Writers don't explain everything outright in a story. Some details are left for the reader to infer through the clues and information included in the text. Based on the inferences you made while reading the short story "The Most Dangerous Game," how would this story have been different if Whitney, not Rainsford, were on the island and being hunted by Zaroff? Consider the idea of the survival of the fittest as you write your response. Also, provide textual evidence and examples from the story to support your response.

Question

Shyanne Chandler

English

21 February, 16:12

Writers don't explain everything outright in a story. Some details are left for the reader to infer through the clues and information included in the text. Based on the inferences you made while reading the short story "The Most Dangerous Game," how would this story have been different if Whitney, not Rainsford, were on the island and being hunted by Zaroff? Consider the idea of the survival of the fittest as you write your response. Also, provide textual evidence and examples from the story to support your response.

+2

Answers (1)

Know the Answer?

Robert Jacobson · Answer 1

Judging from the conversation between the two men (Whitney and Rainsford) while in route to there destination, Whitney appears to live a more healthy life style than Rainsford by way of him turning in early for bed, thus preparing for their hunting expedition, while on the other hand Rainsford appears to be more of an experienced hunter, which after the conversation with Zaroff led me to believe he was more likely to survive than Whitney, ... he also was a smoker with great survival techniques.