In the short story “The Interlopers”, two men under the pressure of a lifelong rivalry over their land seek to end one another, only to be pinned down by a tree and later killed by wolves. Throughout this story the main characters (Ulrich and Georg) face many conflicts, not from each other but from nature. The two are not only pinned down by a tree, they are trapped in the middle of a storm, in the bitter cold, with limited visibility and wolves in the area. I believe that the author, Saki, decided to let nature destroy the men rather than have the men destroy each other, not only because of the irony, but because this incident also reveals the theme. Holding grudges are pointless, they lead to petty quarrels and rash decisions. Throughout
“The Interlopers”, the two main characters face many conflicts from nature, the most prominent one being the tree that pinned the men. The tree caused a major problem for Ulrich and Georg when it collapsed during the storm, trapping them under its weight with no one around to free them. The second conflict comes from the storm itself, which also contributes greatly to the destruction of the men. The storm not only causes the tree to fall, it also limits the visibility of the men and leaves them in the cold. This causes Ulrich and Georg to become weaker and lowers their chance of surviving. The final conflict the two face is none other than the wolves. Towards the end of the story, Ulrich sees figures in the distance and shouts for joy, thinking that his men had come to rescue them. Sadly, this jubilation was short-lived. The figures Ulrich had mistaken for his men were in fact wolves. Although the story ends with this realization, we can infer that Ulrich and Georg were eaten by the wolves. Instead of the men killing each other, they were eliminated by the very land they fought over. Why would Saki let nature destroy the men instead of them killing each other like they had planned? The first reason is because of the irony. The land that the main characters and their ancestors had been feuding over for ages was what led to their demise. The second reason for letting nature ruin the men is that it leads to the theme. The point of this story is to show that holding grudges are pointless, they do nothing to help the situation. When Ulrich and Georg finally realize this fact, it is already over. The men are killed by the wolves, leaving the feud to go on forever. It took being pinned down by a tree and facing death in the face for the two men to turn to each other in friendship. If they (or their ancestors) had let go of their grudges years ago, the men could still be alive and well in their homes. The moral of this story is very important and without nature destroying the men this lesson may have never been taught. Within the story of “The Interlopers”, the two main characters face many hardships from nature. They are pinned down by a tree, caught in a ferocious storm and eaten by wolves. However, without nature playing its part (Ironic as it may be.), we may never have learned the moral of this story. Holding a grudge will do nothing to solve a problem, it will only bring more hatred and destruction, not only to the enemy, but to the owner as well.
The short stories "The Interlopers" and "The Story of an Hour" are both great stories. The Interlopers stars Ulrich von Gradwitz and Georg Znaeym along with their decades-long family grudge. The Story of an Hour includes Mrs. Louise Mallard and the unfortunate death of her husband. To compare and contrast these stories, we need to know where their plots overlap and where they are set apart.
Billy and his hounds face unexpected struggles each time they hunt. For example, there is always a battle to catch the coons. The first time Billy goes hunting, the hounds tree a coon in the biggest sycamore tree in the forest. For two whole days, Billy chips away at the tree until it finally falls down and the coon is caught. Billy is hot, exhausted, and aches all over. Another example of man versus nature is the weather during the Championship Coon Hunt. During this hunt, Billy and his hounds face a terrible blizzard. The winter weather is described as roaring and “the north wind seemed to be laughing at us” (202). The wind blows and the snow falls so fast that the Earth is instantly covered. Even the hounds have to stay in constant motion to keep from freezing to death. The biggest conflict occurs at the end of the story. Billy and his hounds encounter their biggest opponent, a mountain lion. All alone, they struggle with the wild creature that Billy refers to as a “devil cat” (226). The mountain lion has “yellow slitted eyes that burned with hate” (226). Billy watches as his hounds and the mountain lion tear at each other and fight till the end.
The poem “A Poison Tree” by William Blake and the story, “The Cask of Amontillado” written by Edgar Allan Poe writes about revenge. Overall both the poem and the short story share how they developed the overall theme, and to express the act, each of the writings use dramatic irony and sensory
The book “The interlopers”, by Saki, is a story about 2 men (Ulrich von Gradwitz and
The setting in the short story “The Most Dangerous Game” has many similarities and differences to the setting in “The Interlopers”. Though the settings differ in many ways, for example the danger of them and their contents, they are also similar in their mystery and vitality to the plot. These two pieces of writing hold many of the same ideas, but they also are original works that portray them in their own way.
