It is right that there is no perfect writing but good writing always attracts the reader to read more of the text. Getting deepens in a reading or close read a text would illustrate a lot of ambiguous points because the writer has to be always cautious on choosing the right words. He has to know what makes the audience satisfied, and what attracts them and pulls their attention. If anyone skim, or scan a text some phrases, and words look very clear and easy, but if the text has been closed read it, a lot of hidden information would appear. The phrases that are in the exact dialogues have s strong meaning, and also these dialogues make the story more understandable and interesting. 

Some words, and phrases in readings might be seen very simple and understandable, but if they have been closed read; there would be a very deep meaning and also an unexpected conclusion would come out. For example in the text The Necklace the author Guy De Maupassant says "She dressed plainly because she couldn't dress very well," the two phrases "plainly" and " very well" has a big different meaning, and the two phrases are not the opposite of each other (de Maupassant 22). The phrase " She dressed plainly" means that her dresses were plain and there is no specialty on it, which means that anyone could afford this dress and its quality is not that perfect. However, if a dress is being described, as "very well" that would mean that it is a very special dress, and obviously not plain, in a good condition, and good quality, and eventually expensive. Furthermore, if we focus in the phrase "plainly" we see that it is not the opposite of the phrase " very well" because plainly is not a very well dress, and also is not a bad dress, but an appropriate and a good dress. The meaning of the whole phrase is that the woman could not afford a "very well" dress because she is not in a good condition financially. Instead of looking terrible in a dress that is inappropriate, and poor quality, she dressed a plain dress that has no specialty to look appropriate and respectable woman. All in all, the woman couldn't afford a good quality and a massive looking dress, so she dressed plainly to look appropriate and in a good looking. 

Moreover, in the second page of the story the word "unhappy" is written instead of sad, or unlucky. Furthermore, the word unhappy has been used in the text because it has a strong relationship with the word happy than it is with the word sad. As we see, the word unhappy is actually two words "un" and "happy". Using the word "unhappy" in this story would also illustrate that the woman is looking, and searching for happiness; however, the word sad would not be a better choice to describe the woman in this story.  The word sad seems more powerful, and includes crying, but the word unhappy seems less powerful and also the unhappiness would last longer. Thus, choosing word unhappy instead of sad has more valuable sense because it relates more to the word happy, and happiness, and also the unhappiness would last longer than the sadness.

Most of the pages in The Necklace are written as quoted speech, or dialogues between the woman and her husband, which has a stronger meaning, and makes the story more interesting. In the third page of the story de Maupassant quoted the woman's reply "' what do you want me to do with that,'" after her husband gave her an invitation to a party (de Maupassant 23". If this phrase e has not been quoted and the author wrote the same words without quotations the meaning would be slightly different, for example, if its written as the man gave his wife an invitation to party and she didn't know what to do about it, the meaning would be different. As we see from the example, we understand that the woman didn't know what to do about the invitation, which gives a slight clue that she refuses to go to the party. However, as we understand from the woman's actual replay, we see that she is not willing to the party, which means that she refuses the invitation. Thus, we see that the phrase that is in the quotation mark has much stronger and better meaning than the example, which means that it is better to write what exactly the characters said because it presents a better meaning. 

Furthermore, writing the exact dialogues in the story could make more understandable and more interesting such as when de Maupassant quoted  "' What's the matter? What's the matter?" from the man after he saw his wife crying (de Maupassant 23). The man repeated the words "What's the matter?" twice, which means that he strongly cares about his wife and he doesn't want to see her crying, In addition, repeating the word twice might illustrate that the man's reaction was quick and he said them quickly. As we see, repeating the phrase twice exposed the man's feeling trend to the woman what makes reading the story is interesting, and would engage the reader to the story. All in all, writing the exact dialogues between the people in a story would make more interesting because the dialogue might expose the person's feeling and also the reactions of the people.  

All in all, close reading a story might be hard and takes a lot of time, but it illustrates a lot of ambiguous points and conclusions.  In addition, it would shows that some word, and phrases are not simple as it looks and have additional meanings. Also, we see that, the exact dialogues have strong meaning, and also make the story more interesting. The Necklace is a very well written story, the author knows how choose the right words to make the reader engaging with the text. 
