In the story "The Most Dangerous Game," the author clearly values liberty more than equality.
In the beginning of the story, the author creates a main character that clearly value liberty more than equality. The character shows that he values liberty more because he's a hunter and he believes that animals don't have feelings such as humans. The main character, Rainsford, also has an argument with Whitney about animals and says "Bah! They've no understanding!". At the end of the story, after Rainsford kills two people, Zaroff and Ivan, the story states "He had never slept in a better bed."This suggest that the author wanted his readers to know that Rainsford didn't feel guilty about killing two people, nor did he immediatly try to save the other sailors trapped on the island. The author didn't give the story equal effort to the end of the story as he did in the beginning of the story. The resolution seemed boring and written in a hurry, which shows that the author probably became lazy. Another reason that it seems like the author didn't give the story equal effort was because the beginning of the story was very desriptive to things that werent really that important and at an important part if the story, like when we didn't know who was going to die, the story wasn't desriptive at all! The author wanted his readers to use thier imagination on determinig the outcome of Rainsford's life. In conclusion, I clearly think that the author values liberty over equality because he created more liberal parts in the story than equal ones.
In the beginning of the story, the author creates a main character that clearly value liberty more than equality. The character shows that he values liberty more because he's a hunter and he believes that animals don't have feelings such as humans. The main character, Rainsford, also has an argument with Whitney about animals and says "Bah! They've no understanding!". At the end of the story, after Rainsford kills two people, Zaroff and Ivan, the story states "He had never slept in a better bed."This suggest that the author wanted his readers to know that Rainsford didn't feel guilty about killing two people, nor did he immediatly try to save the other sailors trapped on the island. The author didn't give the story equal effort to the end of the story as he did in the beginning of the story. The resolution seemed boring and written in a hurry, which shows that the author probably became lazy. Another reason that it seems like the author didn't give the story equal effort was because the beginning of the story was very desriptive to things that werent really that important and at an important part if the story, like when we didn't know who was going to die, the story wasn't desriptive at all! The author wanted his readers to use thier imagination on determinig the outcome of Rainsford's life. In conclusion, I clearly think that the author values liberty over equality because he created more liberal parts in the story than equal ones.
0 comments:
Post a Comment