1 Answer | Add Yours
If I were the author I would have ended the story the same way because it is a famous literary masterpiece and could hardly be improved on. Maupassant wanted to illustrate how people waste their lives through vanity and presense. We remember this story for years because Maupassant makes us believe that these are real people and that this tragic event really happened. We wish we could have done something to help them. However, it would be interesting to rewrite at least one scene which would change the outcome. Many of us feel that Mathilde made a bad mistake in trying to deceive her friend Madame Forestier with a substitute necklace. She should have gone to her and told her the plain and simple truth, in which case she would have offered to pay her for the necklace in monthly installments over several years. Presumably Madame Forestier would have had the decency to admit that the necklace was only worth about five hundred francs. It would be fun writing a scene in which Madame Loisel goes to Madame Forestier's home and tearfully confesses that she lost the diamond necklace. It might sound like part of one of Oscar Wilde's plays. There would still be a surprise ending when Madame Forestier informed her friend that the necklace was a fake, but Madame Loisel and her husband would not have had to suffer for ten years before receiving that good news. They would only have had to suffer through that one terrible night when M. Loisel tried so desperately to find the lost necklace and to suffer for the next day or so over having to break the bad news to Madame Forestier. Writing such a scene might make an interesting assignment for an English class. There are many occasions in life when we have to break bad news to someone. It is usually a potentially dramatic situation.
We’ve answered 318,911 questions. We can answer yours, too.Ask a question