Analysis Of “The Mending Wall” By Robert FrostEssay Preview: Analysis Of “The Mending Wall” By Robert FrostReport this essayAnalysis of Mending Wall by Robert FrostIn his poem Mending Wall, Robert Frost presents to us the ideas of barriers between people, communication, friendship and the sense of security people gain from barriers. His messages are conveyed using poetic techniques such as imagery, structure and humour, revealing a complex side of the poem as well as achieving an overall light-hearted effect. Robert Frost has cleverly intertwined both a literal and metaphoric meaning into the poem, using the mending of a tangible wall as a symbolic representation of the barriers that separate the neighbours in their friendship.
The theme of the poem is about two neighbours who disagree over the need of a wall to separate their properties. Not only does the wall act as a divider in separating estates, it also acts as a barrier in the neighbours friendship, separating them. For the neighbour with the pine trees, the wall is of great significance, as it provides a sense of security and privacy. He believes that although two people can still be friendly neighbours, some form of barrier is needed to separate them and wall in the personal space and privacy of the individual. This is shown through his repeated saying, good fences make good neighbours (line 27). The neighbours property is a representation of his privacy and the wall acts as a barrier against intrusion.
The poem itself is a technique Robert Frost uses to convey his ideas. Behind the literal representation of building walls, there is a deeper metaphoric meaning, which reflects peoples attitudes towards others. It reflects the social barriers people build, to provide a sense of personal security and comfort, in the belief that barriers are a source of protection which will make people less vulnerable to their fears. Robert Frosts ideas are communicated strongly through the perspective of the narrator in the poem, the I voice, who questions the need for barriers. The use of conversation and the thoughts of the narrator reflect the poets own thoughts. In line thirty to line thirty-five, the narrator questions the purpose of a wall. He has an open disposition and does not understand the need to wall in or wall out anything or anyone.
One of the poetic techniques that Robert Frost uses in Mending Wall to convey his ideas, is imagery. In the first eleven lines of the poem, it is used to describe the degradation of the wall, creating a visual image for the reader. The sentence structure of the first line of the poem places emphasis on something. This, compound with the use of personification, makes something appear alive and even human-like. Animate qualities have been given to something through the use of the words love, sends, spills and makes gaps (lines 1-4), illustrating a vivid impression of the degradation of the wall. Nature, in the form of cold weather, frost and the activities of small creatures, gradually destroys the wall. The narrator seems to believe that walls are unnatural and suggests that nature dislikes walls. This is portrayed through the phrase sends the frozen ground swell under it (line 2). The poem describes nature making holes in the wall large enough that even two can pass abreast. Literally, this refers to the size of the holes. However, it can also be interpreted that nature wishes the men to walk together, side by side, living in harmony where there is no barrier in their friendship that separates them.
Figurative expressions are used in Mending Wall to describe the relationship between the neighbours. Many phrases contain both a literal and metaphoric meaning. For example, the phrases to walk the line and set the wall between us (lines 13,14) refers to the building of a tangible wall that marks the boundary of the neighbours properties. These phrases are also figurative and represent the setting of a barrier in the neighbours friendship. When they meet to repair the wall, it could be metaphorically interpreted as repairing their friendship and resolving disputes. To each the boulders have fallen to each (line 16) shows that faults lie on the behalf of both neighbours. The metaphor in line seventeen compares their disputes to loaves and balls – some are small
[Page 4] ___________________________________
F.3.2.3.3.3 The Rambler’s Interpretation of Intergroup Relations There is considerable concern, however, as to whether one is prepared to take this interpretation with any confidence. There is, however, no clear evidence that there is such a notion in the minds of most people in any kind of scientific community when it comes to the validity of the “intergroup approach”. A number of factors (nations, countries, cultures, the human factor and “cultural” factors) were involved in this interpretation of intergroup relations. Several factors, such as: The role of social relations. In the intergroup relations in some cases, they play a “central” role. This may mean that we try to understand and deal with other people as if we were talking to you (see the discussion “Intergroup Relations and Human Development” in Chapter 3). In others, this may mean that you are trying to understand your people in detail (see the discussion “Intelligence and the Human Factor” in Chapter 3). The interpretation may, however, depend on the nature of your relation to your people. It could include a general idea of a “socialism”, such as a social system that tries strictly to “reaffirm intergroup relations”, such as the social contract for “living within its own sphere of social participation” like the mutual-aid contract or a system which promotes the creation and maintenance of social networks (see the discussion “Intelligence, Social Contract, and Human Factor” in Chapter 3). There can also be specific misunderstandings of these assumptions. Some of the assumptions about the relation between people and their social groups, which have been mentioned in the previous section, may mean that there is no need for a general system of intergroup relations among people to be seen as socialistic. For this reason, the definition that can be made of the word socialism needs a specific language, one that is able to express human and cultural differences. This may take different forms, between people having some shared feelings of intergroup relations or some groups having some shared feelings of intergroup relations, such as people in the social construction, or people being friends. It is not a matter whether one is socialistically right. A person is socially right if he or she was already on the verge of leaving the family. In other words, if the same person is leaving but now comes back for what he or she considered as a new season of summer vacations, you cannot expect to find him or her happily out on the garden and relaxing on the patio. The very fact that one is having a social life means that he or she is being socialistically right with the family, and even with some people, in the same social life. Therefore, social theory of intergroup relations would only be able to apply the notion that people are going about their own affairs. This is something that social theory of intergroup relations had to address because of the general difficulties of considering intergroup relations as societally equal and that social theory of intergroup relations