Cover Letter
Welcome to my blog. I am a junior student majoring in management. I like Chinese Classical Literature, and my favorite book is Stone Story. I like Stone Story, because I appreciate its language, especially the poets. Also, I admire the writer’s view about life conveyed through the story. I also like philosophy, though I am still a beginner. Philosophy makes us to reflect upon our life and world; it makes our life more meaningful. The following essays are extracted from what I wrote in the course I take this semester: Advanced Academic Writing. Also, I would like to sincerely thank Mr. Ron. He gave me much instruction in writing. I like writing, because I like to record my thoughts and experience of different period. As I grow up, as I reopen my words written years ago, the lost time seems to appear again. Also, it is quite attractive to track my growth through my written words. However, before I took this course, I have never written any long essay in English. This course gives me a chance to challenge myself, to improve my English writing. What I learned most about English writing from the class is about language, structure and grammar. For example, thesis statement etc…Thanks to this; my writing seems more professional. Apart from language, structure, and grammar, I think what is more important in writing is thought. For an essay, the language, structure, and grammar are the body, and the thoughts are the soul. A body without soul is like the lifeless mummy, so it is with writing. So, my selected essays are all about my favorite topics. Among all the four stories I have read in this semester, Guy de Maupasant’s The Necklace attracts me most, because Mme. Loisel’s situation is a reflection of the dilemma everyone will meet, the conflict between our expectation and the reality. I am greatly puzzled by this problem. So, most of my selected essays are about this story, about my process of reflection upon this problem. Also, the online discussion about the four stories helped my writing a lot. The fierce discussion not only aroused my interest in writing in English, but also fostered my view about my interested topics. The following are the brief introduction to my selected essays. The first essay in my portfolio is my reading log of The Necklace. This is my first essay in this course. At that time, I was rather pessimistic, because I encountered some difficulty, and I had to compromise to the reality. Mme. Loisel’s story was so similar to my dilemma. So, I named the essay: Life is a Process of Compromise. However, I gradually began to know we have to keep a positive attitude about our life. At that time, my language and grammar was not rather good, because I did not put much emphasis on it. Thanks to Mr. Ron, you can see my improvement in this aspect. My second essay is the final timed writing. I was so lucky. The topic is just about my favorite story, The Necklace. From that essay, you may found I became much more positive than when I wrote the reading log. In the past, I felt sorry for Mme. Loisel, for her compromise to the reality. However now, I find she earned a lot from her hard work, from the lost necklace. In terms of grammar and language, since the time is so limited, and I have too much to say, I regret that I did not do quite well. Then, I want to talk about my essay draft. My essay draft one was just a collection of my thoughts. So, there are many broken sentences, however, my basic concept about the essay was developed. Then, I spent a lot of time on essay draft two. I carefully organized my words, my thoughts, and tried my best to find the evidence. However, Mr. Ron said there was still little evidence. So, in my draft three, I changed the organization of the essay and found some more evidences. At last, I still want to show my sincere gratitude to Mr. Ron. Wish you good luck!
Essay Draft 3
The Prevalent Value Decides Everything
In the 1960s, in France, the class consciousness was prevalent; the whole French society was organized on a class basis. It was hard for a person born into a lower-class family to move into the upper-class. Even when a man chose a wife, the fortune of the girl was his only criteria.
In Guy de Maupassant’s The Necklace, Mathilde was just the victim of the class consciousness. Mathilde was beautiful, elegant, she dreamed of luxurious life, however, she could only marry to an economical clerk rather than any distinguished man, because her poor family background. She borrowed a necklace from her friend, just to satisfy her vanity in a party. However, she lost the necklace. So she paid ten years' hard work for the one-night long glory, for the necklace, thus losing her beauty, her elegance. But, at last, the necklace turned out to be false.
