The Most Dangerous Game Conflict

In the 1920’s, Irishmen battled their compatriots in the Irish Civil War, which lasted for two devastating years. In this war, the Irish Republicans, who fought for liberating Ireland from Britain, battled the Irish Nationalists, who fought to maintain British occupation in Northern Ireland. The predominant ideological differences between these militias were that the Irish Republicans opposed the Anglo-Irish Treaty and wanted Ireland to become an independent republic, while Irish Nationalists supported the treaty and believed in a unified nation. This difference in values and beliefs led Ireland into a fierce civil war. Conflicts can devastate, because they often result in death, violence, the ending of friendships, and breaks in family bonds. …show more content…
In “The Most Dangerous Game,” Rainsford states “Hunting? Good God, General Zaroff, what you speak of is murder.” General Zaroff replies, “I refuse to believe that so modern and civilized a young man as you seem to be harbors romantic ideas about the value of human life”(Connell 64). As depicted in this dialogue, Rainsford and Zaroff possess opposing views on the ethicality of hunting humans, eventually leading them to fight. In the story, Rainsford states "Civilized? And you shoot down men?,” and “A trace of anger was in the general's black eyes.” This example from the text denotes how Zaroff becomes exasperated when Rainsford disagrees with him, and demonstrates how these two men battled due to their apprehension of the other’s beliefs. In “The Most Dangerous Game,” Rainsford declares, "Thank you, I'm a hunter, not a murderer," showing how he condones killing animals, but cannot tolerate killing a person, while Zaroff states “But I think I can show you that your scruples are quite ill founded,” displaying how the General attempts to argue and convince Rainsford to acquiesce to his values. This evidence indicates that a minor argument regarding the character’s values and beliefs about hunting and killing caused such violence and hatred later on in the story. Based on these examples, a true “fear of difference”, or …show more content…
In “The Interlopers,” the two families, Gradwitz and Znaeym, fought and “a long series of poaching affrays and similar scandals had embittered the relationships between the families for three generations.” Long-standing feuds lead to members of families disagreeing even after many years, and often produce injuries, crimes, and deaths. In “The Interlopers,” the narrator claims, “If only on this wild night, in this dark, lone spot, he might come across Georg Znaeym, man to man, with none to witness--that was the wish that was uppermost in his thoughts.” This evidence demonstrates how their family conflict causes them to hunt each other in the woods. In “The Hatfield and McCoy Feud,” the story states “gun-toting vigilantes hell-bent on defending their kinfolk, igniting bitter grudges that would span generations,” embarked on a “decades-long feud,” leading to a “vicious and violent clash between the families.” According to the passage, the Hatfields and McCoys fought for many decades, and based on the word choice the narrator uses, these combatants sustained a deep-seated loyalty to their families, stood firmly by their beliefs, and acquired a willingness to defend their families at any cost. This story also asserts the idea that the violent struggle between the Hatfields and McCoys occurred as a result of various differences

Show More

Conflict In The Most Dangerous Game

Most Dangerous Game Conflict Analysis