The Force Of Nature in The Interlopers
The Summary of the Story
It is no surprise that nature is beyond control, slaughtering hundreds every year; man is also powerless when faced with human nature, which is equally as fatal. Surrounding everyone are these systems that nobody ever reconsiders, an exhausted solution that humans refuse to acknowledge in its failure, these holes that some find themselves helplessly falling into over and over again. Not to mention the robotic structure of this world that limits freedom; there’s nothing to be done about these because the majority of humans are completely oblivious to the subconscious conflicts within a ‘high-functioning’ society. Man is often found stuck in his own opinion to the point where even murder can seem justified to rid of quarel. A story that exhibits the stubbornness of people is “The Interlopers” by Saki. This story is a tale of a three decade dispute between two hunting families, the tension particularly lying between Ulrich von Gradwitz and Georg Znaeym. Their continuous altercation revolves around whether a plot of hunting land is actually the property of the Gradwitz’s as a court case decided long ago. This disagreement being serious enough that both desire their opposer’s death, warranting them to stand in the midst of night in a stalemate, guns in hand. In the moment the rivals hesitate to shoot the other, a tree falls upon them, immobilizing the men. The fact is, even though Gradwitz and Znaeym from “The Interlopers” by Saki brought this situation upon themselves, it was not entirely their fault as no man has complete control of his nature and any control whatsoever over earthly nature, which is proven through the intervention of a fallen tree, perpetual fuel for the men’s feud, and the unexpected ending nature has in store for them.
The Fallen Beech Tree
Since the beginning of time, it has been abundantly clear that man cannot command nature; nature is an independent force, which ancient Greeks and Romans accepted to be untamable by humans. So they believed in gods who controlled nature. The influence of nature is demonstrated when the beech tree topples over and traps Gradwitz and Znaeym beneath it. The beech tree interrupts the tragic scene about to unfold. Without this intervention, murder would be inevitable. On the other hand, a perfect, quick, and easy scenario is ruined due to both men becoming immobilized ‘helplessly in a tight tangle’ of twigs and branches (190). The author chooses to have the tree crumble over them to create an understanding that nature can change the course of a life in a few seconds. Plus it was convenient for the storyline. A person not getting what they want can be a Godsend. Sometimes people are lured in by things that are not beneficial for them, and nature rescues people from what their story would have been. For instance, someone was fixing to head to the store, but they change their mind as there is a thunderstorm approaching. Later that day, a mass shooting occurred in the exact store they planned to shop at. Similarly, this tree stopped either of the men from moving on to the afterlife holding the eternal guilt of having killed another man.
Even though earthly nature stops them from shooting each other, humanly nature lures the men into a spurious friendship with a grudge that cannot be left behind. Crushed beneath the tree, both men are struck with ebullience that they survived. At first, they are not pleased that their opponent survived too. As Gradwitz listens to Znaeym’s agony, he feels a sudden “throb of pity” toward him (191). The two men claim to have befriended each other. Realistically, they only made a pact that regardless of whose foresters arrived first, neither man shall be shot. Each man hopes that his foresters arrive first so he can prove himself a compassionate man to the other as the other is released. Even in dire circumstances, the two manage to continue to compete with each other. All they wanted was to claim the title of better person. Grudges don’t just disappear, especially not one that has driven men to attempt homicide. It is in human nature to insist on loathing another relentlessly. It is a pattern that nobody is cognizant of. People can break habits if they acknowledge they have a problem, but if it proceeds unnoticed, people don’t stand a chance. This is the reason the author chose to write about a persistent negative exchange that buries itself in a cloud of pure-sounding motives, so well that Ulrich and Georg don’t notice its existence. Basically, it must be instinctive for people to stand their ground, just as this passage has proven.
All the while, earthly nature once again proves itself to be an uncontrollable, spontaneous force. Meteorologists have been perfecting the forecasting technique for decades, yet they still guess wrong sometimes because nature is untamable. Georg and Ulrich cry out for help and see faint figures approaching in the distance. In response they cry louder, while trying to figure out who is coming to their rescue. To which when Gradwitz deciphers them, he is “unstrung with hideous fear” for they are wolves (193). The tree almost saved the two from their fate, but death was inevitable. Each wished for his opponent to die, so they both do. In the end, nature gives the men exactly what they wanted. Perhaps had they not acted upon emotions, the force of nature would leave them be. Earlier in the text, Znaeym told Gradwitz that his men would discover him “dead under a fallen beech tree” (191). How prophetic, as their foresters would stumble upon the remains of both men under a fallen beech tree, just as Znaeym said. The fact that nature happened to stop them from murdering each other and simultaneously caused their demise is in no way a punishment. One must remember some people are cursed with misfortune. There’s no secret meaning behind it, nature is nature, an unshakable force. Whatever occurs, occurs. Humans are helpless when faced with the force of nature.
