Most stories written over a hundred years apart wouldn't normally correlate.  But surprisingly, The Necklace, written by  Guy de Maupassant, and the classic story, Cinderella, written by Charles Perrault, actually have some similar plot lines.  By looking at the two short stories, The Necklace and Cinderella, the reader can see that there is an inverse relationship between the stories.  An important component of evidence is when Cinderella loses her beloved item, her life improves drastically; however, when Mathilde loses her item, her life plummets, thus, a reverse outcome which proves that it's not the object that matters, it is the meaning and significance behind it that truly impacts our lives.  We can use juxtaposition in order to prove that because both items are fake, materialistic objects, they do not suggest high social hierarchy through the comparison of each stories' themes of honesty and courage through the mood and tone.  

Possessing materialistic qualities will not get you anywhere and Mathilde had to learn that the hard way.  Mathilde Loisel and her husband worked very hard for what they had but Mathilde still wanted more.  She wanted to be rich, spoiled and pampered and believed that she was living in the wrong lifestyle.  Maupassant expressed her love for materialistic objects by stating, "She had no clothes, no jewels, nothing" (34).  Since these objects were the only things she truly loved, she felt that she was made to wear them.  She had longed so eagerly to charm, to be desired, to be "wildly attractive" (Maupassant 33).  What Mathilde didn't know is that her husband worked very diligently in order to get his wife a prestigious invitation to an upcoming ball.  But Mathilde still wasn't happy because she had nothing to wear and no jewels to show-off.  What I find ironic, is that Mathilde so greatly wants to "be desired, and sought after", but she has a husband that obviously loves her deeply and will do anything to make her happy (Maupassant 33).  Monsieur Loisel gave up 400 francs that he had been saving in order for his wife to buy a totally new dress to attend this ball, instead of just wearing one she already had.  Mathilde's husband knows that sacrificing his savings for his wife will not deny him happiness, because just satisfying Mathilde makes him joyful.  This proves that he understands what truly matters in life and isn't blinded by shiny objects like his wife.  On the other hand, when Cinderella got invited to her luxurious ball, she didn't go out and buy a new dress, she just fixed up an old one she had. As Perrault states, "It was a bit old-fashioned, but Cinderella could make it beautiful!"(4).  The mood and tone from this quote is the exact opposite of the quote in The Necklace.  The tone is hopeful, confident and optimistic.  In Cinderella, the tone starts off sad and dreary and then becomes positive after Cinderella gains confidence with the help of her fairy godmother.  Although in The Necklace, the tone starts off happy and optimistic and slowly turns disappointing and wretched.  Thus, an inverse relationship is created between these two stories.

As Mathilde and Cinderella are similar through their activities and objectives, Monsieur Loisel, the husband of Mathilde, and Cinderella are comparable through their strong work ethic and motivation for what they desire.  It is expressed in the story Cinderella  about how, "she scoured the dishes, tables, etc." (2).  Monsieur Loisel was very driven in his work in order to make the most amount of money to bring home to his wife to make her happy.  As Maupassant declares, "her husband worked in the evenings at putting straight a merchant's accounts, and often at night he did copying at two pence-halfpenny a page" (8).  Both Cinderella and Monsieur, possess honest and courageous character traits that relate back to the same themes of the stories they are a part of.  This is significant because these two characters have very different roles in their stories but are still very dynamic and crucial to the understanding of the theme and mood.

Both Cinderella and Mathilde, lost something very valuable and important to their outfits the night of the ball.  Mathilde lost a diamond necklace she borrowed from a friend, and Cinderella lost the glass slipper her Fairy Godmother gave her.  While both these items were asked for, the reasoning behind the need for them is conflicting.  Both fake, absent items led these women in totally opposite directions for the rest of their lives.  "But Cinderella and the Prince were happiest of all.  For after that their loveliest dreams came true-- together", Perrault wrote (27).  Prince Charming found the missing shoe of Cinderella and searched the entire kingdom in order to find and marry her and when they did, they lived happily ever after.  Losing the shoe didn't mean losing her magnificence or beauty, for losing that one item brought her something she never could have even dreamed of.  

Unfortunately for Mathilde, the result of misplacing her beloved item did not have the same outcome.  The Loisel couple "came to know the ghastly life of abject poverty" because of the self-centeredness that Mathilde expressed when wanting to look desirable with the fancy clothes and jewelry that she really didn't need (Maupassant 38).  Mathilde desperately wanted to emerge from the middle class and become royal, but instead she was forced into the lowest class, having to do all the duties for the household while her husband worked day and night in order to repay the debt and loans that were upon them.  This was not the life either of them had imagined or sought.  As the short story progresses, the reader comes to find out that the original necklace Mathilde lost was a fake, imitation of a real one.  The mood, tone and plot of this story completely changes.  The couple worked so hard for nothing.  This I find very ironic because of how ungrateful Mathilde was at the beginning of the story and now she knows how good she had it before when she took her above average lifestyle for granted.  

Both items were fake, made out of nothing, reproductions of the real thing.  Cinderella's glass slipper was created from scratch made by the Fairy Godmother and Mathilde's necklace was just a piece of cheap plastic.  Both were necessary for the appearance of royalty but didn't help either ladies actually become monarchs.  The word, "fake" not only applies to objects, but also relates to peoples' personalities, depending on what they choose to desire, whether it be true happiness or just the satisfaction of wearing expensive outfits.

I would argue that honesty and courage would be the biggest motifs or themes in both of these short stories.  If Mathilde and Monsieur would have had enough courage to tell Madame Forestier, their friend whom they borrowed the necklace, that the necklace had been misplaced and they would pay for a new one, they would only be 500 francs in debt instead of 36,000.  Contrarily, Cinderella had enough courage to show up to the ball and be honest enough to the Prince that she was a maid and was nowhere near royal.  Her bravery and righteousness worked out in her favor, for her and the Prince lived happily ever after.  These stories have an evident correlation of themes; Cinderella had courage and honesty, while the Loisel couple unluckily, did not.  

So what if Cinderella hadn't lost the slipper and Mathilde hadn't lost the necklace?  Well, I'd like to debate that Cinderella would still be a maid and patiently awaiting the next ball invitation, and Mathilde wouldn't have learned anything through this experience and still would be ungrateful and selfish.  Even though Mathilde and Monsieur had to learn the hard way, it taught them both a lesson to not be afraid to speak up and be truthful.  No one item can bestow royalty upon oneself, it is the traits you possess that will ultimately bring you the most happiness and joy.

