Is character more important than setting in "The Most Dangerous Game?"
Character in "The Most Dangerous Game" is the higher importance, because it sets the stage for the story's conflict. However, the setting is just as important. Since the story depends on there being no outside law or contact that could save Rainsford or doom Zaroff, the setting of a dangerous, "deserted" island is perfectly suited. The island itself is well set-up for a hunting preserve, with a jungle and a swamp, allowing several different settings for Rainsford to struggle and set traps. The high cliffs and dangerous waters of the island keep others from finding Zaroff, and keep his prey from escaping his hunt. In this manner, the setting is more than just background and is vital for the story to work, as well as allowing the characters to adapt their actions to fit whatever part of the island they are on.
A character is more important than the setting because setting usually remains static. On its own it does not develop but it is usually the playwright who experiments with the setting to achieve his various purposes. On the other hand a character through his acts and speeches helps in the development of the plot. Once a character has been decided, its development and transformation through various stages contributes in moving the plot and reach to the climax. The characters throughout remains an integral part of the plot and the story because it is not passive but an active element of the story