Compare/Contrast - "The Most Dangerous Game" and "The Short Happy Life of Francis Macomber"
...kills the buffalo. This story is told in third-person limited as is “The Most Dangerous Game.” Although on the surface this may seem to be a similarity, it is not. “The Most Dangerous Game” is told almost entirely from Rainsford’s point of view. The short interlude at the end told through Zaroff’s mindset is utilized for the purposes of effective storytelling not as a way of broadening the reader’s perspective on the circumstances surrounding the events. “The Short Happy Life of Francis Macomber,” on the other hand, switches the narrator quite frequently. While this serves as an effective way to move the story along. It is even more effective in engaging the reader emotionally and psychologically in the events and people within the story. There are comparisons to large game cats in each of these stories, a jaguar in “The Most Dangerous Game” and a lion in “The Short Happy Life of Francis Macomber.” Both cats serve as similar placeholders. They both foreshadow future events and become mirrors for specific characters in each story. At the beginning of “The Most Dangerous Game,” Rainsford’s discussion with Whitney about what the jaguar feels foreshadows the incidence of Rainsford becoming the hunted. In this switch from hunter to hunted, Rainsford becomes the proverbial jaguar, positioned to learn what it is the jaguar might feel. However, because this is a purely commercial piece the similarities between the jaguar and Rainsford is not further explored and any additional connection ends there. In “The Short Happy Life of Francis Macomber,” telling part of the story from the lion’s point of view serves to both foreshadow future events and enlighten the reader as to Mrs. Macomber’s motivations. The lion is, in essence, a metaphorical representation of what Margot is feeling. Francis’ cowardice is the shot through the gut, causing Margot to go hide in the bushes waiting for a final opportunity to prevail. Mr. Macomber’s obliviousness to the lion’s feelings parallels his ignorance of his wife’s mindset. This is a most interesting juxtaposition in the story. It illustrates the dichotomy of the central question, who is hunting who? In “The Most Dangerous Game,” this question is rather simply answered. Both Rainsford and Zaroff are hunter and hunted. While Zaroff is explicitly hunting Rainsford. Rainsford is implicitly hunting Zaroff. There is no ambiguity in these roles. It is clear that Rainsford is intent on not becoming prey, of turning the tides on Zaroff. And it is clear that Zaroff recognizes that to pursue an avid and renowned hunter like Rainsford is to risk being subjected to the same role reserved to his prey. As the story progresses and Rainsford gains the upper hand, Zaroff clearly switches roles to that of the explicitly hunted. While on the surface it appears that it is Francis, in “The Short Happy Life of Francis Macomber,” who is the hunter, it is clear that this is not the case when one unravels the layers beneath. Margot parallels the lion’s story. Befo...