Lexical and descriptive contrasts in Maupassant's fantastic short stories

Generally labeled as fantastic in nature, Maupassant’s short stories pose a serious problem. The very term “fantastic” is itself ambiguous; there have been many attempts to define what makes a work of literature “fantastic” in nature, but none of these attempts have managed to capture the essence of the genre in its entirely. What is most striking in Maupassant’s narratives is precisely his rejection of the fantastic almost as soon as it occurs. His texts contain as many attempts at rational explanation of the irrational as they do strange events which lie outside of reason’s domain. In order to create the “fantastic”, Maupassant uses different strategies. He introduces different types of contrast (both in lexical and descriptive level). He produces explanations for strange events. In order to achieve this, he uses different metaphors. However the presence of contradictory elements does not affect the coherence of the story, and therefore, the reality of the short story will remain untouched.