It is a given that earthly nature’s rages cannot be snuffed, as the tree and the wolves have proven, but perhaps the cycle of human nature could have been broken before the situation escalated beyond hope. Humans are drawn to have grudges, but can fight back against this urge simply through empathy. All they had to do was try to view the conflict through the other man’s eyes and none of this would have happened because they would have completely lacked the thirst for one another’s bloodshed. Because they did not do this, they both perish. In the end, it did not matter whether they really became friends beneath that tree or not, as they both die anyway. Nature did not care if they resolved it. Nature did not care if they had a family to return to or whether they were rich or poor, male or female, genuine or ungenuine, pure or nefarious, young or old, religious or not, political or not. The disasters of nature do not discriminate.
Creating The Atmosphere in The Interlopers By Saki
You are hunting in the woods at night and alone. As you search for a beast to kill, you suddenly come across your most hated enemy, hunting on your very own grounds right in front of your eyes. As both of you glare at each other with rifles in hand, a large tree crashes down and traps both of you with no hope of freeing yourself. While you wait for your men to come, you and your enemy still trash talk each other and threaten each other’s blood. After some time of waiting, you realize that you should just become friends with your long-hated enemy and make the rivalry history. You propose your plan to your enemy and he agrees! Both of you talk about the great things that you can do together that you never had the chance until now, then you see figures coming down and you have a glimmer of hope that they are your men, but then you notice that they are wolves and they eat you and your ex-rival both.
That is exactly what happened in the short story, “The Interlopers” and the two characters in the story didn’t really have a happy ending. In this essay, I will talk about the foreshadowing, the obvious situational irony, and lastly, I will write about the setting and why the setting is important to the story.
Firstly, I will talk about the foreshadowing used in this story and give good examples. At the start of the story, it says: “Ulrich von Gradwitz patrolled the dark forest in quest of a human enemy.” – Page 82 Line 7. Already, I knew that this story will end with blood spilled with someone dying because Ulrich is in the dark woods alone with a rifle hunting. Then right after it says, ” had wrested it from the illegal possession of a neighboring family of petty landowners.” – Page 82 Line 15. From my knowledge, some wars start when there are land disputes and wars always end bloodily. This was another reason why I knew someone will die or get seriously injured. The last use of foreshadowing that I spotted was when the tree fell on both of them, “a mass of falling beech tree had thundered down on them.” – Page 84 Line 58. This line already made me a bit suspicious because what are the odds of a random tree falling on you and your enemy both. I had a thought that both of them will die under this tree which proved to be right when the wolves come and most likely kill them. The author uses foreshadowing really well but he kind of gave it away too much about what will happen.
Secondly, I will talk about the situational irony in “The Interlopers”. The irony in this story is pretty noticeable near the end. Just when Ulrich and Znaeym meet each other on page 83, line 46: “The two enemies stood glaring at each other for a long silent moment.” Ok, this was the part where they both met and the irony does not start yet. Then a short time late, a tree falls on them and traps them both which the irony starts here because two rivals are forced to be trapped together. Then they decide to become friends, “Neighbour, if you will help me bury the old quarrel, I will ask you to be my friend.”-Page 86 line 146. Both talks about the great things they can do together since both now are friends and the author should’ve seriously ended the story here with their men coming to save them. But then the author decides to use some situational irony and make wolves come and kill them both right after they become friends after years of rivalry. Both Ulrich and Znayem accomplished something good, but they both ended up dying right after sadly. That is the use of situational irony in the story and it was very easy to spot.