What was Guy de Maupassant’s purpose of writing The Necklace? Some readers think: Maupassant wanted to show how life is strange and changeful, and how helpless people are in front of the fate. Others think: Maupassant wanted to criticize Mathilde’s vanity. However, in my opinion, the main purpose of Maupassant in writing the story was to criticize the money worship of the society.
Why Maupassant’s purpose was not to criticize Mathilde’s vanity? It is instinct for a person to try to gain other’s respect and appreciation. At that time, in France, money and social status were everything. Without these, respect and appreciation were just unrealistic dreams. Mathilde just pursued other’s appreciation in the way that was prevalent in the whole society. Is there anything wrong for Mathilde to do so? No! Also, in the end of the story, we can see Maupassant’s appreciation of Mathilde’s courage to afford the debt and hard work. When Mathilde told her friend the fact about the necklace, she “smiled with a joy which was proud and naïve at once. (P. 44)”
Many readers think: Maupassant wanted to show how life is strange and changeful, and how helpless people are in front of the fate. However, if Mathilde was born into a society in which people did not judge everything from money, she should have the chance to pursue her dreamed life, and became another Cinderella, rather than compromise to the reality.
Then, I will demonstrate why Maupassant’s purpose was to criticize the money worship of the society.
What caused Mathildes’s tragedy? ----The class consciousness. At the beginning of The Necklace, Maupassant just showed his attitude. “She had no dowry, no expectations, no means of being known, understood, loved, wedded by any rich and distinguished man; and she let herself be married to a little clerk at the Ministry of Public Instruction. (P.38)” If the French at that time had not judged everything from money, even when a man chose a wife, Mathilde may have the chance to pursue her dreamed life.
There are many other evidences. A single necklace which many rich women wore to attend parties, cost the couple 10 years’ hard work, plus the entire heritage from their parents. When Mathilde’s husband suggested wearing roses on her neck, Mathilde said:” No, there’s nothing more humiliating than to look poor among other women who are rich (P.40).” Woman’s jewel, such a little thing perfectly reflects the snobbery of the whole society.
Mathilde’s friend, Mme.Forstier’s attitude toward Mathild also gave us some clue. When Mathilde returned the necklace to her friend, Mme.Forstier said with a chilly manner:” You should have returned it sooner”. After ten years, Mathilde met Mme.Forestier again. When Mathilde spoke to her friend, Mme.Forestier felt astonished to be familiarly addressed by the plain good wife, and even stammered (P.44). Maybe, at that time, there was no true friendship, what really matters was just money and social status. If Mathilde was born into a rich family, wedded by a distinguished man, her friend would not have treated her in this way.
Maupassant’s experience may also give us some clue. Maupassant once worked as a civil servant from his twenties to his death. He fully understood the hardship of the lower-class. So, it is quite understandable that Maupassant wrote the story to show his discontent with the money worship and class consciousness of the society.
We are all ordinary people. Mostly, we dare not fight against the society’s prevalent value. Genius like Nietzsche and Van Gogh are very rare. So it was with Mathilde. The prevalent value in France at that time decided Mathilde’s tragedy. And Maupassant showed his discontentment with the prevalent value of the society through this tragedy.
Essay Draft 2
The Prevalent Value Decides Everything
In the 1960s, in France, the class consciousness was prevalent; the whole French society was organized on a class basis. It was hard for a person born into a lower-class family to move into the upper-class. Even when a man chose a wife, the fortune of the girl was his only criteria.
In Guy de Maupassant’s The Necklace, Mathilde was just the victim of the class consciousness. Mathilde was beautiful, elegant, she dreamed of luxurious life, however, she could only marry to an economical clerk rather than any distinguished man, because her poor family background. She borrowed a necklace from her friend, just to satisfy her vanity in a party. However, she lost the necklace. So she paid ten years hard work for the one-night long glory, for the necklace, thus losing her beauty, her elegance. But, at last, the necklace turned out to be false.
