The Characteristics Of Civilization In 'The Most Dangerous Game'

In Richard Connell’s short story “The Most Dangerous Game”, the protagonist character, Sander Rainsford is an adventurous and fearless big game hunter. Rainsford has no remorse for his prey. Over the course of the story Rainsford experiences a sudden change of heart when he finds himself where “The world is made up of two classes—the hunters and the huntees.”

Rainsford seems more kind than Zaroff and would not kill humans for pleasure. Rainsford thinks that the world is made up of two groups, the hunters and the hunted. He does not care about how the hunted feel until he becomes the hunted. But as he realizes what it feels like to be the hunted his perspective changes. He ends up becoming a better person because of this experience. After being the hunted, he takes more though into agreeing with what Whitney said in the beginning which was that animals may actually have feelings.

Rainsford last trait is un-barbaric through the story, because he doesn't go hunting humans with Zaroff. Zaroff hunts humans for entertainment and a savage towards the men, while Rainsford says “Thank you, I'm a hunter, not a murderer” [Connell 19]. Which shows that he doesn't like blood of humans or will not kill them for sport, since he believes it’s wrong and

Rainford considers himself civilized. Rainford sees the world as two different sides, one side is hunters and the other one is the huntees. “The world is made up of two classes the hunters and the huntees. Lucky you and I are hunters.” (pg 40)

General Zaroff is clearly not under control with his hunting habits. General Zaroff creates for himself, a dangerous hunting game. More dangerous than all the rest, an animal can reason and feel.This animal is a human. The general has gone over the edge. By following his instincts and making his desires reality, general Zaroff now has access to this dangerous game. He hunts and kills them with a pistol, disregards their feelings, and treats them like animals. Some people, such as Rainsford, have decided that obeying the law and sticking to the principles is better than following nature. Rainsford says,“Thank you, I'm a hunter not a murderer.” Rainsford chooses to be civil and lawful. Rainsford quite obviously has more control over his actions than the general. The general gives into his dark side and gives into his guilty desire to hunt animal that has reason, courage, and cunningness. Rainsford chooses not to because he knows wrong from right. But perhaps, when dealing with your human nature you must succumb to your darkest

In Richard Connell’s “The Most Dangerous Game,” Sanger Rainsford is forced to test his survival skills as he is intensely hunted by an experienced war general named General Zaroff. In this story, Rainsford exhibits some very helpful characteristics like resourcefulness, strategic planning, and the ability to reason. Rainsford questioned the validity of General Zaroff’s hunting methods and ended up playing a part in his game. Although I believe Rainsford is a very helpful, interesting, and dynamic character, in the end of the story, he must give up his own personal morals to win the game.

The protagonist in the story, Rainsford is a hypocrite. First of all, in the beginning Rainsford says to his colleague that there are “two people in the world, the hunters, and the huntees, and luckily for us, we are the hunters.” He believes that he has authority over the animals and he may kill them for game as he pleases. However, when he arrives on Ship Trap Island and meets General Zaroff, his perspective changes. General Zaroff reveals that he hunts humans in “the most dangerous game” and Rainsford believes that it’s brutal and savage as he believes that all humans are equal. However, he still feels no guilt killing animals, as he believes that he is superior to them. Secondly, he believes that humans are very different from

Rainsford, from the beginning, reveals his arrogance to the readers. “This hot weather is making you soft, Whitney. Be a realist. The world is made up of two classes - the hunters and the huntees. Luckily, you and I are the hunters.” (Connell 63). The context is that Rainsford is speaking with Whitney and he believes that the animals have a sense of understanding and fear, but Rainsford does not. Rainsford is impudent towards his friend by criticizing his beliefs. He is moreover conceited when he places himself in the higher class of society. The protagonist is being insensitive to Whitney and to the living, fearful animals, commencing the separation from morality, shown throughout this short story. The antagonist, General Zaroff, numerously illustrates his hubristic personality.

People are like onions; they have several layers and consist of a bitter core. In consideration of this reality of human nature and reality of a man-made society, “The Most Dangerous Game”, written by Richard Connell, reveals these dangers. It unveils the truth about blood lusting hunters and defines the meaning of civilization. In the story, just like in the real world, so-called rules and laws are made to suppress and dignify human savageness. Here, Sanger Rainsford and General Zaroff are two essential characters—capable of virtuous actions, yet prone to decisions that reflect immoral tendencies, and so; a message is conveyed: without the practice of morals and consequences, corruption of man is inevitable.

