The Most Dangerous Game Literary Analysis Essay
The Literary Value of “The Most Dangerous Game” “The Most Dangerous Game” by Richard Connell is an intriguing work of fiction that effortlessly combines both aspects of literary and commercial fiction. Connell was able to write a piece that successfully combines fast-paced action as well as upholding literary merit. Not only did Connell write this story with an exciting and adventurous component, he also managed to convey a deeper meaning within the story by allowing his readers to be pulled into the excitement of the story, while also giving them an insight to a darker, more primitive side of human beings. He creatively depicts a unique setting in which the main character has nothing to fear but mankind itself. Connell not only generates
…show more content…
Connell makes the reader question the ethics of the characters driving the plot. For example, in the beginning of the story Rainsford can be seen having a very Darwinistic attitude towards hunting animals while General Zaroff has the same approach towards hunting humans. However, General Zaroff has lost sight of the value of human life entirely. He is blinded by the fact that he no longer is able to find game worthy enough for him to hunt anymore and is baffled by the fact that Rainsford refuses to agree with him. “The weak of the world were put here to give the strong pleasure. I am strong.”(Connell 18). This adds more conflict to the storyline while simultaneously placing Rainsford in a position where the hunter becomes the hunted. “I refuse to believe that so modern and civilized a young man as you seem to be harbors romantic ideas about the value of human life.” (Connell 17). At this point Rainsford is now really placed within an animal 's shoes and it is safe to say that these events have caused a drastic change to his mindset. This clash in ethics can be heavily associated with concepts of literary
Connell makes the reader question the ethics of the characters driving the plot. For example, in the beginning of the story Rainsford can be seen having a very Darwinistic attitude towards hunting animals while General Zaroff has the same approach towards hunting humans. However, General Zaroff has lost sight of the value of human life entirely. He is blinded by the fact that he no longer is able to find game worthy enough for him to hunt anymore and is baffled by the fact that Rainsford refuses to agree with him. “The weak of the world were put here to give the strong pleasure. I am strong.”(Connell 18). This adds more conflict to the storyline while simultaneously placing Rainsford in a position where the hunter becomes the hunted. “I refuse to believe that so modern and civilized a young man as you seem to be harbors romantic ideas about the value of human life.” (Connell 17). At this point Rainsford is now really placed within an animal 's shoes and it is safe to say that these events have caused a drastic change to his mindset. This clash in ethics can be heavily associated with concepts of literary