The Good Life in Epic Narratives
Classic literature juxtaposes two ways of life that illustrate the poles of true happiness: a life of adventure, exemplified by Odysseus (The Odyssey), and the life at home, which poets and farmers represent. In The Iliad, Achilleus chooses to live a short, glorious life, even though he could have chosen to live a long life in anonymity. Arguments have been put forth that the life of adventure is a living hell, as Achilleus testifies from Hades after his death - in hindsight, he would have settled for the life of a slave and given up his glory, if only he could have lived longer. Alternately, the life of the (metaphorical) farmer has been despised as simple and ordinary, when true immortality is only attained with great accomplishments, such as sacking Troy or surviving heroic adventures which are then recorded. In a modern day autobiography of the 1996 ascent of Mt. Everest (Sagarmatha to the Nepalis, or “goddess of the sky”), Jon Krakauer reveals the human motivation behind adventure and tells the story of the men and women who lived and died on the expeditions to the summit during that spring (Into Thin Air). With epic literature and a recent epic, I will illuminate the values of a reflective life as well as the life of adventure, and delve into the necessary components of the ‘good life.’
The Choice of Achilleus
I carry two sorts of destiny toward the day of my death. Either,
if I stay here and fight beside the city of the Trojans,
my return home is gone, but my glory shall be everlasting;
but if I return home to the beloved land of my fathers,
the excellence of my glory is gone, but there will be a long life
left for me, and my end in death will not come to me quickly.
-Achilleus (Iliad, IX.411)
The decision of Achilleus is a crucial moment in understanding how fate works in epic (Homerian) literature. Thetis tells Achilleus of his opportunity to win renown as the greatest warrior of all time, earning glory through his fearless acts in battle against a foe who is sure to overcome the Achaians. The fate of ten years of attack on Troy hinge upon the decision of Achilleus, who is given the choice to win glory for the Achaians and, more importantly, himself.
In the short story “The Most Dangerous Game”, there are two main characters, Sanger Rainsford and General Zaroff. The story starts off with Rainsford and Rainsford’s hunting partner, Whitney, on a yacht heading to Rio de Janiero to hunt big game animals. Rainsford ends up becoming trapped on Ship-Trap Island, and that is where he and the reader are introduced to General Zaroff. Unfortunately for Rainsford, General Zaroff is not your normal General. General Zaroff and Rainsford are similar and different in many ways, and even though Rainsford believes that Zaroff is a sick individual, at the end of the story he becomes more like Zaroff than he realizes.
In this story there was two main characters Rainsford and General Zaroff. General Zaroff was a very untrustworthy authority figure from Russia who escaped the Russian Revolution. “It is a very great pleasure and honor to welcome Mr. Sanger Rainsford, the celebrated hunter, to my house.” In the beginning he was very welcoming to Rainsford and shared dinner and clothes with him. Rainsford started to believe he was safe and was going to be able to head home soon. Then they
Agamemnon survived the ten year long Trojan War, even as other great warriors such as Achilleus fell. Tales of the war are widespread and it is described by both its veterans and non-participants in glorified terms. Agamemnon is often singled out for leadership and accomplishments. Demodokos sings of the “famous actions/ of men on that venture” and “that lord of men, Agamemnon” while performing for Odysseus on Alkinoos.(VIII, 73-74, 77). Agamemnon stands out as one of “the leaders of the bronze- armored Achaians” who fought at Troy and is recognized as a major hero of the war (IV,496).
...he general, “If you are within sound of my voice, as I suppose you are, let me congratulate you. Not many men know how to make a Malay man-catcher. You are proving interesting, Mr. Rainsford.” Throughout the book General Zaroff makes no attempt to demonstrate humility, selflessness or even kindness towards others unless it benefits himself.
For centuries, authors have been writing stories about man's journey of self-discovery. Spanning almost three-thousand years, the Epic of Gilgamesh, Homer's Odyssey, and Dante's Inferno are three stories where a journey of self-discovery is central to the plot. The main characters, Gilgamesh, Telemachus, and Dante, respectively, find themselves making a journey that ultimately changes them for the better. The journeys may not be exactly the same, but they do share a common chain of events. Character deficiencies and external events force these three characters to embark on a journey that may be physical, metaphorical, or both. As their journeys progress, each man is forced to overcome certain obstacles and hardships. At the end of the journey, each man has been changed, both mentally and spiritually. These timeless tales relate a message that readers throughout the ages can understand and relate to.
He believes, “Life is for the strong, to be lived by the strong, and, if needs be, taken by the strong. The weak of the world were put here to give the strong pleasure,” (9). Zaroff grew bored of hunting animals, so he now hunts humans. He explains, “It had become too easy. I always got my quarry. There is no greater bore than perfection. No animal had a chance with me anymore,” (7). Zaroff decides humans are the ideal game to hunt because they are able to reason and are more of a challenge. At first Rainsford does not think Zaroff is serious. When Rainsford realizes Zaroff is serious, he disagrees with Zaroff’s style of hunting and calls him a murderer. “Hunting? Great Guns, General Zaroff, what you speak of is murder,” (8). It is obvious Zaroff has no morals regarding murder. He explains why he hunts people, “it gives me pleasure,” and he feels they are “more dangerous,” (9) than any game he’s hunted before. Rainsford is disgusted when he finds out Zaroff wants him to hunt humans with him, instead of fascinated as Zaroff hoped. In Zaroff’s eyes, Rainsford is weak, so instead of hunting with Zaroff, Rainsford is hunted by
General Zaroff has his own ways on his island, and to him they’re seen as “civilized” (26). For example, he hunts people for sport and says that there are the hunter and the huntees of the world (25). His sport gives him ecstasy, giving him the urge to keep playing. His addiction, makes him feel imperious as if he is the best hunter created. In addition, when Ivan is killed by Rainsford’s native trick, the General didn’t mind (34). He is apathetic for
Whereas Zaroff’s character is static and too arrogant to change. Initially Rainsford states that, “Who cares how a jaguar feels,” (1) This shows that Rainsford does not show empathy towards his prey. Rainsford also declares, “Bah! They’ve no understanding,” (1)
Zaroff is also astute, or smart. He has killed many men without being caught. Meaning he is hard to track. He kills the men by playing his “game”. The
General Zaroff is an intricate character because he shows two sides of himself. When he first meets Rainsford he comes across as a polite, educated, hospitable man, but when they are hunting he is a cunning cold blooded killer.
G. Zaroff is a cruel person because instead of hunting animals, he hunts humans and does not care for the value of life. He displays this quality when he tells Rainsford “I refuse to believe that so modern and civilized a young man as you seem to be harbors romantic ideas about value of human life. In this quote he shows his cruelness because he doesn’t care about humans but himself. He also doesn’t care for the value of human life.
If animals were humans, then General Zaroff would almost be as bad as Adolf Hitler. General Zaroff, a character in Richard Connell’s “The Most Dangerous Game,” should be considered a negative character because of the way the author portrays him though indirect characterization, such as what he does, what he says, how other characters react to him, and what he looks like. Although there is plenty of indirect characterization, there is little to none direct characterization.
The Great Man and General Zaroff have many common traits. It has helped both handle their prey with great cleverness, yet the protagonists, Rainsford and Tasso have showed cleverness of a greater level. The similarities between the two antagonists of the two stories have similar traits that make them interesting characters and ultimately a
Corey, G. (2011). Theory and practice of counseling and psychotherapy. (ninth ed., pp. 291-301). Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole.
Corey, G. (2013). Theory and practice of counseling and psychotherapy (9th Edition). Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole Publishing.