Write a summary on Fire And Ice
Answers
The poet talks about the two different beliefs regarding end of this world. He says that he is in the favour of those who say this world will end in fire as he has seen the effect and result of uncontrolled and unending desires. He finds the human desires same as fire in its nature. On the other hand, the second belief tells that ice is sufficient for destroying this world and the poet compares the nature of ice with hatred. As ice can make a part of body numb with its prolonged contact like hatred can also give numbness to our mind and thoughts and make us insensitive and cruel.
The speaker brings us into the middle of an argument between people who think the world will come to a fiery end and people who think the world will freeze. He could be talking about the literal end of the world, but he's also talking about the power that human beings have to harm or "destroy" one another.
The speaker's experience with romantic desire has taught him that passionate or "hot" emotions like love and lust would probably have the power to turn the earth into a big fireball. But he has also experienced the other extreme, and he knows that colder emotions like hate have great destructive power. Love gets all the publicity, but hate is the silent killer. It may not have the same grandeur[2] as the fireball ending, but it'll do the trick.
Answer:
Message-
The poem Fire and Ice by Robert Frost is a metaphor for human feelings of desires and hatred. Fire represents burning desires while ice on the other hand depicts ice cold hatred. It tells us about how we humans will be the end of our own race.
Summary-
The poem expresses the profound idea that the world would end in either of two ways, either by ice or fire. One group is of the opinion that someday the Earth’s core will get so heated up that it would lead to fire destroying the earth’s surface. On the other hand, the second group says that if the temperature goes down to an extent that makes life on Earth impossible, it would have the same catastrophic effect. The poet then compares fire and ice with the destructive features of human emotions; desire and hatred. He says that from what he is aware about “fiery desires”, he would favour the ones who say that it would be fire. By saying so, he brings about the idea that human beings let their emotions rule them and the consequence of unmonitored longing is chaos.
Then by not waving off the first option of fire, he considers if the world has to expire twice, ice would be equally competent in ending it. He brings about a contrast between “ice” and “hatred”. The human capability of insensitivity and hatred has the potential for inner destruction. Though slow and steady, it has the same effect that desire has on us. So if given an option between fire and ice, ice would be just as good as fire to destroy the world.
Hope it helps you.
plz mark it as brainliest.
Explanation: