Argumentative test relative the poem “Ice and fire”

Fire and Ice

Some say the world will end in fire,

Some say in ice.

 From what I’ve tasted of desire

 I hold with those who favor fire.

But if it had to perish twice,

 I think I know enough of hate

 To say that for destruction ice

 Is also great

And would suffice.

Desire= desiderio

Hold= essere d’accordo

Favor= privilegiare

Perish= perire

Suffice= bastare

Introduction:

The object of the present work is to discuss and analyse the poem “Ice and fire” by Robert Frost.

The text’s main topic is the contrast between two elements that are by nature one the opposite of the other, ice and fire. The contrast is first presented in the title, in which the two words are contraposed by the use of a conjunction. In particular the topic of the contrast is “Is it more distractive ice of fire?”. The analysis of the poem is meant to find out the meaning of what the poet is communicating in the poem.

Analysis of the layout:

Giving a first lance to the poem the reader is attracted by its layout, indeed the poem is organized into only one stanza like a piece of fiction. The way how the poem looks in the page creates a sense of compactness and singleness of argument.

Structure and punctation analysis:

In order to reach the goal, the present work will develop a structure analysis first and on a second moment will consider how connotative choices add to meaning.

Watching the way how the poem stays in the page the reader thinks it is organized into only one stanza but, reading it, he /she realizes the poem is arranged in this way only apparently. Indeed, there’s a very strong division of arguments in the different parts of the poem and, from this point of view, the poem seems actually organized into three stanzas.

The reader can confirm his/her assumptions find analyzing the poem from a structural point of view, indeed also the punctation reveals the division of the poem, in particular three dots creates the three stanzas. The first two lines are the first stanza, the third and the fourth lines are the second stanza and the other lines creates the third stanza.

The three stanzas play different roles in the economy of the poem. The function of the first one is to introduce the main topic, that is actually presented also in the title, the function of the second one is to explain the main topic giving the speaking voice’s opinion regarding the main topic.

In the first stanza the speaking voice says that, referring to the end of the world, some say the end will be “fire” and some “ice”. In the second one the speaking voice gives his opinion in front of the topi, he agrees the end of the world will be “fire”. In the third and last stanza the speaking voice says that even “ice” would be suffice for the destruction of the humankind.

Before tackling with the different metaphors, it is worth considering also line length in the poem.  The second line of this first stanza and the last two lines of the third stanza are shorter than the other. In particular the conclusion of the poem, represented by the last two lines, strikes the reader attention for the length of its lines. Probably the poet draws the attention of the reader on the conclusion because contains a very important message.

Connotative analysis: metaphorical structure

Analyzing the metaphorical structure, the reader finds out in the first stanza two metaphors, “fire” and “ice”. The first is repeated also in the second stanza and the second also in the third one. In the poem “fire” and “ice” are the subjects of the destruction of the world. Probably these nouns stay for two characteristics of the human being that are bringing the word and the humankind to destruction.

 Taking in consideration the first metaphor, the tenor is “fire”, the vicle is rage/ anger and the ground is the impossibility of being controlled by humans when flared up too much.  Considering instead the second metaphor the tenor is “ice”, the vicle is the cruelty and the ground is the coolness.

Connotative Analysis: semantic level:

The verb tenses used in the poem are the present, the future and the past simple and the conditional present. The speaking voice is sure the word will end because of these characteristics of the humans, he agrees with the who says that rage will cause the end of the world but admits that it could also end because of man’s cruelty. The reader understand that because the simple aspect highlights the certainty of the action instead the conditional tense underscores the uncertainty that something will happen.

Conclusion:

With this text the poet is criticizing mankind, increasingly selfish and cruel. Everyone thinks for himself and to satisfy their desires, without thinking about the consequences that this could have on others.  The poet argues that these characteristics will lead to a total disintegration of the world and totally distances itself from it.