In Richard Connell’s short story, “The Most Dangerous Game,” motivations and justifications for hunting are revealed through the conflicting ideas of two hunters who disagree on what constitutes civilized hunting. In this short story, the protagonist is a hunter named Sanger Rainsford who states early in the story that animals have “no understanding” of emotion, including fear (Connell, pg 1). This may be how Rainsford justifies hunting, as he believes that his prey has neither a sense of fear nor the capability to understand that they are being hunted. In this way, Rainsford does not see what he is doing as cruel, as he believes that animals, unlike humans, do not understand emotion, and therefore their lives do not have value. Believing that …show more content…
For Rainsford, the “huntee” class is limited to animals, however Zaroff’s prey extends into the human population. Zaroff believes that God creates people with certain traits, for example, he has been created “a hunter” (Connell pg 18). This thinking can be extended to explain the belief that some humans are “created” as prey, which may be how Zaroff justifies his choice of quarry. Zaroff also states that “the weak of the world were put here to give the strong pleasure,” which serves as further proof that Zaroff disagrees with Rainsford’s belief of every human life inherently having value (Connell pg 24). While Rainsford and Zaroff both enjoy conquering their prey and have somewhat similar justifications for their actions, they have vastly different motivations. Rainsford hunts for sport and thrill, and justifies his actions through the belief that animals are not capable of emotion and are simply in a class of “huntees.” Zaroff hunts for danger and a way to test his wit, and justifies his actions through the belief that he was created a hunter, and he should therefore be allowed and encouraged to use his talent against those who he finds to be
“You’re a big-game hunter, not a philosopher. Who cares how a jaguar feels?”. The story “The Most dangerous Game,” by Richard Connell introduces an adventurous type of thriller with two main characters named Sanger Rainsford and General Zaroff. Both of which are hunters who in the story play a “game” invented by General Zaroff out of pure fear of becoming bored of the hunt. General Zaroff is a big fan of the hunt and everything he says about the hunt is to be taken serious. Rainsford and General Zaroff are described to be excellent hunters through the traps Rainsford makes, all the big game Zaroff has hunted, but Zaroff is better at hunting through the fact that the hunt has began to bore and he needs more of a challenge hunting humans.
In both film and story, Rainsford expresses his lack of sympathy for his prey. Similar to the story, Rainsford meets Ivan first and can’t get through to him and then, he’s greeted by Zaroff. In the film, Zaroff knows that Rainsford is a famous hunter and has read his books, just like in the story. Moreover, Zaroff reveals that a cape buffalo gave him the scar on his head. In the same manner, Zaroff tells Rainsford how he stocks his island with human prey. Just as the film showed Zaroff has a room filled with human heads, and that’s also mentioned in the story. Furthermore, Rainsford uses the same traps (Malay Mancatcher, Burmese Tiger Pit, and a native Uganda Trick) in the film as he did in the story. In addition, Rainsford kills Ivan with the same native Uganda trick. Both film and movie, unveils that Rainsford kills
Rainsford is known for his extravagant hunting skills, even General Zaroff speaks of Rainsford as is if he has inspired him to become a hunter. Rainsford talks about hunting with passion, while he is speaking to Whitney he tells her it’s “the best sport in the world” (19). Rainsford has no guilt when he kills animals, he even tells Whitney that it’s nonsense when she mention the jaguars have feeling. But Rainsford shows immediate disgust when Zaroff brings up his hunting of humans, “hunting, great heavens, what you speak of is murder” (26). This only the first of many times that he reacts with great displeasure.
For many people, hunting is just a sport, but for some it is a way of life. In Rick Bass’s “Why I Hunt” he explains how he got to where he lives now and what he thinks of the sport of hunting. There are many things in the essay that I could not agree more with, and others that I strongly disagree. Overall this essay provides a clear depiction of what goes through the mind of a hunter in the battle of wits between them and the animal.
A skilled hunter sprints desperately through the woods, realizing the futility of hiding from his greatest foe: his own kind. Richard Connell’s “The Most Dangerous Game” is the story of a hunter that becomes the hunted. The story explores the sense of extreme terror the protagonist feels being pursued by a psychopath living on a mysterious island. This protagonist, Rainsford, has many traits that aid him in his battle with the general. By demonstrating his cunning, sly, and remorseful traits, Rainsford shows the story’s theme of “walking a mile in someone else’s shoes”.
As a member and supporter of the earth’s weak little peacekeepers (small humans with loud voices), I can say that despite Rick Bass’s honorable honesty, I found “Why I Hunt: A Predator’s Mediation” to be a threat to womankind. Not all women are vulnerable, but with weapons the hunter can make most anyone his prey. There are predators in the United States who hunt women the way Bass hunts elk. If Bass’s non-human targets are replaced with women and children, the essay has quite a different effect on the reader, though the arguments don’t change. When Bass describes his love of “sitting in some leaves, completely hidden and motionless—waiting, and waiting” (63), I picture him waiting in a park for an unattended child or an unaccompanied woman. My concerns about Bass’s instincts aren’t neurotic. I’m a loving woman who occasionally hugs trees and wants to feel safe in the world—not a card carrying member of PITA.
