Personal Review: Rainford Vs Zaroff

General Zaroff is similar to Rainsford because they are both intelligent, and Zaroff shows this in the story because of his up-bringing and past experiences. This is seen in the story when it says “I, luckily, have invested in American Securities, so I shall never have to open a Tea room in Monte Carlo, or drive a taxi in Paris.” (Connel 48) This proves Zaroff is intelligent because he foresaw the downfall of the Russian economy, and heavily invested in said American Securities. However, Zaroff is different than Rainsford because he is powerful, which he shows when he explains his quarry to Rainsford. An example of this is seen in the story, which states “To date, I have not lost” … “The most elementary sort of problem” (Connel 50.)This proves Zaroff is powerful, because he fears nothing during the hunt. If anything, he thinks it gets quite boring. Zaroff is also different since he can be described as serious, because of his history with the hunt. In the text, this shown when it says “Hunting was beginning to get boring! And hunting, remember had been my life. I have heard that in America, business men often go to pieces…” (Connel ?) This proves Zaroff is about the hunt because it has sparked a new, welcoming,

To begin, Zaroff and Rainsford can be compared by their most common interest, hunting. Rainford expresses his genuine enjoyment for hunting early on as he states proudly to Whitney, “The best sport in the world.” (Connell 1) When speaking to General Zaroff for the first time, the general seems to already know who he is, justifying it due to his familiarity with Rainsford’s novel on hunting; “It is a very great pleasure and honor to welcome Mr. Sanger Rainsford, the celebrated hunter, to my home.” (Connell 5) This demonstrates Rainsford notoriety for the hunt, as well as Zaroffs infatuation with it. Furthermore, Zaroff appears to be obsessed with the hunt as he displays countless mounted heads/hunting trophies, and dedicates his entire island and life to the hunt. We see this to be further evident based on the similar skill levels displayed by both characters in the hunt. Both men appear proficient in tracking prey, identifying weaponry, techniques in killing prey, and survivalist methods. Rainsford effectively identifies the technique and weapon used by Zaroff when we awaked on the island to evidence of a hunt; “A twenty-two…The hunter had his nerve with him to tackle it with a light gun.” (Connell 4) Later within the hunt, Rainsford evades Zaroff with crude trails (recalling the lore of the fox hunt), techniques and traps learned from people of his travels, as well as logical level-headed thinking. These efforts are noted as impressive but seemingly ineffective to Zaroff , as he finds Rainsford at every turn; tracking his path in pitch black darkness within the heart of the jungle, a feat doubted by Rainsford. Finally, their common experience of war, a key factor in revealing Zaroff’s perception of human life, allows us to compare these characters. Zaroff

After the visit and the survival of the 72 hour bet, Rainsford killed Zaroff in his room, but we do not know what happened after that. If Rainsford decided to stay at the

Question: Discuss the characterizations of Rainsford and General Zaroff in “The Most Dangerous Game.” Which one is more fully characterized? Are both characters plausible?

Rainsford wants to show General Zaroff that he is wrong but he knows that the only way to reason with him is by being hunted. Rainsford knows that he must be quick- witted when he is making these decitions. Rainsford knows that he is morally better that General Zarofff but since Rainsford is so humble he lets his actions speak louder than his word. In the end, they did. It might have helped General

After the conversations between Rainsford and the General, Rainsford wants to leave, but can not due to the knowledge of Zaroff’s corrupt game; he ends up playing the amoral game for the preservation of his life, although he could lose it.

Rainsford turns out smarter because he lives. Zaroff lost the hunt. Rainsford actually ends up killing him in his own bedroom. Rainsford did not believe in murder but he did believe in protecting

Rainsford and Zaroff are both amazing and resourceful hunters who are both very sharp and quick witted. They’re both strong in their convictions and ethics. They can go out into the forest and mountains alone and be at peace and harmony with nature. They’re both someone who is attentive to their surroundings and use their the ability to use their conceptual being. They both have taken the time to learn to track and shoot well and have intent of the purpose of the hunt rather than viewing it as a « fun » hobby so it’s very difficult and tough for me having to choose which one is or… was (since general Zaroff is dead now !) the better hunter, as they’re both well disciplined and prolonged hunters. But now that I am assigned to pit them against

