“For my people have committed two evils: they have forsaken me, the fountain of living waters, and hewed out cisterns for themselves, broken cisterns that can hold no water.” (The Holy Bible, English Standard Version, Jeremiah 2:13). All men seek to be satisfied. The pursuit of pleasure, whether recognized or not, defines the life of every person. For whatever one does, he does it with the feeling that abstaining from it or choosing an alternative will, either in the short-term or the long-term, bring less pleasure. In the end, only God can satisfy our thirst for pleasure, but Guy de Maupassant is highly aware that many seek for materialistic fulfillment, which inevitably leaves us emaciated. Therefore, despite the oft-repeated thought that greed is the focus, the story of the Loisels in “The Necklace” is ultimately one of misplaced desires for insufficient pleasures.
Greed is usually defined as a destructive pursuit of material possessions. In this sense, the tragedy of Mrs. Loisel was not driven by greed. While it is true that she “suffered because of her grim apartment with its drab walls, threadbare furniture, ugly curtains,” (Maupassant) she did not go about pursuing the alleviation of this misery. Instead, she suffered idly. She dreamed and wished for a higher standard of living, but at no point did she try to accumulate wealth. Greed did not set this story into motion. The tragedy of the Loisels was initiated by something else.
If greed did not cause the events of “The Necklace,” what did? To answer that question, consider the inherent hedonism in all people mentioned earlier. The story begins with the description of Mrs. Loisel’s misery, which is centered on her unfulfilled desires. “She dreamed of large, silent anterooms, decorated with oriental tapestries and lighted by high bronze floor lamps, with two elegant valets in short culottes dozing in large armchairs under the effects of forced-air heaters.” Mrs. Loisel craved a higher life, an elegant extravagance. She thought that it would bring her the pleasure she sought. This misplaced desire for an incompetent pleasure was the catalyst for her later fall. Even the temporary acquisition of her dreams failed her.
The misguided pursuit of her worthless pleasures was the force that finally betrayed Mrs. Loisel and her husband. At first, its malice was only subtle. “Large tears fell slowly from the corners of her eyes to her mouth…Mrs. Loisel seemed sad, uneasy, anxious, even though her gown was all ready,” (Maupassant). When she finally saw a taste of her desire in reach, it teased her painfully by keeping the grandest fulfillment further than she could see. Fortunately, Mr. Loisel was a loving husband willing to fight for her delight. Unfortunately, his efforts were not enough. After exhilarating her with the night of her dreams, the delight dropped back and double crossed her by taking from her the necklace and ultimately enslaving her for ten years. Her desire for a perfect night was soon replaced by a desire simply to maintain her dignity, and the desire for luxury was crippled and fell to a basic desire for just a stable life, which took many years to be fulfilled. The Loisels were betrayed by evanescent pleasures of the wind, for which they had for so much time mistakenly longed.
The tragedy of the Loisels, then, is a story of fallen desires in fallen pleasures, and the misery they bring. The social realist in Maupassant may not have seen that, even being its author, but it is nonetheless true. More than that, as Laird Kleine-Ahlbrandt noted, the story can be seen “as an allegory for French society as a whole,” of its relentless pursuit of temporal, material pleasures and worldly ambitions. Yet only God can satisfy, for Psalm 90:14 says, “Satisfy us in the morning with your steadfast love, that we may rejoice and be glad all our days.” He is the only pleasure which does not disappoint, fail, fade, or betray, and only He is worthy of our passionate pursuit.