comparing and contrasting
Comparing and Contrasting (quoted from Jim Stover, “Writing About Literature”)
One of the best methods to help us clarify our thoughts about a character, an event, a poem, a story—nearly anything—is to compare and contrast. (To compare can mean to find similarities and differences. Coupled with contrast, however, to compare means to point out similarities, while to contrast means to point out differences.) Many of us, feeling weighted down by cares, have happened to see someone coping with a much greater burden or handicap—and suddenly our problems become insignificant in comparison. Seeing how our situation relates to another’s, we have gained perspective. The only way to have that perspective is by viewing things in relation to one another—by comparing and contrasting. Considering two characters, for example, can help us think more effectively about each. (Authors frequently invite such comparison by including a character foil in a story—a character who serves to emphasize the attributes of another character because the two are so different.)
Let’s consider, specifically, Rainsford, the protagonist of Richard Connell’s story “The Most Dangerous Game,” and the unnamed protagonist in Jack London’s “To Build A Fire.” How are the two men comparable? Each confronts a life-threatening situation. Rainsford is chased by the fanatical Zaroff, and London’s protagonist combats the extreme cold of theYukon. Each fights down panic and acts swiftly and decisively. Rainsford sets traps for his pursuers and finally tricks Zaroff; the man in theYukon quickly builds a fire after his feet are soaked. Each denies the suggestion of an acquaintance: Rainsford tells Whitney that hunted creatures have no feelings, and London’s protagonist ignores the old-timer’s advice. And each man learns, as a result of his ordeal, that he has been wrong.
On the other hand, the men are different in several ways. London’s protagonist does not have sufficient foresight to realize, in the
One of the best methods to help us clarify our thoughts about a character, an event, a poem, a story—nearly anything—is to compare and contrast. (To compare can mean to find similarities and differences. Coupled with contrast, however, to compare means to point out similarities, while to contrast means to point out differences.) Many of us, feeling weighted down by cares, have happened to see someone coping with a much greater burden or handicap—and suddenly our problems become insignificant in comparison. Seeing how our situation relates to another’s, we have gained perspective. The only way to have that perspective is by viewing things in relation to one another—by comparing and contrasting. Considering two characters, for example, can help us think more effectively about each. (Authors frequently invite such comparison by including a character foil in a story—a character who serves to emphasize the attributes of another character because the two are so different.)
Let’s consider, specifically, Rainsford, the protagonist of Richard Connell’s story “The Most Dangerous Game,” and the unnamed protagonist in Jack London’s “To Build A Fire.” How are the two men comparable? Each confronts a life-threatening situation. Rainsford is chased by the fanatical Zaroff, and London’s protagonist combats the extreme cold of theYukon. Each fights down panic and acts swiftly and decisively. Rainsford sets traps for his pursuers and finally tricks Zaroff; the man in theYukon quickly builds a fire after his feet are soaked. Each denies the suggestion of an acquaintance: Rainsford tells Whitney that hunted creatures have no feelings, and London’s protagonist ignores the old-timer’s advice. And each man learns, as a result of his ordeal, that he has been wrong.
On the other hand, the men are different in several ways. London’s protagonist does not have sufficient foresight to realize, in the