     Rainsford is certainly a brave character. ‘“Hunting, Good God, General Zaroff, what you speak of is murder” (110). Rainsford is composed until he figures out that Zaroff’s new species is human beings. Rainsford has just met this man, doesn’t know where he is or anything about those people but he still puts his foot down. Rainsford knew it was murder, and so did Zaroff, but it was brave for Rainsford to tell him he would not keep a secret of what Zaroff was doing and Rainsford demanded to be taken home immediately. Rainsford was brave to tell Zaroff, straight forward, that he would not participate in his game. ‘“Ivan,” he said to Rainsford, “will supply you with hunting clothes, food, and a knife”’ (170). Rainsford was now in the game and had to participate. His bravery came out when a three day duel was forced against his will.

Even though clearly distraught Rainsford was able to make key decisions to save his life. “Nerve, nerve, nerve” he panted, as he dashed along …. Then he leaped far into the sea.”(18). This quote tells the reader even while battling nerves and running away from a pack of dogs Rainsford was able to make a imperative choice to save his life. Rainsford survives the three days to beat Zaroff and win the game but still feels uneasy will not rest until General Zaroff is dead. “I am still a beast at bay,” he said, in a low, hoarse voice.” Get ready, General Zaroff.”(18). This quote discloses to the reader that Rainsford felt like quarry and wanted Zaroff dead and was not satisfied with merely winning the game.This quote also shows what kind of man Rainsford is and how he is willing to die for what he feels is right. Rainsford battled many trials throughout the story but somehow managed to make the best out of each one.

Rainsford was justified in killing General Zaroff. For instance General Zaroff said “Your brain against mine, Your woodcraft against mine.” (Connell 6). This shows that General Zaroff gives right to rainsford to try and outsmart him and try to win by surviving. If rainsford outsmarts him then he will get the victory or he can do what Zaroff wanted to do to him which was kill him. Also Rainsford disagreed when Zaroff told him about the hunting game. “No,General,”he said “I will not hunt.” Then Zaroff basically said he had to or ivan will kill him.(Connell 9).This quote means that Rainsford did not like the idea that he had to stay in a jungle and

Rainsford is not a hero due to his egocentric attitude and hypocritical behavior. After Rainsford hears the hounds and sees Ivan and General Zaroff approaching, he then creates a trap to kill General Zaroff. When Rainsford hears the footsteps stop, he looks back at the trap and “[sees] in the shallow valley that General Zaroff was still on his feet. But Ivan was not. The knife, driven by the recoil of the springing tree, had not wholly failed” (Conell 14). This quote proves that Rainsford does not obtain the qualities of an altruistic and civil being. This is due to Rainsford wanting to kill General Zaroff for his own survival. Furthermore, once Rainsford accidentally kills Ivan, he swims away in refuge from General Zaroff.

There are several differences between Rainsford and Zaroff also. Rainsford is an American from New York City while Zaroff is a Cossack hailing from Russia. In the

Yes, General Zaroff “lost” the game because he was not able to kill Rainsford. On page 34, in paragraphs 11 and 12, Zaroff is killed by Rainsford and even though there is no explicit evidence that Rainsford did kill Zaroff, we can most certainly infer. When Rainsford leaps into the seemingly depthless ocean on page 34 in paragraphs three and four, Zaroff has lost the game, because he has not kill Rainsford while Rainsford has neither won the game, unless he survives. It is a difficult question and your answer could be either, but based on the terms and conditions of the game, I can conclude that Zaroff did indeed lose. The book does not specifically say, but we can infer that Zaroff was killed

In my opinion, General Zaroff shows more diligence than Rainsford throughout the story. General Zaroff is one who does not give up, no matter what the situation may be. He mainly does not give up on hunting and this is why he shows more diligence. For example, “Hurled me against a tree,” said the general. “Fractured my skull. But I got the brute.” This direct quote from the general shows how he does not quit hunting for prey until they are dead. Like he had said, he had a fractured skull, but that still did not give him a reason to just give up. Diligence is to show effort into things and that is exactly what General Zaroff did when hunting. He not only showed diligence, but he showed his dedication in hunting.