Lastly, I will write a description of the setting of the story and say why the setting is important. Just when the story starts, it says: “the creatures that won’t go to sleep during the dark hours.” – Page 83 line 35. That gives the story a more dark vibe which already the story takes place in the woods in the middle of the night. Already the setting sounds pretty scary and the author also writes what the characters hear, ” Skirling of the wind and the restless beating of the branches for sight or sound of the marauders.” That makes the setting sound more sketchy which is exactly what the author wanted to do. I would’ve peed my pants if I was Ulrich already but the really terrifying part was when Znaymen emerges out of nowhere but thankfully I was brought back to reality and kept on reading. The author uses the setting to create a more dark and scary theme which does contribute to the end. Then this was this blink of happiness when the two enemies strike a deal and become friends but the author decides to make wolves appear. Already the setting was scary and now the wolves come AND the author doesn’t even tell us if the wolves kill them, which makes the story really suspense because we readers demand to know what actually happened. All I can say that the author did a really good job of making the setting dark because it really helped the story and the author kind of overkilled it by at the end when making wolves appear.
So in conclusion, in this essay, I talked about the use of foreshadowing, the situational irony, and the use of the setting to make the story darker. Foreshadowing, when the author uses disputes, rivalry, and the tree crashing down. The situational irony, when both men become friends and suddenly wolves come and kill them. Then the setting which he described it as really dark and scary to help the story sound more “terrifying”. The moral of this story is: If you have an enemy, become friends with your enemy any chance you get. Or you will end up like these poor souls in “The Interlopers”. This story was really great and suspenseful to read and I will be very interested to read more works from this author. (Nevermind, he died in 1916)
The Interlopers: The Blind Pursuit
Summary of the Story
What would you choose – fight for your family’s honour, or end a legacy of revenge? The short story “The Interlopers” by Saki is about a generations-old feud between the Gradwitz and Znaeym families, over a strip of forest land on the eastern spurs of the Carpathians. In the beginning, Ulrich Von Gradwitz patrols the land in quest of Georg Znaeym, “the inheritor of the quarrel and the tireless game snatcher and raider of the disputed border forest” (Saki 83). Strangely enough, on this dark winter night, the two men come face to face, however, before either of the men could open fire, a large branch of beech tree comes falling on them, leaving them stretched on the ground, helpless. The men realize the pointlessness of continuing their feud under such brutal circumstances and end up making amends and reconciling their differences. Despite their compromise, when the men join their voices to call for help, it is a pack of wolves that answers instead of their men. In the end, it is the two men’s greed and quest for revenge that leads them to their downfall. “Nature’s own violence overwhelmed them both” (pg. 84), and the author proves that the land was neither Gradwitz’ or Znaeyms’ to claim through his use of irony, foreshadowing and theme.
The major literary device used to establish the conflict in “The Interlopers” is irony; the difference between what appears to be and what is true. The main instance of irony occurs when the men die shortly after ending the feud that had endured amongst the families for three generations. They finally realize “that there are better things in life than getting the better of a boundary dispute” (Saki 86), only to die moments later with nothing to take with them. This is an example of situational irony because the outcome drastically differs from what is expected of the readers. The families had quarrelled for centuries with no settlement, and when they finally bring closure to their feud, it is assumed that the mood will lighten; however, in an ironic twist, the men become prey to wolves. Ultimately, neither men have ownership of the land. Another example of irony occurs when a lifetime of battles between Ulrich and Gradwitz ends when the subject of their feud becomes the cause of their death. When Ulrich and Gradwitz come face to face in the forest, they are both reluctant to initiate violence under the code of a restraining civilization. As a result, ‘before the moment of hesitation had given way to action’ (Saki 84), a branch of beech tree plunges down on them. The strip of forest, that had harboured the beech tree and had, ironically, been the premise of the men’s conflict, entraps them both, leaving them prey to wolves. The final instance of irony is how Ulrich’s and Gradwitz’ decision to call for help, in hopes that their parties would save them, is instead answered by a pack of wolves. They had ‘each prayed a private prayer that his men might be first to arrive’ (Saki 88), unfortunately, when they see indistinct figures coming through the woods, they realize quickly that it was not their men, but a pack of wolves. The author creates suspense by describing the figures running down the hill towards them and the characters anticipating their parties arriving, only for them to finally recognise that their prayers had not been answered. Therefore, the author uses situational irony or the difference between what appears to and what is true to cause the reader to be surprised by the unexpected events.
