Comparing Character in Child by Tiger and Most Dangerous Game

632 Words 3 Pages
Difference in Character in Child by Tiger and Most Dangerous Game

In Thomas Wolfe's "The Child by Tiger," the character Dick Prosser is clearly more credible than General Zaroff in Richard Connell's "The Most Dangerous Game." This plausibility is due to each character's lifestyle, murder motives, and personal morals. The difference in the characters is very dramatic.

Foremost, how and where one lives tell much about a person. General Zaroff appears to be living in an almost make-believe world. He has bought an island and made his home there. When Rainsford, another character in the short story, reaches the island, he begins looking for lights. Connell describes, "He came upon them as he turned a crook in the coast line, and his
…show more content…
In addition, the murders that take place in the stories play a big part in the plausibility of the characters. The motives behind the killings are very different for each character. General Zaroff seems barbaric in his reasoning. He chooses to shoot humans for fun and enjoyment. General Zaroff explains:

"I suggest to [one of the men to be hunted] that we go hunting. I give him three hours' start. I am to follow, armed only with a pistol of the smallest caliber and range. If my quarry eludes me for three whole days, he wins the game. If I find him"-the general smiled-"he loses." (Connell 16)

When Dick Prosser performs his murders, it is almost as if he does not know what he is doing. Dick is a gentle man, but racism seems to have gotten the best of him. He has taken all he can take. A drunk man and Dick are involved in an accident. The man has side-swiped Dick. However, the drunk man begins hitting Dick. Blood trickles down his face. Wolfe informs the reader: "But suddenly the whites of his eyes were shot with red, his bleeding lips bared for a moment over the white ivory of his teeth" (27). Prosser, unlike Zaroff, values the living; he is simply fed up with the human race.

Furthermore, the morals of each character justify the more plausible character. In the end, General Zaroff is still inhumane. He never really grasps the wrong in his sport of hunting. It is still just