Have you ever found yourself viewing two things that are very different in look or appearance, but noticed that they actually had more in common than you think. Maybe these two things were things from different time periods, so it was inferred that they had to be quite different. In this paper, two stories from different time periods’ themes will be compared and contrasted. Although some people may believe that stories written in different time periods can’t have similar themes, they can because of similar character selection and real life circumstances. The first story that is being analyzed is The Most Dangerous Game by Richard Connell which was written in 1924. The second story is The Lottery by Shirley Jackson which was written in 1948.
…show more content…
You now have information on both stories. Now they must be compared. The first topic of comparison shall be the similarity in character selection. Character selection is very important to an author when they are trying to tell a story. Incorrectly portrayed characters messes up the author’s deliverance of their intended theme. “ “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.” “Is he Russian?” “He is a Cossack,” said the general, and his smile showed red lips and pointed teeth. “So am I ” ” (Connell 4). In this quotation from The Most Dangerous Game, Zaroff acknowledges the fact that he’s at least a little bit of savage. When you think about it the villagers in The Lottery are savages in their own right. Sacrificing family and friends with no glint of remorse sounds like something that a savage would do. Couple this comparison with the already known fact that both of the selected characters in these two texts are not what would be called life advocates, then you start to realize that they are quite similar. Many may say that the circumstances in The Lottery are different than that of The Most Dangerous Game. People would probably say that Zaroff kills for fun which is more savage than the traditional killing done by the village people in The Lottery. This may have some validity, but at the end of the day, cold-blooded killing is the same thing no matter what. One of the biggest contrasting things between the two texts was the fact that Rainsford ended up killing Zaroff even when he didn’t need to. This was also a savage thing to do, so maybe Rainsford doesn’t value human life either. Tessie Hutchinson has to sit back and be killed and do nothing about it. This is an area where character selection differs between the two texts. The next topic of comparison is the real life circumstances when the stories were written.
You now have information on both stories. Now they must be compared. The first topic of comparison shall be the similarity in character selection. Character selection is very important to an author when they are trying to tell a story. Incorrectly portrayed characters messes up the author’s deliverance of their intended theme. “ “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.” “Is he Russian?” “He is a Cossack,” said the general, and his smile showed red lips and pointed teeth. “So am I ” ” (Connell 4). In this quotation from The Most Dangerous Game, Zaroff acknowledges the fact that he’s at least a little bit of savage. When you think about it the villagers in The Lottery are savages in their own right. Sacrificing family and friends with no glint of remorse sounds like something that a savage would do. Couple this comparison with the already known fact that both of the selected characters in these two texts are not what would be called life advocates, then you start to realize that they are quite similar. Many may say that the circumstances in The Lottery are different than that of The Most Dangerous Game. People would probably say that Zaroff kills for fun which is more savage than the traditional killing done by the village people in The Lottery. This may have some validity, but at the end of the day, cold-blooded killing is the same thing no matter what. One of the biggest contrasting things between the two texts was the fact that Rainsford ended up killing Zaroff even when he didn’t need to. This was also a savage thing to do, so maybe Rainsford doesn’t value human life either. Tessie Hutchinson has to sit back and be killed and do nothing about it. This is an area where character selection differs between the two texts. The next topic of comparison is the real life circumstances when the stories were written.