Saki uses foreshadowing to help create suspense and build anticipation for what might happen later in the story. Primarily, the author’s setting hints at whether the forthcoming events will be adverse or fortunate. In this story, we are first introduced to the setting on a winter night somewhere on the Eastern spurs of the Carpathians, where Gradwitz stood waiting ‘for some beast of the woods to come within range of his vision and later his rifle’ (Saki 82). The author’s description of the forest being precipitous and dark, as well as his illustration of Gradwitz watching and listening attentively, suggests that there is a sense of danger in the forest. Otherwise speaking, the author uses a dark and gloomy setting to imply that bad fortune would follow. Another use of foreshadowing is how Saki makes subtle but deliberate references to objects in their environment, in an effort to demonstrate that they might play a significant role later on in the plot. For example, Saki describes there being “movement and unrest among the creatures that were wont to sleep through the dark hours’ (Saki 83). The deer and restlessness amongst the creatures signifies the presence of predators and adds a disturbing element to the setting. This shows that the author makes subtle references to the predators to demonstrate to the reader that this would be a critical element in the conflict. The final use of foreshadowing in the story “The Interlopers” occurs after the men make amends. As readers we interpret the men’s reconciliation as a resolution to the main conflict. This is because in a typical plot diagram with an introduction, rising action, climax, falling action, and finally, conclusion, the falling tree would be considered the climax, and the men’s reconciliation would be considered the falling action. However, despite resolving their feud, the setting remained cold and gloomy, “with the wind tearing in fitful gusts through the naked branches and whistling round the tree trunks” (Saki 87). This hints at the inevitable tragedy that will be inflicted upon the men at the end of the story. With this, Saki uses foreshadowing to hint at the grim and dark theme, and the catastrophic events that await the two men.
The theme of the short story “The Interlopers’ is that too often, people waste their lives focused on aimless disputes. The first reason why I believe so is because in the beginning of the story, Saki states that “a long series of poaching affrays and similar scandals had embittered the relationships between the families for three generations” (Saki 82-83). The story focuses on the two mens thirst for each other’s blood, gathering their foresters in search of thieves that were expected to be invading the forest that night. However, with all this effort and devise, both men later become prey to wolves. Therefore, the men spend their lives focusing on a battle that has no significance to either of them in the end. Another reason why I believe the theme of the story is that people waste their lives focusing on aimless disputes, is because the subject of their feud becomes the cause of their death. Both men seek one another in belief that the other is an interloper on their land. However, when nature conquers them both with “a mass of failing beech tree [thundering] down on them” (Saki 84), they decide that they would dominate the land together and jointly take ownership of the trees and animals within it. However, when a pack of wolves appear over the hillside, it appears that neither of the men would be recognised as rightful owners of the natural land. Therefore, the true interlopers are both the men, because without their intrusion, the land would be otherwise undisturbed. The final reason for why I believe the theme is that people spend their lives focused on aimless disputes, is because both Ulrich and Gradwitz take nothing with them when they die. Ulrich realizes that they had been fools arguing all their lives for the meaningless piece of land, and that “there [were] better things in life than getting the better of a boundary dispute” (Saki 86). However, despite eventually coming to this realization, both men die moments later. Thus, they had wasted their entire lives quarrelling, without making any meaningful or significant accomplishments in their lifetime. Overall, the insignificance of the boundary dispute and the two men’s downfall, proves that often people waste their lives focused on aimless disputes.
Through the use of foreshadowing, irony, and theme Saki conveys that the land was neither Ulrich’s or Gradwitz’ to claim. Through the use of irony, the author displays nature, the subject of the feud, conquering the men, leaving them both to die with no ownership. Through the use of foreshadowing, the dark mood and atmosphere is established, and we are introduced to objects that are of significance to the plot. Through the theme, the author expresses that often people waste their lives focusing on senseless disputes. It is my belief that through these literary devices, the author is trying to convey that since life is so short, we should spend our lives focused on purposeful things, and we should recognise that when we die, our life’s worth will not be measured by our possessions.
Developing Surprise in The Interlopers
Imagine how uneventful a book would be without some type of suspense or surprise. How is it possible for authors to ensure they create such responses from their audience? The British fiction writer Hector Hugh Munro, also known by his pen name “Saki”, was known for featuring surprise endings in his narratives. Authors tend to use structural elements of suspense and literary devices together to create an effective surprise ending. Saki utilizes suspense, textual structure, and pacing to develop the element of surprise in his narrative “The Interlopers”.
