Francis Macomber Comparison

While one may look at Richard Connell's "The Most Dangerous Game" and Ernest Hemmingway's "The Short Happy Life of Francis Macomber" and pass them off as basically the same, he should be reminded of the cliché "don't judge a book by its cover." Although both are short stories, each work encompasses a number of elements that are characteristically associated with either commercial or literary fiction. By evaluating the author's use of elements of fiction, such as plot, theme, and characterization, and the literary devices diction, figurative language, and detail, one can come to the conclusion that neither story is better than the other. Because the importance of plot and characterization vary based upon a work's classification as either commercial or literary, "The Most Dangerous Game" and "The Short Happy Life of Francis Macomber" are very different from one another. In his work, Connell uses the element of surprise to keep his readers wondering what's going to happen next. This surprise element, which is created through Reinsford's series of traps, allows the reader to chronologically navigate the story. Additionally, Connell heavily relies upon chance and coincidence than practicality. Examples of this include Reinsford's miraculous weaving stills and his
"[He] had … been carried to his tent from the edge of the camp in triumph on the arms and shoulders of the cook, the personal boys, the skinner and the porters." But as the story progresses, it is clear that Macomber is a coward. This is magnified by his conscience effort to cover his actions up. Toward the end of the story, Macomber experiences an epiphany. "He expected the feelings he had had about the lion to come back but it did not. For the first time in his life he really felt wholly without fear. Instead of fear he had a feeling of definite