What is Guy de Maupassant’s purpose of writing The Necklace? Somebody says: Maupassant wanted to show how life is strange and changeful, and how helpless people are in front of the fate. Somebody says, Maupassant wanted to criticize Mathilde’s vanity. However, in my opinion, the main purpose of Maupassant in writing the story is to criticize the class consciousness of the society.
What caused Mathildes’s tragedy? ----The class consciousness. At the beginning of the Necklace, Maupassant just showed his attitude. “She had no dowry, no expectations, no means of being known, understood, loved, wedded by any rich and distinguished man; and she let herself be married to a little clerk at the Ministry of Public Instruction. (P.38)” If the Frenchman at that time had not judged everything from money, even when a man chose a wife, Mathilde may have the chance to pursue her dreamed life.
There are many other evidences. A single necklace which many rich women wore to attend parties, cost the couple 10 years’ hard work, plus the entire heritage from their parents. When Mathilde’s husband suggested wearing roses on her neck, Mathilde said:” No, there’s nothing more humiliating than to look poor among other women who are rich (P.40).” Woman’s jewel, such a little thing perfectly reflects the snobbery of the whole society.
Mathilde’s friend, Mme.Forstier’s attitude toward Mathild also gave us some clue. When Mathilde returned the necklace to her friend, Mme.Forstier said with a chilly manner:” You should have returned it sooner”. After 10 years, Mathilde met Mme.Forestier again. When Mathilde spoke to her friend, Mme.Forestier felt astonished to be familiarly addressed by the plain good wife, and even became stammered (P.44). Maybe, at that time, there was no true friendship, what really matters was just money and social status. If Mathilde was born into a rich family, wedded by a distinguished man, her friend would not have treated her in this way.
Somebody says: Maupassant wanted to criticize Mathilde’s vanity. However, I think it no wrong of Mathilde’s vanity, because it was aroused by the society. It is very natural for a person to try to gain other’s respect and appreciation. However, in that society, money and social status were everything. Without this, respect and appreciation were just unrealistic dreams. Mathilde just pursued other’s appreciation in the way that was prevalent in the whole society. It was not the fault of Mathilde, but the fault of the society.
Somebody says: Maupassant want to show how life is strange and changeful, and how helpless people are in front of the fate. In my opinion, if Mathilde was born into a society in which people did not judge everything from money, she should have the chance to pursue her dreamed life, and became another Cinderella, rather than compromise to the reality.
Maupassant’s experience may also give us some clue. Maupassant once worked as a civil servant from his twenties to his death. He fully understood the hardship of the lower-class. So, it is quite understandable that Maupassant wrote the story to show his discontent with the class consciousness.
We are all ordinary people. Mostly, we dare not fight against the society’s prevalent value. Genius like Nietzsche and Van Gogh are very rare. So it was with Mathilde. The prevalent value in France at that time decided Mathilde’s tragedy. And Maupassant showed his discontentment with the prevalent value of the society through this tragedy.
Essay Draft 1
What’s the main purpose of Maupassant of writing The Necklace?
In the 1960s, in France, the class consciousness was prevalent! It is hard for a person born into a lower-class family to move into the upper-class. And Mathilde is the victim of the class consciousness. She was beautiful, she was elegant, she dreamed of luxurious life style, however, she had no means of being known, understood, loved, wedded by any rich and distinguished man., She could only marry to an economical clerk, because of her poor family background! And this is just the beginning of her tragedy. She borrowed a necklace from her friend, just to satisfy her vanity, to have a taste of her dreamed life. However, she lost the necklace. So she paid ten years hard work for the one-night long glory, for the necklace, losing her beauty, her elegance, her dream! However, what is extremely joking, the necklace was false!
