In the story "The Most Dangerous Game", Rainsford kills Zaroff in the end. But does he really have to do this? I believe he does. If Rainsford did not kill Zaroff, Zaroff's island would still be a place of hunters and huntees. Zaroff would keep hunting people and he would always win the game. Although Rainsford did not want to be a hunter, he had to kill Zaroff.
The ending of the story and my interpretation of it relates to my understanding of Modernism. The story omitted an ending. This is a lot like Modern stories. I had to predict what I felt was going to happen after the ending. The story also captured an essence of modern life by asking if every one is either a hunter or a huntee. This story relates a lot to Modernism.
Overall, "The Most Dangerous Game" made me think a lot about life. It made me wonder if Rainsford had to kill and it also made me interpret the ending.
