In the story “The Story of an Hour” love and romance is shown to be suffocating and restricting. In this story the need for a man is shown on a much larger scale. Once Brently Mallard is presumed dead his house and his money and his social identity all becomes hers. Once Louise Mallard discovers that her husband is dead and she gets to grips with the situation she starts to realise that she has a chance to start over again in life with her new profound independence.
Unlike the other two stories in “The Necklace” the thought of getting married is actually considered a good thing. Although in this story getting married is not about love and commitment its all about social appearance and wealth. Madame Loisel always thought that is she had more money and glamour she would some how be a better person.
In the nineteenth century the social status of women was very different to what it is today. Although there is a great difference in the social status it has only started to change in the last fifty years, during World War Two. In these three stories the social status of women during the nineteenth century is shown very well.
In the Women’s Rose and The Necklace, women are shown as objects and ideals posed by men, women are also shown as being powerful over men. “I'm not exactly sure, but I think that I could manage with four hundred francs”, she knows that her husband wants to go lark shooting with that four hundred francs. While in The Story of an Hour women are shown as being suffocated and controlled by men. “Free, free, free”, Mrs Mallard feels that she is free now that her husband has died.
In all of these three stories it is the women who bring the shock and surprise to the stories even though it is thought that women are insignificant.
In “The Necklace” Madame Loisel wishes for luxurious lifestyle that she cannot afford. So when she is given an invitation to go to a fancy ball she is disappointed to realise that she does not posse any jewellery. So she goes to her friend Madame Forestier to borrow a single diamond necklace. She goes to the ball believing that she has something of real value on her neck. Once the ball is over she is shocked to discover that she has lost the necklace. Towards the end of the story one Madame Loisel has paid back all the money she owes the story slows down, this is done by using long complex sentences. Once Madame Loisel sees Madame Forestier the story suddenly speeds up, this is now done by still using long sentences but now with lots of punctuation. This is done until Madame Loisel is told that the necklace was in-fact fake then the story once again comes to a halt as it finishes. Guy de Maupassant writing style is similar to Kate Chopin’s; this is because Kate Chopin’s writing is based on Guy de Maupassant life work. This is shown in the story “The Story of an Hour”. As Mrs Mallard starts to deal with the terrible news he husband suddenly appears. Once this happens the story suddenly speeds up with long sentences but with lots of punctuation. Oliver Schreiners technique for surprises is slightly different. Instead of using long complex sentences she uses short simple sentences to bring the surprise into her story. Out of all the techniques used I believe that Olive Schreiners is the most effective.
Overall there are many and differences in these three stories but they all try to get the same point across. Women in the nineteenth century were suffocated by men and social behaviour. I think the main thing which we must all remember is that sexism is not the sort of thing to be desired as it prevents certain people from doing what they can.
