because it is clerk of education and mme is ministry of education department
In Guy de Maupassant's short story, "The Necklace" (1884), it is Mme. Loisel, the one who borrowed and lost the necklace, who recognizes Mme. Forestier. This meeting sets up the twist ending.
A. She does not have fine jewelry
Madame Forestier said in a faintly waspish tone: You could have brought it back sooner! I might have needed it! Basically she was not happy with how long it took for Mme. Losiel to bring back a necklace.
Mme Loisell, who borrows the thing from her (friend) Mme Forestier- which means Forester. Parks would not be a bad translation. In a sense MMe Forestier is the antagonist, though fatal pride- and maybe alcohol played a role. I think she ( Loisell) was drunk when she lost the necklace at the party.. and waited too long to report it... that would explain why she did not call up MMe Forestier when she first noticed the item ( which she believed to be worth 60 Grand plus) was missing.
Mme. Forestier's reaction when the necklace was returned was one of anger. She was not pleased that it took so long to get back because she may have needed to wear it sooner.
She wants her to see what despair and trouble that necklace had cost her and want her to feel guilty but in the end she get a suprise #Sabrina
MMe Forestier. It is a counterfeit wearing copy. She smugly does not inform social-climbing Mme Loisel ( la-zell it was pronounced when I had this in English) that it is a wearing copy. she loses it at the ball- exactly how is not stated- a phone call could have saved about sixty grand and a nose-dive into debt slavery and relative poverty.
The main woman character is Madame Loisel. The minor woman character is Mme. Forestier.
Efforts to find Mme Forestier's necklace were made by searching the entire city, retracing her steps from the party, interviewing potential witnesses, and offering a reward for any information leading to its discovery. The police and private investigators were also involved in the search.
IT wasn"t it was mysteriously lost at the social gathering or party. The writer is somewhat vague about how the allegedly valuable item was lost. I don"t think it was a mugging or a theft. My guess she ( Mme Loisell) was drunk,and this explains why she did not call up MMe Forestier when she got back from the party. People do get drunk at parties. I think Mme Forestier should have told her beforehand it was a wearing copy- not an original worth some $60,,000 so if it was lost- no sweat... quite the opposite.
well
Mme Loisell, who borrows the thing from her (friend) Mme Forestier- which means Forester. Parks would not be a bad translation. In a sense MMe Forestier is the antagonist, though fatal pride- and maybe alcohol played a role. I think she ( Loisell) was drunk when she lost the necklace at the party.. and waited too long to report it... that would explain why she did not call up MMe Forestier when she first noticed the item ( which she believed to be worth 60 Grand plus) was missing.