Saki implements suspense to cause a surprising response from the readers of “The Interlopers”. Saki does this best by the verbal conflicts in the plot. In the story, the main characters are bickering and almost threatening each other over what their men will do to them when they arrive to release them from under the tree. In paragraph 7 the character Ulrich states, “When my men come to release us you will wish, perhaps, that you were in a better plight than caught poaching on a neighbor’s land, shame on you.” In this quote, Saki can create suspense because it shows the extremity of the character’s conflict. In paragraph 7 the other character Georg states, “I have men, too, in the forest tonight, close behind me, and THEY will be here first… it won’t need much clumsiness on their part to roll this mass of trunk right over on the top of you.” These two quotes create suspense in the text because of how unsure it makes the audience of what may happen next. This further assists in the effectiveness of the surprise ending.
Saki also uses textual structure in the text “The Interlopers” to develop the element of surprise. Saki’s story has a narrative structure which means that it is a literary element that uses a structural framework to present the plot and setting of a narrative.
Saki lastly utilizes pacing to surprise the readers of “The Interlopers”. Pacing is moving a story at a certain speed. Saki uses fast pacing when both men are trying to figure out who is approaching. The dialogue in paragraph 28 sates, “”They are making all the speed they can, brave lads,’ said Ulrich gladly. ‘Are they your men?’ asked Georg. ‘Are they your men?”” In this quote, the characters are using rapid dialogue when trying to communicate about whose men are approaching. This fast pacing creates can create an anxious emotion in the reader. This then can lead to a more effective surprise ending.
In the end, Saki best uses suspense, textual structure, and pacing to produce a surprise ending in his narrative “The Interlopers”. If the audience is always was able to detect what will happen in a narrative then the story can lose its impact. Sometimes leaving the audience to envision the story as something different.
Vengeance And Loss Of Humanity in The Interlopers
When people let vengeance get the best of them, it can lead to a loss of their humanity. A considerable example of this is in the story “The Interlopers”, written by Saki.
Ulrich and Georg let their quarrel urge them to hunt and murder each other, completely disregarding their morality. Hence, the two men sought each other out in the forest, regardless of tempestuous weather, and when they met, “The two enemies stood glaring at one another for a long silent moment. Each had a rifle in his hand, each had hate in his heart and murder uppermost in his mind.” Though Ulrich could not care less about the piece of land and trees, he is willingly open to the idea of manslaughter due to his prolonged feud with Georg, his loathing for George has corrupted and darkened his judgement and ethics.
Moreover, subsequent to being crushed and immobilized by an immense tree, Georg exploits the predicament they are in and snarls at Ulrich ‘caught fast. Ho, what a jest, Ulrich von Gradwitz snared in his stolen forest. There’s real justice for you!’, cackling heartlessly at Ulrich, who immediately replies with ‘I’m caught in my own forest-land…,When my men come to release us you will wish, perhaps, that you were in a better plight than caught poaching on a neighbour’s land, shame on you.’ This is noteworthy to the story as Ulrich is portrayed as an empathetic gentleman, barbarically growling at a disabled and helpless man without pitying him shows a loss of identity and compassion.
Lastly, Georg and Ulrich both allow their bloodthirst for each other take over, throwing aside their nobility and influencing them into commiting timid acts. This is demonstrated by George uttering “When they drag me out from under these branches, it won’t need much clumsiness on their part to roll this mass of trunk right over on the top of you. Your men will find you dead under a fallen beech tree” indicating that George is willing to perform a spineless deed of murdering a vulnerable and powerless man, for control over a piece of meritless woodland. Losing control of his common decency and principles, showing a small loss of his humanity.
Nonetheless, as the two men bond over a mutual dilemma, they start to show compassion to one another, regaining their judgment, morality, and identity as they vow to help each other and let go of their hatred by one another. Eventually, the men exhibit that when you do not learn to let go of your grudge against others, it can lead to more casualties.
Development Of Characters in Lamb to the Slaughter, The Monkey’s Paw And The Interlopers
Characterization in a short story can create sympathy in the reader. Characterization is the means by which an author establishes and reveals various personalities in the story. Roald Dahl in “Lamb to the Slaughter,” W.W. Jacobs in “The Monkey’s Paw,” and Saki in “The Interlopers” develop realistic characters that possess strengths and weaknesses not unlike those of people the reader may know. Mary Maloney in “Lamb to the Slaughter” is a devoted wife, whose life revolves around the husband who betrays her. Mr. White in “The Monkey’s Paw” is a man whose desire to have more than he now possesses creates devastation for the family. Greatly influenced by an ancient land dispute, Ulrich von Gradwitz in “The Interlopers” makes the decision to rewrite a different end to the feud. The authors of “Lamb to the Slaughter,” “The Monkey’s Paw,” and “The Interlopers” develop their characters in various ways in order to create realistic people who draw the reader into each story.
