The world endures because of transformation. The news broadcasts it, authours turn it into books, and it even appears in daily life. Global warming and volcanoes erupting are shows of earth altering. Revolts, moving jobs, and even changing breakfast cereals are people’s way of changing. Everything grows, develops, and adapts to survive. Proof of this shines everywhere, including Richard Connell’s book “The Most Dangerous Game.” This book weaves a tale of courage, self-control, and the need of elasticity to survive. Rainsford, from “The Most Dangerous Game,” shows the properties of a dynamic character in the change in his ethics, the situation 's disparity, and the internal conflict he experiences.
First, Rainsford’s ethics change throughout …show more content…
Rainsford’s troubles start when the hunt begins. The severe rules of the hunt and his limited knowledge of the island need Rainsford to adapt to his conditions. Connell writes that “hunting clothes, food, and a knife” were Rainsford’s few survival items for the hunt (30). Zaroff continues on to talk about “death swamp,” which has quicksand (30). Later in the story, Rainsford narrowly avoids death twice, a happenstance that seldom occurs, and ends on top. These instances bring back the topic of environs affecting the surrounding community. When a person’s surrounding are excessively harsh, they are more likely to become apathetic and distrusting. This causes sociopathic behaviours that can harm neighbouring persons. Connell brought this topic into the book to warn people about the danger of apathy. If one does not care about a human’s conditions for a prolonged period, they will inevitably hurt someone – whether for pleasure or unknowingly. The insecure and unstable characteristics of the characters and their setting hold proof of this. While Connell did not wish to scare, he clearly wanted people to know any possible dangers instinctual self-protection are. Most literature worldwide has this paradigmatic warning. The change in Rainsford’s surroundings makes him a dynamic character; howbeit, another example of his personal change lies …show more content…
Frequently throughout the story, Rainsford deals with nerves. Along with this, his situation test his morals and perspicacious thinking. Near the beginning of the story, Rainsford falls overboard. Instead of panicking as most do, he quickly “remembered the shots,” and swam to safety (19). Whilst playing prey, Rainsford remains calm, knowing that success depends on his ability to “keep my nerve” (30). There are several other instances where Rainsford ignores his instincts in favour of rationality. War with oneself may prove both helpful and harmful. It may allow one to make the right decision, but it may also cause anxiety. Remaining calm in every situation remains the best way to handle what fate has in store. Rainsford’s rational actions and many conversations lend themselves to this point of view. While “The Most Dangerous Game” is a fiction work, it plainly expresses basic life truths that may help everyone. This occurs in many fiction stories written throughout history. Learning from someone else’s story is a pattern more beneficial than any other in literary history. The internal conflicts that sway Rainsford are the last confirmations of Rainsford’s repute as a dynamic
First, Rainsford’s ethics change throughout …show more content…
Rainsford’s troubles start when the hunt begins. The severe rules of the hunt and his limited knowledge of the island need Rainsford to adapt to his conditions. Connell writes that “hunting clothes, food, and a knife” were Rainsford’s few survival items for the hunt (30). Zaroff continues on to talk about “death swamp,” which has quicksand (30). Later in the story, Rainsford narrowly avoids death twice, a happenstance that seldom occurs, and ends on top. These instances bring back the topic of environs affecting the surrounding community. When a person’s surrounding are excessively harsh, they are more likely to become apathetic and distrusting. This causes sociopathic behaviours that can harm neighbouring persons. Connell brought this topic into the book to warn people about the danger of apathy. If one does not care about a human’s conditions for a prolonged period, they will inevitably hurt someone – whether for pleasure or unknowingly. The insecure and unstable characteristics of the characters and their setting hold proof of this. While Connell did not wish to scare, he clearly wanted people to know any possible dangers instinctual self-protection are. Most literature worldwide has this paradigmatic warning. The change in Rainsford’s surroundings makes him a dynamic character; howbeit, another example of his personal change lies …show more content…
Frequently throughout the story, Rainsford deals with nerves. Along with this, his situation test his morals and perspicacious thinking. Near the beginning of the story, Rainsford falls overboard. Instead of panicking as most do, he quickly “remembered the shots,” and swam to safety (19). Whilst playing prey, Rainsford remains calm, knowing that success depends on his ability to “keep my nerve” (30). There are several other instances where Rainsford ignores his instincts in favour of rationality. War with oneself may prove both helpful and harmful. It may allow one to make the right decision, but it may also cause anxiety. Remaining calm in every situation remains the best way to handle what fate has in store. Rainsford’s rational actions and many conversations lend themselves to this point of view. While “The Most Dangerous Game” is a fiction work, it plainly expresses basic life truths that may help everyone. This occurs in many fiction stories written throughout history. Learning from someone else’s story is a pattern more beneficial than any other in literary history. The internal conflicts that sway Rainsford are the last confirmations of Rainsford’s repute as a dynamic