Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
War ethics
Why cant war be justified
Why is respect important in the army
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: War ethics
Yes, Rainsford was justified in the killing of General Zaroff. Rainsford was justified in the killing of General Zaroff during the story when Zaroff is talking about how the game works. Before Zaroff put Rainsford into the woods, he was explaining how he gets hunting clothes and a hunting knife. If Rainsford wins he will have to face Ivan. For instance, “Ivan the other was that his quarry has escaped him”(Connell 9).It is showing how it was justified because he had trapped Ivan in a Quarry [quarry is defined is a large pit].
This shows Zaroff knew somebody was going to come to his house, he already knew Rainsford, much better than expected for someone Rainsford has never met or heard of him. Zaroff explains he has hunted all big game, and he got bored with hunting normal animals. In the text he
Rainsford’s perspective on hunting changed drastically throughout the book, making him more knowledgeable towards the game he always conquered in. From the start, Rainsford always had a straightforward view on hunting. “You 're a big-game hunter, not a philosopher. Who cares how a jaguar feels?”(1) Rainsford never felt any remorse toward the animals he killed while attacking his prey, and felt as though he was the master of the hunt. A situation came across when Rainsford realized that their lives are just as valuable as his.
Rainsford, Montresor, Walter Palmer, and the Sniper all killed. Rainsford was the most justified in killing his enemy. My reasons are self defense General Zaroff was a murderer, and sailors would get trapped. My first reason is Gen. Zaroff tried to kill Rainsford On page (29) “Tonight,” said the general, “we will hunt You and I”
According to Dictonary.com adversity is “an adverse or unfortunate event or circumstance”. In two short stories the main characters have to deal with Adversity and they both have too uses there smarts to conquer it. The the Short Story “The Sniper” by Liam O’Flaherty and “The Most Dangerous Game” by Richard Connell both of the main characters have to think of a way to outsmart their enemies. In “The Sniper” A Republican Sniper was laying watch on a roof. A cross the way there is another sniper wanting him dead.
Rainsford was justified in killing General Zaroff. During the time Rainsford is in Zaroff’s house they have a conversation about hunting. Zaroff tells Rainsford about him hunting humans. Rainsford says, “I can’t believe you are serious, General Zaroff. This is a grisly joke...........
General Zaroff can also be described as a static character. Over the course of the story he doesn’t change from thinking that human are not for hunting, he still thinks that hunting is more than an animal. Rainsford cannot believe that General is murder but General doesn’t take it seriously. “Why should I be serious? I am speaking of hunting . .
For Rainsford, killing Zaroff could have been just to win “The Most Dangerous Game” or for survival because General Zaroff would have definitely killed Rainsford if he saw him again. Was Rainsford’s murder justified?
In the Dining hall there are many heads and trophies of his previous hunts. Zaroff gives Rainsford clues on what kind of animal he now hunts. Rainsford slowly figured it out and starts to Vex. Zarroff does not understand why he is vexing, but ensure he will be even more angry as the hunting
Also, General Zaroff is an extreme hunter and doesn’t find pleasure in hunting regular animals. Zaroff says the most dangerous game is humans because they have the ability to reason. Rainsford is going to be hunted and is given a certain amount of time to survive. Moreover, while Rainsford is being hunted Zaroff
I believe Rainsford was not justified because, General Zaroff never stated what he was going to do to Rainsford, General Zaroff was just lonely because the only person he could talk to was Ivan and he is deaf so he had no one to play with he, also he could have stayed hidden and then General Zaroff wouldn’t hunt him anymore after three days. Also, he went back into the house to kill general Zaroff when he didn’t have to go back in and kill him since the hunting was over already. It wasn’t justified because he didn’t have to kill general Zaroff to survive he had successfully stayed hidden
Therefore, Rainsford won’t ever hunt again because he is traumatized by his experiences on the island. With all his experiences on the island Rainsford became traumatized. For example when Zaroff tells Rainsford about the type of hunting he does, which he hunts actual men. “Hunting? Good God, General Zaroff, what you speak of is murder” (Connell 23).
Tanner Toussaint In the short story The Most Dangerous Game by Richard Connell, Rainsford is justified in killing General Zaroff. One of the reasons why Rainsford is justified in killing General Zaroff is on the island the only way to live is to hunt or to be the one being hunted. Secondly, Rainsford is justified in killing General Zaroff because Zaroff wanted to die. Lastly, Rainsford is justified in killing General Zaroff because killing Zaroff is going to be the only way Rainsford will escape the island from a psychopath.
General Zaroff is different, to say the least, in Richard Connell’s book, “The Most Dangerous Game.” Rainsford is stranded on a deserted island, or so he thinks. Rainsford comes upon a mansion that is owned by General Zaroff. He knows of Rainsford, who is a renowned author of a book about the hunt, as well as everything and everywhere Rainsford has hunted. General Zaroff is also a hunter, but he goes to the extreme.
In the beginning of the story Rainsford is talking to Whitney on the yacht about hunting. “You’re a big-game hunter, not a philosopher… who cares.(215) This shows arrogance by showing Rainsford brag about how being a hunter is the top of the “Food chain”. When Rainsford arrives to the castle,Zaroff brags about being a skilled hunter. ”No