Mary Maloney in “Lamb to the Slaughter” is a devoted wife, whose life orbits around the husband, which is Mr. Maloney, who betrays her for infidelity and alcohol. Mary Maloney is a perfect and devoted house wife, also an expectant mother. She waits happily each night for the arrival of her husband Patrick from work at the police station. But on one Thursday night, she commits an almost perfect murder. The author Roald Dahl has developed the character of Mary Maloney both through direct and indirect characterization. This reveals her character as being dynamic through her words and personality, and is what makes this short story a success. In the Book the narrator tells the quote from Mrs. Maloney and reads, “That’s the way, she told herself. Do everything right and natural. Keep things absolutely natural and there’ll be no need for any acting at all.” The significance of characterization helps a reader to actually give feelings and a care about the Wife or Mrs. Maloney in the story. If characterization was changed in this story, I believe that the mood of the story would change and the reader might have a different effect or feelings towards the wife in the short story, also would probably fall more for the husband in the story. Mrs. Maloney is one of the main characters in this story and she can’t live without her husband and it reflects on the different words and mood of the story.
Mr. White is the elderly man who buys the monkey’s paw and uses it to wish for two hundred pounds (British money) in order to pay off the loan on his house. At the beginning of the story, he’s skeptical about the paw. Is it magical, or is it just an icky piece of junk? By the end of the story, though, he’s totally convinced of its powers. “The Monkey’s Paw” is a tragedy, the story of Mr. White’s fall from a basically happy life to one full of fear, doubt, guilt, and loneliness when his son dies and his wife breaks down. We might see “The Monkey’s Paw” as the story of a foolish man who makes foolish wishes and pays the price. We might also see it as the story of a man who learns to be strong when life gets tough. In the reader’s eyes you see that the monkey is magic and nobody else knows about it except for Mr. White and his family. Also as the story progresses the reader kind of gets pull in to the characters eyes of the story and you kind of see what Mr. White and his family goes through with the Monkeys’ paw. Monkey’s paw?” said Mrs. White, curiously. “Well, it’s just a bit of what you might call magic, perhaps,” said the sergeant-major, offhandedly. (1.21). If you changed to a different character rather than Mr. White, the story would change in many different ways, but not in a major way just that you would see the story in a different family member or someone outside the story. In the “Monkey’s Paw” Mr. White buys a monkey that possesses magic and the family starts to make wishes that doesn’t always turn good in the story, this is why I chose Mr. White for this paragraph.
Greatly influenced by an ancient land dispute, Ulrich von Gradwitz in “The Interlopers” makes the decision to rewrite a different end to the feud. Ulrich von Gradwitz is a wealthy landowner. He has legal right to a disputed stretch of land but knows that Georg continues to hunt on this land. On the night the story takes place, he has organized a group of men to find Georg, whom he plans to kill. He considers Georg his enemy and calls him a “forest-thief, game-snatcher.” After the men get trapped under the tree, Ulrich offers Georg some of his wine and is the first one to put forth the idea of making amends. Ulrich is also the one who sees wolves approaching. Ulrich von Gradwitz is a round and dynamic character. At the begining of the story he had wanted to kill Georg, but after them meetface to face he had changed his mind, and he wanted to stoped the feud between the two families, so he changed throughout the story. He has quite a few different character traits, so that he is a round character too. I think the ending of this story is effective, because it is a really surprise ending which made the story more interesting to read . In the end Ulrich and Geory has become friends but nobody will ever know since they are probably going eaten by the wolves.
The Past Views of Hunting and the Opposite Result of Presumption in The Dangerous Game by Richard Connell and The Interlopers by Saki
Have you ever discovered that someone isn’t who they seem to be? Or have you ever experienced an event that made you think back on a past action or thought? Well in the two stories, “The Most Dangerous Game” by Richard Connell, and “ The Interlopers” by Saki, these particular events take place; these are considered the two main themes. In “the Most Dangerous Game”, Zaroff does not turn out who how he was originally presumed to be. As well as Reinsford changes after being part of a horrific event. In the interlopers Georg does not have the personality at the end of the story that he had in the beginning. Ulrich is involved in a supreme event, which will change his life forever and his views about Georg. In the stories “The Most Dangerous Game” and “The Interlopers” two of the characters turn out not as they were Presupposed to be; Both stories also contain an extreme event which changes the characters views about each other and makes them think back on their past.
