Games, Violence, and Human Nature in Connell and Greene
This essay compares Richard Connell's "The Most Dangerous Game" (1929) and Graham Greene's "The Destructors" (1954), arguing that both stories share a structural framework built around the establishment and completion of a perverse "game." In Connell's story, General Zaroff devises a lethal hunting contest using human prey, while Greene's gang of boys methodically demolishes a historic London house as a form of organized play. The essay analyzes how each narrative is organized around artificial rules and structured activity, and how that framework ultimately serves to expose darker truths about boredom, human destructiveness, social class, and moral indifference.
- Introduction: The Game as Narrative Structure: Both stories structured around perverse organized games
- The Double Meaning of 'Game' in Connell's Story: Zaroff's lethal hunt as rule-bound sporting contest
- Greene's Gang and the Rules of Destruction: Boys' demolition plan treated as competitive group game
- Comparing the Two Narratives: Structure and Human Nature: Both games expose boredom, destruction, and moral blindness
- Conclusion: The Game as a Window into Darkness: Greene's story achieves deeper moral complexity than Connell's
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- The essay establishes a clear, arguable thesis — that both stories use the "game" structure to expose dark truths about human motivation — and pursues it consistently across both texts.
- Close reading of specific quotations from both stories supports each analytical claim, grounding abstract argument in textual evidence.
- The paper identifies a genuinely interesting literary device — the pun on "game" in Connell's title — and unpacks it to deepen the comparative argument.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper demonstrates comparative literary analysis: rather than treating each story in isolation, it identifies a shared structural principle (the organized "game") and uses it as a lens to read both works simultaneously. This technique allows the writer to build a unified argument while still honoring the distinct qualities of each text, noting, for example, that Greene's story achieves greater realism and moral complexity than Connell's thriller.
Structure breakdown
The essay opens with a dual introduction that situates both texts and states the thesis. It then dedicates a section to each story in turn — first unpacking Connell's pun and Zaroff's rule-bound contest, then analyzing Greene's gang as a group engaged in game-like destruction. A synthesis section draws the two narratives together around questions of human nature, and a brief conclusion reflects on the relative literary weight of each story. This classic compare-and-contrast arc keeps the argument organized and easy to follow.
Introduction: The Game as Narrative Structure
"The Most Dangerous Game" by Richard Connell and "The Destructors" by Graham Greene share a similar structure: each story is organized around the completion of a "game" with artificial rules, which ultimately reveals darker truths about human motivation. In Connell's story, General Zaroff — a Cossack aristocrat who lives on a remote island — is obsessed with hunting but has grown bored with even the most dangerous animals, such as tigers. He therefore devises a system whereby he kidnaps and hunts human beings in a kind of structured contest: "if my quarry eludes me for more than three days, he wins the game" (3).
Greene's story, which has a greater element of realism, follows a gang of pre-adolescent boys in post-World-War-Two London who are searching for an activity to occupy them. They decide, perversely, to demolish an architecturally significant house that has somehow survived the German bombing during the war. Greene notes, however, that the boys' gang is engaged in playing a game before settling on this plan: the gang starts by "bouncing balls on the wall" and "sacrificed the whole morning to the game of bouncing that only Mike was young enough to enjoy" (2). Both stories use the central structure of establishing and completing a "game" — an artificially structured activity — in order to reveal darker truths about human nature.
The Double Meaning of 'Game' in Connell's Story
Connell's story foregrounds the concept of a "game" in its very title, "The Most Dangerous Game." It is important to note, however, that the word "game" in the title is, in fact, a pun. "Game" carries the meaning of a type of animal hunted for sport, as in the concept of a "game preserve" — an area of land set aside and stocked with animals for hunting. This is exactly how General Zaroff refers to Ship-Trap Island when he tells Rainsford: "Here in my preserve on this island… I hunt more dangerous game" (2). Zaroff also uses the word "game" in its more everyday sense: a contest or artificially structured activity with rules, the kind of game one plays to win. The perversity of Zaroff's worldview is that the "game" he is playing is one that, as Rainsford accurately notes, most people would call murder:
"It's a game, you see," pursued the general blandly. "I suggest to one of them that we go hunting. I give him a supply of food and an excellent hunting knife. I give him three hours' start. I am to follow, armed only with a pistol of the smallest caliber and range. If my quarry eludes me for three whole days, he wins the game. If I find him" — the general smiled — "he loses." (3)
What this description makes clear is that Zaroff is not simply a sadist or a serial killer. He is, instead, a man obsessed with a particular leisure activity — hunting. What he truly craves is the thrill of that pastime, and so he contrives to make it as difficult as possible by hunting the most intelligent animal of all. His game is conducted according to specific rules: he limits his own capacity by carrying only a short-range handgun. The entire structure of the story is built around Zaroff compelling Rainsford to play this game by being hunted across the island — and this is, after all, how the story ultimately concludes, when Zaroff is forced to concede: "I congratulate you… you have won the game" (8).
Conclusion: The Game as a Window into Darkness
"The Most Dangerous Game" by Richard Connell and "The Destructors" by Graham Greene are therefore structurally similar stories. Each narrative follows the establishment of an artificially imagined activity — a kind of pastime — and concludes when that game has reached its end. We do not learn what happens to Rainsford after he kills Zaroff, nor do we learn what becomes of the gang after Old Misery discovers his house has been destroyed.
Ultimately, Greene's story is perhaps the more serious work of fiction, because it does not merely rely on thrills and surprises to hold the reader's interest. Instead, it coldly narrates a disturbing sequence of events and resists easy notions of good and evil in order to ask larger questions about human society and what motivates people. In both stories, however, the central "game" is the structuring element of the narrative — and in both cases, that game serves as a vehicle for exposing something troubling about the human condition.
References
Connell, Richard. (1929). "The Most Dangerous Game."
Greene, Graham. (1954). "The Destructors."
Create your account
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.