The readers would think that he is civilized when he says, "We try to be civilized here." (226) However, the purpose of Zaroff<Spelling errors> saying this was to try to make readers think that Zaroff<Spelling errors> is civilized. Zaroff<Spelling errors> wanted the readers to believe that he took good care of his guests, but in actuality, he did not. Zaroff<Spelling errors> says, "Life is for the strong, and if need be, taken by the strong. The weak of the world were put here to give the strong pleasure." (225) On the other hand, readers may believe that Sanger<Spelling errors> Rainsford is civilized. This may be argued to the point that Rainsford is a hunter who kills animals in the uncivilized wilderness, but Rainsford states, "Thank you, I am a hunter, not a murderer," (225)The<Spelling errors> quote proves that Rainsford has good morals, and he is polite because he thinks of other people, proving that Rainsford is

When Rainsford and General Zaroff were conversing about Zaroff’s new game to hunt, Rainsford strongly disagreed but still kept his manners. This is proven on page 11 by a response from Rainsford to Zaroff “Thank you, I'm a hunter, not a murderer." Rainsford was also polite toward the end of the story by, not just killing Zaroff in his sleep without giving Zaroff a chance to defend himself. This was settled by a knife duel that ended up with Rainsford winning anyway. Zaroff on the other hand was not polite by calling Ivan his deaf and dumb servant’s race and him a savage. This is proved by this statement on page 6 “Ivan is an incredibly strong fellow,” remarked the general,” but he has the misfortune to be deaf and dumb. A simple fellow, but, I'm afraid, like all his race, a bit of a savage." This statement shows that Zaroff is very

Nevertheless, their morals are oxymorons that take deviating approaches in regards to humanity. With this intention, “Must’ve been a fairly large animal… hunter had the nerve to tackle it with a light gun”(20). In like manner, “Not many men know how to make a Malay man-catcher”(32). Rainsford's knowledge of hunting proves that he had a passion for learning how to hunt, because when you choose to learn more about something you retain information easier. Likewise, “I have but one passion in my life, Mr. Rainsford, and it is the hunt”(22). In the same fashion, “My hand was made for the trigger … I have hunted every kind of game in the land”(24). Zaroff, in the same way, has his own love for the hunt but Zaroff focused more on his natural talents and his results in hunting. Be that as it may, Zaroff and Rainsford also have their differences; “ Hunting? Good god, General Zaroff what you speak of is murder” (25). Rainsford was repulsed by Zaroff’s morals in regards to humanity illustrating Rainsford's compassion and love towards humanity. On the contrary, “The weak of the world were put here to give the strong pleasure… I hunt the scum of the earth”(25). Zaroff Believes that Rainsford’s compassion towards humanity is his weakness. Zaroff’s maverick originates from his moral viewpoints on humanity and that he is performing his civil duty when hunting. Consequently, the exploited differences in Rainsford’s and Zaroff's morals outweigh their mutual love for

Rainsford questions Zaroff when he makes a comment about being civilized. Rainsford says, “Civilized? And you shoot down men?” (Connell). Rainsford points out that killing other humans is uncivilized and against societies nature. If it’s as uncivilized as Rainsford says then humanity does play a part in life, as we decide what may be right or wrong. Humans deciding what is civilized and humane brings us to stay at certain standards. Since there are standards set then do we have to follow them? Morality is something implied to life as people are born into this society according to Rainsford’s beliefs. Rainsford’s beliefs contradicts the beliefs of Zaroff, leaving the decision of who is correct throughout the story. There are now two sides as to whether killing is really inhumane or if in reality it’s the nature of all

Rainsford values human life, because when the general told Rainford that he hunts humans. Rainsford told the General that what he is doing is not hunting, what he spoke of was murder. He also is very caring. He said that he will not make him into a condone cold blooded murderer. Rainsford is also described as a mouse in the hunting game, “He didn't even have to wait long,the cat was coming to play with the mouse.

In the short story, “The Most Dangerous Game”, by Richard Connell, Rainsford is characterized as considerate, skilled, and smart. One example of Rainsford being considerate is when he says “what you speak of is murder. ”(49)This tells us that he knows murder is not right and looks at it as if he were in the victim’s shoes. One example of Rainsford being skilled was when “General Zaroff could not trace him. ”(Page