In the book “The Most Dangerous game” Rainsford thinks about his present views on hunting and his past views of hunting. He will never think the same as he did before about the topic. In the beginning of this piece of literature titled “The Most Dangerous Game”, Rainsford had mentioned how he felt in a conversation with a friend that he didn’t care how animals he hunted felt. “ ‘Don’t talk rot, Whitney,’ said Rainsford. ‘You’re a big-game hunter, not a philosopher. Who cares how a jaguar feels?’” (Connell ). This was a quote taken from the beginning of the book, which clearly states how Rainsford feels about the way that a hunters pray feels. But by the end of the story after Rainsford has been hunted he has a different approach to the way that the pray feels. After experiencing being the pray himself it is doubted that he will feel that way when hunting from no on. Rainsford experienced the hydrenaline rush and “Fear” of being hunted by a more dangerous and lethal creature than himself. The intense mental disintegration he feels when being hunted he would never wish upon an innocent creature: Unless of course that creature, itself, was the monster that hunted him as if he was nothing more than a helpless, defenseless, jaguar.
In the book “The Most Dangerous Game” Zaroff is not the character he seems to be. At the beginning when Rainsford meets Zaroff, Zaroff seems to be a model citizen. He seems to be helpful and welcoming. At the moment Zaroff and Rainsford meet, Rainsford swam up on the island beach and was looking for something to eat, he hadn’t eaten in hours. And he knocked on the door of a “civilized” looking house and came to meet Zaroff. Who offered him food and wine and a place to stay for the night. “ ‘Now you want clothes, food, rest. You shall have them. This is a most-restful spot.’” (Connell ). This quote was taken from the mouth of General Zaroff when the man known as Rainsford entered his house. After Rainsford became comfortable with Zaroff; he mentions that he has a particularly uncommon hobby, He hunts people for a sport. When Zaroff and Rainsford were sitting at the table their conversation lead to these statements from the two of them. “’I wanted the ideal animal to hunt,’ explained the general. ‘So I said, `What are the attributes of an ideal quarry?’ And the answer was, of course, `It must have courage, cunning, and, above all, it must be able to reason.’ ‘But no animal can reason,’ objected Rainsford. ‘My dear fellow,’ said the general, ‘there is one that can.’ ‘But you can’t mean’ gasped Rainsford. At the beginning of the story General Zaroff the Cossack says that he tries to be civilized on the island and he appears normal and helpful. By the end of the story Zaroff admits to hunting people and even hunts Rainsford.
In the short story “The Interlopers” Ulrich thought about his past thoughts and opinions about Georg and attempted to resolve them, but not before a long dispute between the two in the middle of the woods under a tree. In the beginning of the book the interlopers Ulrich and Georg did not get along with each other because both thought that a plot of land between their properties belonged to them and not the other. So one day they strayed away from their men and went to find each other to kill them for the land. And in the beginning Ulrich had and extreme and unimaginable hatred for Georg. Then when they met the wind picked up and a tree fell on them both and pined them to the ground. They argued with each other for a while but then got tired. Ulrich then pulled out a wine flask from his pocket and had a sip before tossing it to Georg. That was the symbol that their friendship will begin. “ ‘Could you reach this flask if I through it over to you?’ asked Ulrich suddenly; ‘There is good wine in it, and one may as well be as comfortable as one can.’” (Saki ) That would be the beginning of the friendship that would last them the remainder of their lives that would be viciously cut short by Mother Nature.
The main interloper in the life of Ulrich, Georg is not the person he was aspired to be. At the beginning of the story “The Interlopers” George was entered in to the story as an innocent man standing in the woods when a physco man comes out of know where and tries to kill him. But later in the story when the two men begin to argue and threaten each other Georg is the first to it. “ ‘When they drag me out from under these branches it wont need much clumsiness on their part to roll this mass of a trunk right over on the top of you.’” (Saki ). This was taken directly from the words for Georg when he was mentioning that he had men in the woods that would find him first. This comment from him started a long and grueling argument between the two men. Noticeable to the reader, these statements would certainly not come from a friend, so you could tell that at this point in the story they are foes as apposed to friends.
