The second irony was his wife’s happiness because she seemed sad for a while at first. Although the author does not state it clearly, from my point of view, Mrs. Mallard’s death reason was the shock of thinking that she lost her freedom again. It is because she was dreaming of a free, single life after her husband’s death. We see three examples of irony in at “The Necklace”. Mrs. Loisel had a poor life but wanted to have a wealthy one.
Both Daisy and Curley’s wife didn’t really truly love their husbands. They just married them for the money. The character Nick from the book, The Great Gatsby and Candy from the book OF Mice and Men, both had related dreams. Nick wanted to live outside of the city in a small home. Candy wanted to join Lennie and George in there American dream which was to live on a small ranch and tend their own animals.
At that time, a woman’s life is just like passing from her father’s hand to her husband’s. And the society did not think it was a wrong thing, they still thought women should only pleased their husbands first and they should not to work as men, all their job and duty was to be a good housewife, take care of the whole family. Due to these opinions, most couples in 19th century had no love between each other. Kristina, who married with a rich man to support her mother and two brothers, she had no love to her husband, all she wants was support her poor family. But now, she becomes a widow, her husband and mother died and her brothers were grow up, she does not need to support any one more, she does not need to live for any one more.
Mathilde Loisel, instead of being satisfied with her own pleasures of simple life yearns for the luxuries of the wealthy therefore leading her to a miserable life. Mathilde Loisel is miserable because she yearns for the lush lifestyle of the upper-class which, in reality, she can’t have. She is wedded “to a little clerk in the Ministry of Education” (pg. 221) who is not a rich man but can provide for basic needs. While Mathilde is a person who is never satisfied with what she has, her husband enjoys the simplicity of life.
Here she makes a substantial amount of money considering her background. She chooses to stay because she makes enough money to pay rent, feed her children, and send them to private school. She could not even imagine such a life if she were to waitress or be a servant. Kelly finds that, even in an effort to eradicate force into the profession via anti-pimping laws, some women still found themselves working against their will-- either forced by their partners or deceived into thinking that they are taking up another job. For example, Magda was promised work as a waitress, but ended up serving at a
Throughout Act One Nora is presented as a materialistic woman, who seems to think that money can buy a person’s happiness as she is constantly asking her husband for ‘money’ which she claims will keep her ‘going for a long time’ suggesting that she can’t live without money. She seems to forget the fact that she is completely reliant on her husband and his finances. Nora initially seems like a playful, naïve child who lacks knowledge of the world outside her ‘perfect’ home. Nora seems to be referred to as ‘little’ by her husband continuously, which makes the reader almost automatically assume that she is treated like a child, she is taking on the role of a spoilt daughter rather than a wife. Helmer also continuously refers to Nora as a bird ‘Is that my little lark twittering out there?’.
She loses the necklace. Her husband and her try to find it but they can’t. So they buy a brand new diamond necklace for Madame Forestier. Madame Loisel and Madame Forestier run into each other ten years later. “What I gave you was another one just like it.
The grip or power money has on the main protagonists of the short stories is important to the overall development and growth of those characters. In one instance money seems to be plentiful and in another it’s gone, for many characters in “The Rocking Horse Winner” this holds true were money has actually lost its value. By constantly spending money on luxurious things such as maids, fur coats and fancy parties, characters like the mother usually find them in a position without sufficient funds. In turn the mother always seems depressed or angry of the lack there of money were in reality she actually has a more than modest amount of wealth. “Were the poor members of the family… it’s because your father has no luck… it’s what causes you to have money.
Hedda Gabler Study Guide Questions Act I 1. In the opening pages, Mr. Tesman (George) seems to be a very bright intellectual. He strives to become a professor (specifically studies history) and was raised by his loving aunt. The action of George allowing his aunt to mortgage her annuity to provide security on the expensive new house does not lead me to believe that he is “selfish”, but more appreciative of his aunt’s sacrifices ("Oh, Auntie, will you never be tired of making sacrifices for me!"). It also leads me to believe that he is not the best well off (money wise).
Edna Pontellier, often reflects on her role of mother-of-two who is married to a well-off and often traveling brokerage-business husband Leonce Pontellier. The community views Leonce as the ideal husband, for Leonce he adores and provides for wife and children, he is quite consistently concerned about the welfare and happiness of his household. Yet Edna does not look at Leonce as her choice of husband, she says their marriage was accidental, that as she was growing up there are particular men that came around her that she would have wished to take her hand. Leonce is disciplined, insistent and low-toned, often dissatisfied about Edna's attention to the children and other household issues, more so because he is often away on business and Edna