Over centuries, humankind has searched for the line where positive and negative influence over nature intersect. “The Rattler”, a tale of a man and a rattlesnake who cross paths in the desert, deals with this very question. The individual is at first cautious of the snake, thinking it best to leave the dangerous creature alone. But at the thought of the nearby neighbors, he takes it upon himself to kill it, and then continues on into the night. The author uses comparison, diction and personification in “The Rattler” to promote sympathy for both characters: the snake and the man.
well stocked with game…...but it was the most jealously guarded” lines 9-13. The author tells the reader that there is a feud and that there could be implications because of this forest. The suspense of what is going to happen leaves you guessing.The background created by the plot ties into the advancement of suspense in the story. “The disposed party had never acquainted in the judgment of the courts”. This tells the reader there is still some unresolved tension between the two. Another question that leads the reader how will they act because of this prerequisite tension. The plot also created an uneasy feeling throughout the text. The height of the plot was when”both..were pinned beneath the fallen mass” line
The film, The Interrupters, explains about a group of people in Chicago that are fighting for a ceasefire (Kotlowitz, 2012). This group of interrupters is comprised of ex-gang members that have been recruited to stop the violence (Kotlowitz, 2012). For many years the streets of Chicago have been full of violence; the incidents that were occurring involve many fatal shootings that have taken the lives of many young people in the community. According to the film, “nine people were shot in five hours” and there was a thirteen year old boy that was shot twenty-two times (Kotlowitz, 2012). The consequences of actions are not thought about, and many people in Chicago are acting violently in retaliation instead of thinking about
Annie Dillard’s Pilgrim at Tinker Creek features various creatures struggling to survive in the perilous habitats of Tinker Creek. From her own experiences living near the creek, she presents detailed descriptions of the deaths of different insects and animals, mainly due to attacks from other creatures of the same species. Throughout the distinct chapters of her book, she stalks and studies the creatures to construct an overarching theme of life. Dillard argues that in order for any creature to sustain its life, it must cause death to others, even if it means killing members of its own group. In an attempt to expose this horror of reality, Dillard astonishingly employs the muskrat, often thought as a peaceful creature found enjoying the calm water. By presenting the muskrat as a victim of its predators as well as a predator of its own species, Dillard reveals that even the most peace-loving creatures, like the muskrat, are both the objects and the subjects of death.
It has been said that the wolf is one of the most voracious and horrifying animals that exist in nature today. But, in all reality, is that actually true? One is unable to make an assumption such as this without a firsthand experience, or so that is expressed in In The Shadow of a Rainbow and Never Cry Wolf. Authors Robert Franklin Leslie and Farley Mowat make every attempt to convey the true nature of the wolf throughout their journeys, as they prove claims falsely accusing wolves, with documented evidence of complete vigilance. These works of literary nonfiction effectively refute anti-wolf claims made within them through being dangerous to the wildlife, dangerous to humans, and viciousness.
all the hunted animals convey connotations of evil, and this is doubtless the reason why the author of the poem seems so involved in the outcome of the hunts and never tires of triumphantly describing the final slaying of the pursued animals. (Howard 85)
Leopold goes on to explain his experience as a hunter and the only time he killed a wolf. He saw the fire die in the wolf's eyes and later realized what he had done. Before, like most hunters, he thought that by killing the wolves off there would be more deer in return. Therefore, there would be more game for the hunters. Leopold writes, "I thought that because fewer wolves meant more deer, that no wolves would mean hunter's paradise. But after seeing the green fire die, I sensed that neither the wolf nor the mountain agreed with such a view." Prior to this event, Leopold never thought to consider the destructive, long-term effects that could be made by reducing the wolf species on the mountain. He had been overtaken by the...
When the narrator introduced the main character of the story, the man, he made it clear that the man was in a perilous situation involving the elements. The man was faced with weather that was 75 degrees below zero and he was not physically or mentally prepared for survival. London wrote that the cold "did not lead him to meditate upon his frailty as a creature of temperature, and upon man's frailty in general, able only to live within certain narrow limits of heat and cold."(p.1745) At first when the man started his journey to the camp, he felt certain that he could make it back to camp before dinner. As the trip progressed, the man made mistake after mistake that sealed his fate. The man's first mistake was to step into a pool of water and soak his legs to the knees. This blunder forced the man to build a fire to dry his wet socks and shoes so his feet would not freeze and become frostbitten. When the man began to build a fire he failed to notice that he was doing so under a large, snow laden spruce tree where he was getting his firewood. When the man had a small fire that was beginning to smolder the disturbance to the tree caused the snow to tumble to the ground and extinguish the fire. "It was his own fault or, rather, his mistake. He should not have built the fire under the spruce tree. He should have built it in the open."(1750).
This tribe brings nothing but death and destruction to the island. Moreover, the newly formed group of warriors even develop a dance that they perform over the carcass of the dead pig. They become so involved in this dance that that warriors kill one of their own kind. By chance, Simon runs from the forest towards the group that is already shouting “‘Kill the beast! Cut his throat! Spill his blood!’” (152).
Stubbornness is a horrible character flaw of the man in the story. He discards all warnings of the weather that he received from those with experience. Full of himself and ambition the man embarks on his final trail. He sights no big problem regarding the weather and is sure of the fact that he will meet with his fellows in the camp in planned time. Soon however the cold hit harder and harder. The absence of heat grew as the man’s strength and confidence shrunk. Here the words of his advisors began to make way into the front of his mind, the theme as well ever-present. The theme that suggested the potential of nature compared to that of man’s. The theme which so clearly exhibited how blind stubbornness would not lead to stoicism and victory but rather painful demise. Witnessed in this story was just that theme. The miserable man was killed not by the dreadful cold but by his own free will and lack of knowledge. Had he taken just a fragment of the native’s advice or read the warning on the wall inside the heat-infiltrated house perhaps he would breathe another breath, step another step, or live to tell of his encounter.