In the stories “The Most Dangerous Game” and “The Interlopers” two of the characters turn out not as they were presupposed to be; Both stories also contain an extreme event which changes the characters views about each other and makes them think back on their past. This tells about two of the main themes present is the two stories, “The Interlopers” and “The Most Dangerous Game”. It also explains how the characters fit in to the different situations. Mentioned was that General Zaroff and Georg where not who they were purposed to be. They did not have the same mental characteristics in the beginning and the end and neither had the same personality towards each other at the start and finish of the story. As for Rainsford and Ulrich they both thought back on there past thoughts and changed from them. The experiences that they faced throughout the story changed them as well. They both have different opinions about the topics from the beginning of the story to now. For good or for bad their opinions have changed.
“The Interlopers” and “The Lottery” Comparative Essay
In the short stories “The Lottery” and “The Interlopers,” the authors Shirley Jackson and Saki (respectively) use pacing, text structure, and strong moods to build suspense. Through the use of the literary elements mentioned above, the reader is left surprised at the end of both stories. The authors might not have used the literary elements in entirely similar ways, but they have the same effect on each story: causing anticipation for the reader. Through the use of pacing, the authors are able to develop their stories and cause suspense, as the surprise endings of their tales draw near.
From the very first sentence in the book “The Lottery,” Jackson sets the pacing of the book for the reader by saying, “The morning of June 27th was clear and sunny, with the fresh warmth of a full-summer day; the flowers were blossoming profusely and the grass was richly green”. Throughout the book, the author never strays from the painfully slow pace thus creating anxiety within the reader to figure out what the lottery is and why it is important. While Shirley Jackson creates suspense by keeping a slow pacing, Saki creates suspense and tension by increasing the pace of the book as more action happens. Although the author’s use of pacing creates tension and suspense, the author’s structure of text also creates suspense.
The authors of “The Lottery” and “The Interlopers” also use the structure of the text to build their stories. Through character development, both authors show how the characters’ life affects what happens. For example. In “The Interlopers” the structure of text develops the characters by showing there has been a lasting rivalry between the Gadwitz and Znaeym families, it also creates tension because it shows that the rivalry has lasted a very long time. This is shown in the second paragraph when Saki writes, “A famous lawsuit, in the days of his grandfather, had wrestled it from the illegal possession of the neighboring family of petty landowners; the dispossessed party had never acquiesced in the judgement of the courts, and a long series of poaching affrays and similar scandals had embittered the relations between the families.” The quote indicates why the Gadwitz and Znaeym families dislike each other which sets off a chain reaction of events taking place in the book.
While Saki uses character development, Shirley Jackson uses chronological order so the reader can get all the details of the lottery and what it is. Jackson describes the procedure of the lottery without actually telling what it is when she says, “There was a great deal of fussing to be done before Mr. Summers declared the lottery open. There were the lists to make up–of heads of families. heads of households in each family. members of each household in each family. There was the proper swearing-in of Mr. Summers by the postmaster, as the official of the lottery.” By saying what happens without actually saying what happens makes the reader anxious to find out the purpose of the lottery. In addition to pacing, and structure of the text, the author uses the mood to create suspense and tension.
In the stories “The Lottery” and “The Interlopers,” both authors’ uses of mood builds suspense. In “The Lottery” the opening sentence of the book gives the setting of the story. The opening sentence says, “The morning of June 27th was clear and sunny, with the fresh warmth of a full-summer day; the flowers were blossoming profusely and the grass was richly green”. the reader can imagine in their head what the scene and what the atmosphere is like. The mood evokes feelings in the reader at the end of the book that contradicts the calm setting used in the beginning. Whereas in “The Interlopers” the author starts off with a suspenseful mood saying, “In a forest of mixed growth somewhere on the eastern spurs of the Carpathians, a man stood one winter night watching and listening, as though he waited for some beast of the woods to come within the range of his vision and, later, of his rifle. But the game for whose presence he kept so keen an outlook was none that figured in the sportsman’s calendar as lawful and proper for the chase; Ulrich von Gradwitz patrolled the dark forest in quest of a human enemy.” This statement causes the reader to wonder who the human enemy is and why he is hunting them. Like Jackson’s, Saki’s word choices and setting increase the suspense and tension in the narrative.
In the stories “The Lottery” and “The Interlopers,” authors Shirley Jackson and Saki use pacing, the structure of text and mood to build suspense. The importance of using these literary techniques is to keep your audience interested. If there was nothing to look forward to, the readers wouldn’t want to read onward. I predict if the authors hadn’t used pacing to build suspense, the endings would have been more surprising and more confusing because there was nothing that led up to such finishes.