Compare and Contrast Essay: Lamb to the Slaughter, The story of an Hour, and The Necklace

Would one be able to guess the unaldertered flaws within Mary Maloney, Mathilde, and Mrs.Mallard? The subversion within the three stories of Lamb to the Slaughter, The story of an Hour, and The Necklace is a refreshing descriptive. Each protagonists had flaws that were some reasonable and completely unreasonable, shaping them to be the villains of their stories. One would examine each story and see three similar flaws within them, selfishness, deception, and dependence. While some of these characteristics were controlled by the protagonist, some were formed by the circumstance of which they were in. They all had completely different goals yet similar ways of achieving them. Between Lamb to the Slaughter, The Story of an Hour, and The Necklace, all three protagonists have displayed similar characteristics of selfishness, deception, and dependence throughout each story.

Selfishness is a trope evident within all three protagonist, whether they are aware of it or not. In Lamb to the Slaughter, Mary Maloney was acting for her own benefits - rarely thinking of others. While this doesn't seem true all that true in the beginning, as she was eager to help her husband in anyway after work, that seemed to all drop as he confessed their divorce. Now she had only her in mind, going so far as to commit murder to the one who wronged her. She hadn't even seemed guilty at the end or griven-strike. No - only satisfied with the success with her plan. “And in the other room, Mary Maloney began to giggle.” (Dahl, 8). Mathilde seems to be the most obvious example of selfishness as one reads through The Necklace.  She hadn't thought for anyone but herself - not even her husband who provided solutions to majority of her self-acclaimed problems. She was acting for her benefit and hers solely. Even after paying the price - literally and figuratively, for the necklace she lost that dropped her and her husband into ten years of poverty and debt. “How would things have turned out if she hadn’t lost that necklace? Who could tell? How strange and fickle life is!” (Maupassant, 107). She hadn't seemed the slightest bit of regret or guilt for any of her actions except for the loss of the necklace. With difference - Mrs. Mallard was selfish, but not with any ill intent. She felt relief and freedom after her husband’s death, not worrying at all for his last moments or his family. However, looking at context clues it could be believed that the marriage went sour towards the ends, with lack of any privacy of independence. 

“There would be no powerful will bending hers in that blind persistence with which men and women believe they have a right to impose a private will upon a fellow-creature. A kind intention or a cruel intention made the act seem no less a crime as she looked upon it in that brief moment of Illumination.” (Chopin, 11). 

Mary Maloney, Mrs. Mallard, and Mathilde all show varying degrees of deception either to express themselves, or achieve their goal. Maloney achieved the greatest deception as she was covering up her late husband’s muder that she was responsible for. Right after the killing, she immediately began thinking of how to trick the police officers “It was extraordinary, now, how clear her mind became all of a sudden. She began thinking very fast” (Dahl, 4).  Mathilde did use deception and manipulation in order to achieve what was wanted, however to a much smaller extent. She mainly used it on her gullible husband to exaggerate problems so he would be more inclined to solve them. “But, with great effort, she had overcome her misery; and now she answered him calmly, wiping her tear-damp cheeks.”(Maupassant, 20). In this event, she had suddenly cried and stopped within seconds as if an act to make her husband overflown with emotions to help her.  In contrast, Mrs.  Mallard had not used deception to achieve her goal but rather to camouflage her feelings on the main event of the story. After her husband had died, it was stated she had felt a wave of grief that once went gone, unexpectedly felt relieved. Everyone around her had thought the opposite, and were incredibly worried for her wellbeing. The disparity is immensely evident 

‘ “Louise, open the door! I beg; open the door--you will make yourself ill. What are you doing, Louise? For heaven's sake open the door."

"Go away. I am not making myself ill." No; she was drinking in a very elixir of life through that open window.” (Chopin, 12). 

Aware or oblivious, each protagonist displayed a level of dependence towards their husband, or craved it within themselves. Maloney haven't craved independence, no - she had reacted incredibly negative when presented it from her husband. However, she demonstrated a level of independence that is contrasted by the utter dependence she craved to have with her husband in the beginning of Lamb to the Slaughter.  She knew his exact routine and was desperate to have any sort of time with him. Even after murdering her husband, she admitted she’d rather die than be without him, only to live for her child.

 “As the wife of a detective, she knew quite well what the penalty would be. That was fine. It made no difference to her. In fact, it would be a relief. On the other hand, what about the child?” (Dahl, 4) 

In The Necklace, Mathilde’s husband had been at her every beck and call, as stated before to provide the solution to majority of her problems. Without him, she wouldn’t have even had the opportunity to attend the gala, the main premise of the story. He had provided her the money for her dress, reminded her to ask her friend for the necklace, and had obtained the money for the replacement necklace, signing to multiple debts. In the beginning of the story, she had dreamed of extreme wealth, butlers, and great rooms with silk. However, would not be able to choose her fate, as it was required for to be married and depend on a husband for wealth, whether he be rich or poor.

“She had no dowry, no hopes, not the slightest chance of being appreciated, understood, loved, and married by a rich and distinguished man; so she slipped into marriage with a minor civil servant at the Ministry of Education.” (Maupassant, 1)

As stated, these stories are based in times where regardless of status, the wife had to depend on a husband for wealth. This put a required dependency on all of the protagonists of the stores, wanted or not. Mrs. Mallard hadn’t wanted it any sort of dependency after her husband’s death. She actively craved independency - to be without any partner in life. This is an extreme disparity compared to the other two protagonists, whom had been completely fine and happy with the dependency they showed.  She dreamed of a life for herself, without any rules imposed by a husband. “ There would be no one to live for during those coming years; she would live for herself.” (Chopin, 11)

When one looks at each story, it would be evident three common flaws. While the protagonist was in control of some of these characteristics, others were shaped by the circumstances in which they found themselves. They all had very different aims, yet they all went about accomplishing them in the same way. The protagonists in Lamb to the Slaughter, The Story of an Hour, and The Necklace have shown similar traits of selfishness, deception, and dependence.