Issues of “class” are central to Marxist literary theory. In the paragraphs to follow, I will demonstrate that by applying the lenses of, first Marxism, and then feminism, to my reading of “The Necklace,” this text has been transformed from a short story with seemingly simple themes into a deep study of society, oppression and power, past and present. I always enjoy a refreshing reality check and examining this story in depth, by applying two different lenses of literary theory, has been gratifying and eye opening to say the least. Though I am happy most of the time, I am not a complete stranger to the deflated sense of dissatisfaction with my income bracket that the character of Mathilde is steeped in as the story opens (XX The Necklace). My interest in “The Necklace” by Guy de Maupassant comes from my own experience as a woman who is sometimes envious of people who are in “higher” social classes. What first appears a superficial text can become an instructional look at classism or patriarchy, simply by employing the use of theories.

Using literary theory, we can take any piece of literature and examine it from different angles, finding different significance with each theory lens. As Brewton writes of the sea change that literary theory would become, “What literature was, and why we read literature, and what we read, were questions that subsequent movements in literary theory were to raise” (Web). Literary theory questions texts rather than just accepting them at face value. Where traditional criticism recognized a common canon of literature as worthy of study, and a traditional set of criteria for exploring texts, literary theory came along to blow the doors open. Each theory features ideas and assumptions about reality, and can be used, like lenses, to make new discoveries about the meaning of literature and art. Literary theory is a broad term that contains within itself a variety of literary theories.

The necklace by guy de maupassant