Discussion Topic
Zaroff and Montresor: Evil and Madness Comparison
Summary:
The debate over who is more evil between Zaroff from "The Most Dangerous Game" and Montresor from "The Cask of Amontillado" centers on their motives and actions. Zaroff hunts humans for sport, showing no remorse and posing a broad threat due to his numerous victims. Montresor, driven by revenge for a perceived insult, meticulously plans a single murder. While some argue Zaroff’s actions are more disturbing due to their scale, others find Montresor's personal vendetta more sinister. Both characters display a lack of sanity and moral compass, making them dangerous in different ways.
Who is more evil, Zaroff from "The Most Dangerous Game" or Montresor from "The Cask of Amontillado"?
I am not sure either is sane, although Zaroff seems to be so. Montressor is getting revenge for some perceived wrong, while Zaroff is just killing for sport. I think that makes Zaroff more disturbing. Whether or not both know what they are doing is wrong can be questioned, but Zaroff is more dangerous than Montressor in his current setting. Montressor may very well appear normal most of the time, until he thinks you have wronged him.
Just playing the devils advocate here. Zaroff always gave his prey a chance to escape, so if they were clever enough to evade him (as Rainsford was) they would survive. Also, Zaroff seemed to have no conscience, so he wasn't doing something he thought of as wrong (even though we know it was.) On the other hand, Montressor knew what he did was wrong. He never gave his...
Unlock
This Answer NowStart your 48-hour free trial and get ahead in class. Boost your grades with access to expert answers and top-tier study guides. Thousands of students are already mastering their assignments—don't miss out. Cancel anytime.
Already a member? Log in here.
victim a chance to escape, and even so many years after the event, he still tells the story with a proud vindicitiveness.
What an interesting question! I love auntlori's point that a minor insult shouldn't result in someone being walled up underground. i do, though, think that overall, Zaroff is the more "evil" of the two. To me, someone who gets pleasure from seeing others (whether they're people or animals) suffer is truly evil. Because we don't have any evidence that the incident with Montressor isn't isolated, and because Zaroff takes people with whom he isn't even acquainted (and therefore, who couldn't possibly have done anything to him), I'd say Zaroff.
I would also cite Zaroff as the worst of the two because of the number of humans he has killed. Additionally, the mystery about why he is on Ship Trap Island leads one to believe that he might have committed crimes in his homeland which caused him to be exiled.
One more reason for Zaroff over Montresor--while Zaroff is certainly maniacal, he does come across assane. Montresor does not. He never gives the specific insult he endured from Fortunato, and his elaborate murder scheme demonstrates the typical psychologically unreliable character of which Poe is so fond.
Simply from the aspect of the number of men that Zaroff has killed, the Cossack general from Richard Connell's short story, "The Most Dangerous Game," wins this contest of evil. Whereas Montressor, Edgar Allan Poe's character from the short story, "The Cask of Amontillado," certainly shows his evil side when he coerces his "friend" Fortunato into the catacombs and to his eventual death, his intentions only concern one man. Montressor's murder of Fortunato cannot match the mass murdering skills of Zaroff, who retrieves human shipwreck victims and then hunts them down. Where Montressor shows respect for Fortuanato and carefully plans his murder, Zaroff shows only contempt for his victims, voicing disappointment that their intellectual skills are not closer to his own. Needless to say, both Zaroff and Montressor show a sinister side that cannot be excused or dismissed, but the sheer quantity of Zaroff's victims makes him the winner here.
Are General Zaroff from "The Most Dangerous Game" and Montresor from "The Cask of Amontillado" crazy?
They are equally cunning, manipulative, determined and indifferent to human life, but they are not crazy. However, their motivation is different.
Montresor is motivated by revenge. He needs to exact revenge on Fortunato to preserve/rescue, his family's honor. He is acting on a family tradition that propels him to plan and execute a perfect murder. He lures the unsuspecting Fortunato to his death without violence, there is no evidence.
Zaroff is motivated by his desire to be entertained through the sport of hunting humans. He has grown bored with hunting animals, so he matches his wits with human prey. He gives them a chance to defend themselves, so it is not too easy for him. He thrives on the challenge of tracking a human, who is smart, with higher level thinking, rather than pursuing a simple animal.
Montresor is not a classic murderer, he has chosen his victim for a specific reason, a thousand injuries against him, Poe does not explain what they are, he is not likely to murder anyone else. So he is not crazy, just filled with purposeful revenge. His behavior is not normal, but it is easier to understand than Zaroff's.
Zaroff's behavior is more like that of a mad scientist who gets a thrill when he makes an unethical discovery in his lab. Every time Zaroff hunts a human he must get a rush of adrenalin, like riding on a roller coaster. It's easy to get addicted to this feeling.
Who would you rather meet, Zaroff or Montresor?
I would rather meet with Montressor. Zlaroff cloaks himself in civility, but he is an evil barbarian. While he says, if Rainsford can escape that he will be freed, but who knows what Zaroff would do to the only quarry to survive the hunt. With that being said, while Montressor seemed crazy, he did not seem evil, and that seems like much less of a threat.
I'm not fast, I'm not very handy with weapons, I'm not experienced creating things from nature, I'm not skilled at thinking like either the hunted or the hunter.While Zaroff might be up front with me, that wouldn't really help me much. I'd still be at a humongous disadvantage and my head would be hanging on his wall in no time flat.
I guess that meansI'd better choose Montressor. At least I'd have a fighting chance.
Unless one is extremely skillful as a hunter, he/she has little chance against Zaroff. However deranged Montesor is, it seems that one would have a chance against him since he did warn Fortunato that he should turn back, be careful, etc. Besides, the irony of Fortunato's name is not missed when the reader sees the description of the man in a fool's costume. Afterall, Fortunato willingly descends into the catacombs of Montesor whereas Rainsford has no choice in "the hunt." Added to this, physical prowess has fewer variables than mind games which afford more opportunities for success.
If I had my choice I would rather meet Zaroff from "The Most Dangerous Game." Zaroff is very honest and up front about who he is and what he does. Also with Zaroff you have a fighting chance to escape with your life. With Montresor you are at his mercy. He lies, he cheats and he manipulates the situation to cause harm and there is no way out. I would much rather deal with an enemy that I know than one who acts like a friend then bricks me into my grave.