Fire and Ice
When I first check out this poem, the very first thing that I recognize is general idea that whoever is speaking (in initially person) is definitely describing the final of the world. The vital thing that occurs to you is the video Armageddon and meteors burning up the earth, addressing the fire. I’m also able to see the planet covered with great glaciers with every thing buried below sheets of ice. That is especially scary to me?nternet site live within warm The hawaiian islands. I can understand the literal meaning, that the one who is speaking says if the world would have been to end they can favor open fire, but ice cubes will also do. These are points I know being true after a first reading.
Yet another thing I checked out was the composition of this poem. It is set up so that there exists a rhyming structure, which I believe that was intentional by the writer. The way the composition seems placed together by the rhyming is definitely aesthetically pleasing. Something interesting which i saw was your scheme in line 6 and 8 differ from the rest of the composition. The words that rhyme happen to be hate and great, which is an satrical association to generate between something considered bad and something which is by description good. One more thing I noticed about the rhyming was that inside the first 5 lines, the term ice (2) does not rhyme with flames and desire. This may have been completely to show an initial contrast between fire and ice.
Now that I have established the things i know, I now ask me personally some concerns about what I really do not know about this composition from a basic reading. How do fire, glaciers, desire, and hatred associate? Why is their very own relationship crucial? What is Ice trying to declare in this poem? These are the main questions i had.
To begin to handle the first question, in-line 3, the speaker says From what Ive tasted of desire and then continues into range 4 with I hold with individuals who favor open fire here the speaker the connection among fire and desire. In my opinion he is trying to use flames as a metaphor for desire. From personal experience, I know a desire can be most consuming and far like a untamed fire strong out of control and destroying everything in its course. The presenter also appears to understand how harmful desire could be, and makes this his first choice for the finish of the world.
Then the loudspeaker speaks in the second half of the poem. There he declares in line six of how glaciers Is also ideal for destruction based on their understanding of hate. Here the presenter makes a connection similar to that used in 1st half, besides here between ice and hatred. It has to be taken into account that the publisher is doing the same method with two sets of opposite things, desire and fire, and hatred and ice. I’m also able to relate to how cold hate is. After i do things I really hate, it feels like as well as the clock hands are freezing in time. Hate is also chilly in the sense that after one genuinely hates some thing, they will whatever it takes to cause harm or eliminate it, whatever the consequences. Any heart may be frozen in hatreds straightener grip. Therefore , the presenter states that hatred can also destroy the world.
In my opinion fire and ice, and desire and hatred had been first brought up as opposites. When one thinks of fire, one particular thinks heat. When the first is hot, they would like to drink something cool. When ever one thinks of ice cubes they think of cold. The moment one is cold they want to take a seat by a fireplace and heat up. Desire is the want to have or perhaps create a thing while hatred is wanting to destroy this. I have clarified my first question about how fire, ice cubes, hatred and desire happen to be associated. I could begin to notice that my reply to the second query (what may be the deeper concept in this composition? ) is getting closer.
Frost starts to confuse myself with range 5, But since it had to perish two times, as absolutely nothing can die twice. This paradox potential clients me to trust that there is a more substantial paradox concealed this composition. When the speaker talks from the destruction that will cause the finish of the planet, that they cite two opposite triggers, fire and ice. This leads to the larger (and more important) paradox the place that the author can be implying that ice and fire, plus the speaker-associated feelings of desire and hate are really exactly the same thing. Fire and ice are identical, as are desire and hate.
While at first, this may seem not possible (as is the nature of paradoxes), I looked at the context which the author addresses of fire and ice, and desire and hatred. When the person discusses fire and ice, and desire and hatred, they are doing it inside the context of the end on the planet. Both the fireplace and the ice cubes, and desire and hate can ultimately end up destroying the earth. The author is attempting say that since both of these pairs of opposites can bring about damaging force, they may be really the same. I have today answered all my questions, and will begin showing on the poem.
Something that I found interesting was Frosts use of the word suffice in line 9. This is where Frost states that fire and ice (and their associated emotions) are similarly dangerous. But there is an irony from this. When one thinks of fire, that they see a glowing, smoky, remarkable event. Whereas ice is just plain old ice cubes. While the two are same, they are also inherently distinct. Fire undergoes the fancy process of losing, where ice is just frozen. But they still result in the same task. That is the paradox.
I will make one particular main assumption about Early morning frosts values. He believes that anything inside the extreme, just like hate or desire may be in extremely dangerous, possibly causing the finish of the planet. I am inclined to agree, because governments curved on both hatred of others or the desire to have power have got, in our history caused great pain and suffering. One shining sort of this is Adolf Hitlers hate of people who had been different. This cold hate lead to a great war and Holocaust through which many people suffered and died.
Though this kind of poem was written above 70 yrs ago, it provides an eternal message and a paradox. Any feeling taken to the ultimate is hazardous, and opposites become the same (destructive) at an extreme state. We must become careful never to hate or desire anything so much that it becomes a great obsession, for a Holocaust lies in all of us.
