approach to this story concludes how wealth poses as a detrimental illusion, where one’s obsession with luxury could lead to an inevitable downfall. Madame Loisel embodies this through her lavish temptations, causing detachment from reality and neglecting her recent financial stability. As she succumbs to her pride and greed, the necklace’s value constitutes her role as a victim of her social and materialistic obsession. With this theoretical approach centralizing these principles, a story of luxury and losing a necklace transitions to a representation of social classes and their influence on one’s mindset of a meaningful life. If one life lesson were to be taken from Madam Liosel’s outcome, Marx would interpret the detrimental profundity of status and materialism and how such worldly obsessions have never favored the true purpose of inner fulfillment.
Work Cited:
Bertens, Hans. “Political Reading: Class, Gender, and Race in the 1970s and 1980s”. Literary Theory: The Basics. 3rd ed., Routledge, 2014.
Dumesnil, Rene & Turnell, Martin."Guy de Maupassant." Britannica Academic, Encyclopædia Britannica, 6 Sep. 2019. academic-eb-com.ezproxy.snhu.edu/levels/collegiate/article/Guy-de-Maupassant/51492. Accessed 25 Jan. 2020.
Maupassant, Guy De. “The Necklace.” Bartleyby.com, American Book Company, 1907, www.bartleby.com/195/20.html.
McLellan, David T., and Henri Chambre. “Analysis of Society: Marxism.” Encyclopædia Britannica, Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc., 2 Oct. 2019, www.britannica.com/topic/Marxism/Analysis-of-society.
Comments