What is the poet’s understanding of the role of human emotions in the the
world ending?
From The Poem Fire And Ice
Answers
Yes the poet is right. The poem "Fire and Ice", by Robert Frost is a depiction of the manner in which the end of the Earth would come. ... According to the poet, irrespective of the method of destruction, the end of the Earth is inevitable
Answer:
plz mark me brainly
Explanation:
"Fire and Ice" is a popular poem by American poet Robert Frost (1874-1963). It was written and published in 1920, shortly after WWI, and weighs up the probability of two differing apocalyptic scenarios represented by the elements of the poem's title. The speaker believes fire to be the more likely world-ender of the two, and links it directly with what he or she has "tasted" of "desire." In an ironically conversational tone, the speaker adds that ice—which represents hate and indifference—would "also" be "great" as a way of bringing about the end of the world. There are two reported inspirations for the poem: the first of these is Dante's Inferno, which is a poetic and literary journey into Hell written in the 14th century. The other is a reported conversation Frost had with an astronomer in which they talked about the sun exploding or extinguishing—fire or ice.
Read the full text of “Fire and Ice”
“Fire and Ice” Summary
The speaker weighs up two different scenarios for the end of the world. Some people think the world will end in fire, whereas others think ice is more likely. Based on the speaker's experiences with desire, he or she tends to agree with those who believe fire is the more likely scenario. If the world were to end twice, however, the speaker feels that, based on his or her knowledge of human hatred, ice would be an equally powerful method of destruction—and would do the job sufficiently.
“Fire and Ice” Themes
Theme Hatred, Desire, and the End of the World
Hatred, Desire, and the End of the World
Despite its light and conversational tone, “Fire and Ice” is a bleak poem that highlights human beings’ talent for self-destruction. The poem is a work of eschatology—writing about the end of the world—and poses two possible causes for this end: fire and ice. The speaker uses these natural elements as symbols for desire and hatred, respectively, arguing that both emotions left unchecked have the capacity to destroy civilization itself.
The speaker begins by relating that, when it comes to how the world will end, “some” people favor fire and “some” ice. At this early stage of the poem, these two elements could easily relate to a natural disaster. For example, a potential world-ending “fire” could be something like the asteroid that most likely destroyed the dinosaurs; and ice could relate to a future ice age, or the extinguishment of the sun. But as soon as those more naturalistic ends to the world are suggested, the poem changes direction and makes it clear that fire and ice are symbols—not of natural disasters, but of humanity’s ability to create disasters of its own.
By “fire” the speaker actually means “desire”—and from the speaker’s limited personal experience, the speaker knows desire to be a powerfully destructive force. Humanity, then, could bring about the end of the world through passion, anger, violence, greed, and bloodlust. Indeed, the “fire” now seems like an image of warfare too. (Indeed, the poem was written shortly after then end of World War I.)
Though the speaker feels “fire” is the likely way for humanity to destroy itself and the world, the speaker also feels that human beings’ capacity for destruction is so great that it could bring about this destruction more than once. (This is tongue-in-cheek, of course, as once would certainly be enough.) Here, the speaker presents “ice” as another method for ending it all, aligning it with hatred.
Ice works differently from fire in this eschatological prediction. Human destruction doesn’t have to be bright, noisy, and violent—hate can spread in more subtle ways. Ice has connotations of coldness and indifference, and so a possible reading here is that the end of the world could be brought about by inaction rather than some singular major event. A contemporary reading could map climate change onto “ice” here: if people fail to act over humanity’s effect on the climate, it will gradually, but assuredly, bring about destruction.
By the poem’s end, though, the choice between “ice” and “fire” starts to seem a little false—particularly as the speaker’s tone is so casual and even glib (“ice is also great”). Ice and fire, though utterly different in the literal sense, here represent one and the same thing: the destructive potential of humanity. Either method will suffice to bring about the inevitable end of the world. In just nine short lines, then, “Fire and Ice” offers a powerful warning about human nature. Finally, it’s important to notice something that isn’t in the poem: any hint of a possibility that humanity won’t end the world.