Essay Comparing The Most Dangerous Game And The Cask Of Amontillado

People are killed every day, so why do two more people make a difference? “The Cask of Amontillado,” and “The Most Dangerous Game” both focus on characters who have been wronged, and want revenge. I do believe Fortunato, and General Zaroff deserved to die. In the stories, “The Cask of Amontillado,” and “The Most Dangerous Game” the characters Montresor, and Rainsford are justified in taking another human’s life for revenge. The first two pieces of evidence I would like to point out are both important points to consider. In “The Cask of Amontillado,” we are to believe that Fortunato has wronged Montresor many times; this is shown when Poe writes “The thousand injuries of Fortunato I had borne as best as I could” (238). I think it is only

In “The Most Dangerous Game” General Zaroff thinks that his only purpose in life is to hunt. General Zaroff believes “[he, God] made a hunter” (23). The thing General Zaroff believes to be his purpose in life is killing. Killing game is the only thing that has ever interested General Zaroff, and Rainsford was killing a man, who he realized was only fueled by hatred, and death. I would consider what Rainsford did a noble act, because even today, people like Osama bin Laden are killed, because of that same hatred that General Zaroff has had for so long. Fortunato, in “The Cask of Amontillado,” “prided himself on his connoisseurship in wine” (238). Montresor explains that this pride is his weakness, and many would agree that pride is the root of all evil. People often say that pride is the worst sin of them all, as supported by the quote “Only by pride cometh contention,” (Prov. 28:25) which I think means that only by pride will we create a means of separating ourselves from others, and creating a divide with such animosity that those at the top will never come back down. Montresor was taking someone with that amplitude of viciousness from this world, which I would say, at the least, is doing humanity a