What is Guy de Maupassant’s purpose of writing The Necklace? Somebody readers think, Maupassant wanted to show how life is strange and changeful, and how helpless people are in front of the fate. Others think, Maupassant want to criticize people’s vanity. However, in my opinion, the main purpose of Maupassant of writing the story was to criticize the class consciousness of the society, the snobbery of the upper-class and show his sympathy for the lower-class. I will argue my point of view from the following aspect:
1. From the novel, we can see many evidences of Maupassant’s attitude.
a) “She was one of those pretty……as if by a mistake of destiny, born in a family of clerks. She had no dowry, no expectations, no means of being known, understood, loved, and wedded by any rich and distinguished man… (P.38)”----------It is the class consciousness that prevent Mathilde from pursuing her dreamed life style. The society should be responsible for Mathilde’s tragedy.
b) “No; there’s nothing more humiliating than to look poor among other women who are rich (P.40)”; “When Mme. Loisel took back the necklace, Mme. Forestier said to her, with a chilly manner: You should have returned it sooner. I might have needed it (P. 43)”; “The other, astonished to be familiarly addressed by this plain good-wife, did not recognize her at all, and stammered: But—madam!—I do not know—you must be mistaken (P. 44)”------------All these evidence show the snobbery of the upper-class.
2. The experience of Maupassant. Maupassant worked as a civil servant from his twenties to his death. He understood the hardships of the lower-class very much. So, it is understandable that Maupassant write The Necklace to show his sympathy for the lower-class.
3. The social background and Maupassant’s other novels. The novel was written after the French Revolution. At that time, the class distinctions remained an integral part of French society. The whole society judges everything from money! And from Maupassant’s other novels, we can see his similar averseness to this custom.
Final Timed-Writing
Q:From The Necklace, what might have been the quality of Mme. Loisel’s life if she had not lost the necklace? Is her life better or worse now? What is the quality of life? In my view, it is the combination of the living standard and the soul fulfillment. And the soul fulfillment is much more important than the living standard. Many rich people feel vacuity in their life, because money cannot make them happy from the bottom of their heart. However, many poor people lead much happier life than those rich people, because they can taste the sweetness of life through their hard work and their optimization. It reminds me of a story. The farmer drank water in a broken bowl after hard work, he found the water sweet. The king drank the water in the golden bowl. However, he did not found any sweetness in the water, because he did not know the hardness of life. In Guy de Maupassant’s The Necklace, if Mme.Loisel had not lost the necklace, she may live under better living standard. She may attend other parties, be admired by those rich man, thus fulfilling her vanity. Also, she may choose to be a mistress of a rich man, as long as she was willing to. However, what can she get from the jewelry, from the admiration? Of course, the answer is nothing else apart from vanity. However, after Mme.Loisel lost the necklace, she made her life through hard work; she knew the true meaning of life, just like the farmer. So, when she met her rich friend again, she felt proud to tell her experience, because though she lost her beauty, though she lived under low living standard, her soul was fulfilled through her hard work. So, obviously, Mme.Loisel’s life is much better now.
Reading Log
If there is great difference between your expectation and the reality, and you can do little to improve the situation you are confronted with, what will you do? Maybe, compromise is the only way out.
Life is a Process of Compromise
I have read The Necklace for many times, however, my sentiment differs every time I read the novel. This time, it reminds me of Hardy’s novel, An Imaginative Woman, which was a tragedy about a romantic woman. The lady was married to an arm trader. Though she led a rich life, she was unhappy. She loved poets; she liked romance; however, her husband only knew how to earn money. She fell in love with a young poet, thus resulting in the tragedy. It also reminds me of my sister. She is married to a man he does not love. Her perfect lover should have broad arms; when he laughs, the laughter is like the sound of the sea; he should be romantic, be able to understand what she is thinking of. However, her husband is fat, unromantic. Sometimes, she even found it difficult to communicate with her husband. Though her husband treats her rather well, my sister is still complaining about her marriage, thus making the situation even worse. However now, my sister is pregnant, in order to give the baby a happy life, they decided to live together in spite of their quarrel.
We have too much expectation in our life. However, we can not realize all of out dreams. We can only yield to the reality. In this way, life is a process of compromise. Or, life itself is a tragedy.