On The Most Dangerous Game from Perspective of Anthropocentrism

【Abstract 】： The Most Dangerous Game is a well-known fictionwhich is written by Richard Connel who is one of the most popularAmerican short story writer. In this thesis， I would like to interpret thefiction in perspective of anthropocentrism， which aims at revealing thestrained relationships between human beings and nature. Through theanalysis， the awareness could come to human beings that the ecologicalproblems have always existed and mankind should be harmony with naturerather than superior to nature.

【Key Words】： The Most Dangerous Game； Anthropocentrism；Ecological Balance

The first principle of anthropocentrism is human beings are the centeron the planet. In The Most Dangerous Game， people are hunters and theyregard hunting is a great sport and even the best sport in the world. Themain character Rainsford holds that the hunted are destined to be huntedand they are supposed to be no aware of joy and sorrow. There are manyhunters like Rainsford regarding animals are “others” in the world and theyare contrary to human beings. Mankind catches and kills other creaturesfor human’s benefits. They have always wanted to be the ruler on earth，which made hunters be extremists of anthropocentrism.

People once were convinced that the human beings were superior toeverything in the world because they had reason. They were confident inconquering nature completely. In the story of this fiction， the nature wasregarded as the opposite to mankind， which brought about the alienation tothe interpersonal relationship and even brought about abnormal mentality.Zaroff held that being able to reason was the ideal quarry and it was aleading distinction of human beings from animals. Under the desire ofconquering， even the human life is of little importance. When Zaroff wascondemned by Rainsford for hunting persons， Zaroff said “I refuse tobelieve that so modern and civilized a young man as you seem to beharbors romantic ideas about the value of human life.” （Richard Connell，P15） The lives of others were all of no account after Zaroff’s many huntingactivities. Rainsford opposed completely to hunt persons， but he had neverbeen aware that the animals should be equal to of human beings. In thisway， Rainsford was similar to Zaroff for their abiding by the principles ofanthropocentrism. This shows the arrogance of human beings and binaryopposition relationship between nature and mankind.