In the story “The Most Dangerous Game” by Richard Connell the narrator gives a few example of man vs man, man vs himself, and man vs nature. In any story there has to be conflict or else there is no story. Not all stories have the sames types of conflict as “The Most Dangerous Game”. These types of conflict make “The Most Dangerous Game” a very interesting short story.
There are a few cases of man vs himself in the story. When Rainsford is being hunted he is thinking of strategies to get away from the General and to not be hunted, which is hard to do when you are very nervous. Rainsford even said “‘I must keep my nerve. I must keep my nerve”’(11). It is very hard for Rainsford to not get nervous and just give up. He also did not have any sleep so on top of being nervous he also had not gotten a good sleep the night before. Rainsford changes his mind about
…show more content…
The narrator shows this when Rainsford tries to make a trap from a dead tree. He does this so that he could hurt General Zaroff and make him unable to keep hunting for Rainsford and therefore Rainsford would win the hunt. His trap does not work so well and it only hits General Zaroff's shoulder and gives him a bruise. “The dead tree delicately adjusted to rest on the cut living one, crashed down and struck the general a glancing blow on the shoulder as it fell” (12). Unfortunately the trap that Rainsford makes does not work very well it makes it harder for him to win the hunt because the General has dogs and a gun. For this reason man vs man is shown in the story.
The three types of conflict the author uses in the story are man vs man, man vs nature and, man vs himself. These conflicts make the story a very stimulating short story. The biggest reason that The Most Dangerous Game is so interesting is the three different types of conflicts that the author presents in the story. .If there was not at least one of these conflicts there would be no