Hunting big game animals for sport was a popular pastime with the wealthy classes following World War I. The morality of killing for sport was not questioned in reality, but in this short story the author does question it by taking it a step further and having the protagonist, Sangor Rainsford, hunted by the antagonist, General Zaroff.In a short story full of irony, one of the greatest ironies of Richard Connell’s “The Most Dangerous Game” is that General Zaroff repeatedly tells Rainsford that he maintains a sense of civilization on his island.
In his article The Modern Hunter-Gatherer, Michael Pollan recounts the events that took place during his first hunting trip. Both during and after the hunt, Pollan struggles with an array of emotions that he conveys directly with his audience. From this struggle, a moral complication is formed regarding the direct relationship of death between humans and animals. By not giving a direct answer regarding the question he introduces of whether animals and humans experience death in the same way, Pollan leaves his text open to interpretation which ultimately forces his audience to view hunting through a more challenging, introspective lens.
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.
Some people you meet can have a major impact on your life and change it for better or for worse. Rainsfords (a man who likes to hunt dangerous animals) life was greatly changed in both a good way and a bad way by a man who lives on a tiny island in a big house named General Zaroff. Rainsford ended up on this island after he fell of a yacht he was on to go hunt an animal somewhere else but ended up swimming his way up to the shore of an island. But after about a day of being on the island Rainsford was being hunted down. While Rainsford was trying his hardest to survive on the island he was on he found a way to escape to the mainland where General Zaroff was to try and get a way off the island back to civilization. The points in this story will be somehow related to my thesis statement in ¨The Most Dangerous Game” by Richard Connell, Zaroff teaches Rainsford how it feels to be like the hunted and not the hunter.
"To improve is to change; to be perfect is to change often" (http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/topics/topic_change.html), this quote by Winston Churchill is something I can connect with as I often feel the need to improve myself which can only be done with change. It also relates to the protagonist, Sanger Rainsford, of the short story, "The Most Dangerous Game," by Richard Connell. Sanger Rainsford changes his views on some matters after being trapped on an island with a madman with no method of escape. He undergoes a major change in his character due to an awful experience in isolation with the psychopath, General
General Zaroff used hunting tactics when they were eating “the last supper” at Zaroff’s house. Every time Rainsford looked up, he said, “he found him studying him, appraising him narrowly” (Connell 66). By this, the reader can tell that Zaroff is trying to notice Rainsford’s tendencies. Knowing these can make hunting him easier. Also at dinner, Zaroff explains to Rainsford that “God made him a hunter” and how his father believed that “his hand was made for the trigger” since he was ten (Connell 85). Zaroff sharing this with Rainsford is proof that this man is a talented hunter and has been for a long time. Rainsford is quite the hunter himself. So much so, that Zaroff knew who he was when he arrived. The General stated, “It is a very great pleasure and honor to welcome Mr. Sanger Rainsford, the celebrated hunter, to my home” (Connell 52). Also during the hunt when Rainsford set up the Burmese tiger pit and claiming one of Zaroff’s dogs, Zaroff tells him, “You’ve done well, Rainsford” (Connell 194). If his enemy believes that he is a great hunter, then he must be. Especially because Zaroff thinks so highly of himself. Going back to when Rainsford was
“One of us is to furnish a repast for the hounds. The other will sleep in this very excellent bed. On guard Rainsford.”
In the story Zaroff says many horrible things about the creatures he hunts, showing he has no mercy. In the story Zaroff states that, “Why should I not use my gift? If I wish to hunt, why should I not? I hunt the scum of the earth—sailors from tramp ships—lascars, blacks, Chinese, whites, mongrels—a thoroughbred horse or hound is worth more than a score of them.” by saying this, Zaroff is implying that he will continue to hunt humans until he is stopped. Rainsford knew that this would happen so he had to stop him. Rainsford was just protecting the different people that Zaroff would kill if he weren’t stopped.
In the novel, Ender’s Game by Orson Scott Card, the children all have the ability to think in abstract ways. The government in this book takes advantage of the children’s ability to think in these ways. The adults need the children to be in charge of society because they act on instinct. First, Card shows that because the children act on instinct it allows them to be able to kill others without being aware of that fact. Second, Card shows that the children acting on instinct allows the government to somewhat still be in control. Finally, he shows that their society is blinded by the major control that the government has over the families, mainly the children. First, I will be talking about how Card shows that because the children act