Tell me a story! There are many different elements that I like or dislike in both “The Necklace” by Maupassant and “Lunch” by Monninger. Both authors use some type of device while writing to give the stories a cutting edge style to them. The main devices I noticed while reading the stories were open ended ending, greed, and foolishness.
I liked the way that Joseph Monninger created an open ended ending. His cleaver use of words and phrases allowed him to tell some information about the ending without actual telling a specific ending. Up to this point in the story, the narrator has been watching Kendra like a stalker and has eventually given up on her noticing him. He heads back to the car and then narrator notices, “And she lifts her hand, too, although whether it is a wave, or just a hand to block the sun, you will never know,” (6). I liked the story when Monninger set the tone and direction of the ending. It creates an environment in a person’s mind where they can come in and sit down next to the narrator. It is really fascinating how sparingly Monninger uses his words while writing this open ending. For example, in the quote previously mentioned, the writer uses constant pauses to create tension but also to use fewer words. The fewer words a writer gives a person, the less information a person gets, which in turn, allows an open ended story to be created. This was not the only thing I liked in the readings.
I love the way Guy de Maupassant showed greed in Mathilde. The author gave Mathilde an excessive desire for worldly items. In the story, Mathilde and her husband have been invited to see the minister but she desires a brand new expensive dress. Her husband asks her how much and she exclaim, “She reflected several seconds, making her calculations and wondering also what sum she could ask without drawing on herself an immediate refusal and a frightened exclamation from the economical clerk” (13). I liked the way the narrator has let us into Mathilde mind and shows us how she thinks. In the quote, a person can see how greedy Mathilde is. I adore the way she cleverly crates a number that which when not obtain a negative answer. Reminds me of the wonderfully days of elementary school when I wanted everything I could get my hands on. Mathilde reminds me how I would do clever tricks, and smiles, and hugs just to get what a person wants. On another note, Maupassant did have some parts that I disliked though.
I am displeased with the way Guy de Maupassant showed Foolishness. The author made Mathilde appear to have a lack of caution. In the story, Mathilde has just came back from the party and she notice she has lost her expensive necklace. After many years and a large number of fracs later she presents Forestier, the person she borrowed the necklace from a real diamond necklace. Mathilde then exclaims, “Yes, I’ve had some tough times since I saw you last; in fact, hardships… and all because of you!” (18). In the story, after Mathilde has lost the necklace, the writer has her sitting in a chair not even caring about her dress she is still wearing. Right there, I disliked how the narrator did not make her get up, change, and run out there and hunt for the necklace. Any person with common since would know that a person just needs to back track there steps. I disliked that too about Mathilde in the story, the writer failed to pencil in that quality about Mathilde. It is very frustrating to read this part of the story because before this part, Mathilde seemed so happy at the party.
What a great story that was. I wonder if there are more stories like these. In any case, both authors had some good perks which makes their work compelling and entertaining enough for anyone to read. There different components they use while writing really keeps me drawn in. Then again, it is all just a matter opinion.