What does this ironic twist at the end tell us about the author's attitude toward status? Use evidence from the story to support your answer.

I have looked this question up. It is about the short story "The Diamond Necklace," by Guy de Maupassant.

Answer and Explanation:

The main character, Madame Loisel, is a woman who dreams of being rich. She resents her social status, especially the lack of money to buy the fancy things she has a taste for. One day, as she and her husband are invited to a ball, Madame Loisel borrows a necklace from a friend whose social status is superior to her own. She loses the necklace and, to replace it, spends ten years of her life working herself old and "ugly" (to her standards).

At the end, the ironic twist lies in the fact the the necklace she lost was a fake one. There is a lot to be interpreted here, especially the fact that Madame Loisel never even thought to ask if the necklace she was borrowing was made of real diamonds or not. She just assumed it was because that is how she views rich people. She thinks of them as having money to spare, so they would have no reason to buy a fake necklace.

The ending also reveals Maupassant's own attitude toward status. Unlike his character, he is not fooled by a person's appearance of wealth. It is all appearance after all, a façade. There is no reason to marvel at the life of a wealthy person. They are not happier or better than anyone else.

bc

explanation:

because it crosses through the circle twice

what are the following?