Question

poet says neither force of nature nor waves can destroy his poetry do you feel that poem is trying to say that everything on the earth die and decay

Answer 1

Shakes starts out strong, declaring that his poetry is both buffer and more long-lasting than all those fancy funeral monuments of dead rulers. After all, they're dead, right? That's his point exactly.

"Monuments," meaning the statues and art decorating rich graves, makes it clear that these princes are now past tense, while "marble" and "gilded" reinforces the wealth of these guys.

"Princes" here doesn't just mean the sons of ruling kings. It's a more general word that refers to every kind of ruler, including queens, dukes, and duchesses.

And it's set in a really general context. We don't know what country we're in or what century.

Shakes spreads the irony thickly here by stacking his small flimsy sonnet against the stone art of dead rich guys. These princes thought they could preserve their memories through monuments, but Shakespeare's here to deliver the (not-so) hard truth: time will eventually destroy this stuff.

As for this sonnet? It will "outlive" everything. How? Precisely because it's not made of hard material. This 14-line iambic package of poetic thought is immaterial: it's not made of anything and therefore can never be destroyed. Boom.

Answer 2

No it isn't trying to say that earth will die and everything on earth will die and decay it want to say that thought of one's person never die and decay I hope it will help you