How Is Irony Used In The Most Dangerous Game

964 Words2 Pages

Did you know even though nature can be beautiful it can sometimes be deadly.In The Most Dangerous Game, Rainsford begins to see the awe-instilling power of nature and how it can hurt us. The Most Dangerous Game Written by Richard Connell is a story about the dangers of nature and the ethical question of if we should kill animals. Connell uses irony to instill a question in the mind of the reader”Is killing animals moral?” In “The Most Dangerous Game,”Richard Connell uses a flip between man and animal to convey irony in the story while also using the dangerous environment of the Island to show suspense. One way Richard Connell uses suspense to convey the power of nature and to prove the struggle between man and nature is by …show more content…

When Rainsford is playing The Most Dangerous Game with the general he realizes something major. Connell writes,”I have played the fox, now I must play the cat of the fable”(Connell 32). Connell illustrates the irony of this phrase because he has always “played the fox” (the hunter), but now that he is playing the most dangerous game with the general the tides have turned. Redford now must “play the cat of the fable”(the hunted). This Redford an insight into the animal 's perspective and it helps him to realize the hardships animals have to face when they are being hunted by a human. Through Connells use of irony the reader can learn that we to are animals we to can be hunted the only thing that separates us from animals is our intelligence ,but that does not give us the right to kill them unnecessarily ,but if it comes to the matter of life and death it is ok to kill. We need to kill for food ,but not when we are hunting for game. Irony is displayed in the story by the topic of what to hunt. Rainsford is talking with the general about the best game to hunt and is astonished by what he is hunting …show more content…

We can see that Rainsford was intrigued with the general until the point when he realized that the general was hunting humans.”But no animal can reason” here Rainsford still does know but then when he says this “but you can 't mean” he then starts to piece it together and begins to realize that he was wrong. He was killing animals recklessly but when it came to humans he stopped

Open Document