Deconstruction theory;

Deconstruction is at its core not actually a theory so much as it is a practice. Complexity is the basis, since all things are necessarily of numerous components, that is assumed when taking a critical look at a structure. Where the traditional belief is that a text has only one definite meaning, deconstruction points to multiple meanings which can change. This is quite contradictory to the conventional idea behind critical analysis, and it's why the theory was so controversial and groundshaking. Derrida suggests that all things contain contradictions, and once this is realized, a better understanding of the subject can be achieved. Taking new ideas from what was omitted from the work brings up a whole crop of new thinking and throws the old methods out the window. Derrida maintains that the elements that are left out of a structure will inevitably be its downfall, and since deconstruction can be applied to such a tremendous spectrum of fields, it quickly drew the ire of many. Especially unpopular was the idea that nothing can exist without a degree of uncertainty, and more so when turned on popular religious beliefs. The uninitiated may see nihilism emerge, that there is no real truth to life and that our faith and mores are false. While deconstruction, when applied to ultimate reality and religion does propose that a single meaning does not exist, it does point to multiple meanings, but necessarily different ones. The assumption of complexity and uncertainty in all things, paired with unfavorable revelations about cultural statutes and a pioneer who was reluctant to share even his own definition of the subject, seems like a magnet for scorn, and it arguably was. However, the obscurity that surrounds deconstruction is really an illustration of its chief meaning, and icing on the cake for followers and critics. The majority see only the denial of conventional thought, and disparage the premise, especially when they look at summaries in lieu of Derrida's actual works. For those who see deeper, and realize the advantage of such a paradigm change, will find a treasure trove of new ideas and identify with their progenitor. APPLICATION OF DECONSTRUCTION ON ROBERT FROST POEM FIRE AND Ice The poem starts with the idea that the end of the world will be in two forms either by fire or by ice. Fire is basically related with warmness n life while ice can be associated with dead sentiments. The poem can be interpreted on different levels

according to deconstruction. Frost forces the reader to look back at the first two lines and consider a new meaning. The speaker goes on to relate fire to the human emotion of desire and ice to hate. Looking back at the third line, the use of I shows a personal connection to the emotions of desire and hate. Putting this poem in the context of a relationship, desire and hate are emotions that people often feel. The final line of the poem shows that human emotions of fire (desire) and ice (hate) are equally harmful and can easily bring about the end of a relationship. In order to effectively communicate the darker feelings felt in a relationship, the poet uses the following poetic devices: imagery, denotations and connotations, figurative language, musical devices, rhythm and meter, and the structure of the poem. Imagery. The speaker utilizes images to help emphasize a persons feelings in a relationship. The first image of fire is used both in the title and twice in the poem. Fire, when uncontrolled, viciously consumes all around it, wanting more and more as it grows. In a relationship, this fire can be set off in an instant. Desire, or jealousy, can occur in a relationship, and consequently can consume an individual until there is nothing left to burn. The second image of ice is also used in the title and twice in the poem. In Dantes Infernal, the freezing temperatures of hell attempt to drive the life out of a person . Similarly, hate forces the other person away, driving the life out of a relationship. When left uncontrolled, these darker emotions can bring about the end of a relationship. The speaker utilizes images to help emphasize a persons feelings in a relationship. The first image of fire is used both in the title and twice in the poem. Fire, when uncontrolled, viciously consumes all around it, wanting more and more as it grows. In a relationship, this fire can be set off in an instant. Desire, or jealousy, can occur in a relationship, and consequently can consume an individual until there is nothing left to burn. The second image of ice is also used in the title and twice in the poem. In Dantes Infernal, the freezing temperatures of hell attempt to drive the life out of a person . Similarly, hate forces the other person away, driving the life out of a relationship. When left uncontrolled, these darker emotions can bring about the end of a relationship. The poems meaning is also communicated by the denotations and connotations of words. The poet uses words that mean or suggest passion/consumption, knowledge/experience and death/destruction. Passion and consumption are suggested by the words fire, desire, and taste. The words some say represent knowledge of a group of people;

while the first person I know suggests personal experience. End, fire, ice, perish and destruction all denote death and destruction. The use of figurate language further adds to the meaning of the poem. The primary source of figurative language is through the use of symbolization. Tom Hansen states that fire is directly equated with desire, the kind that kindles antagonism and conflict. The symbolism of fire, along with the denotations and connotations, further add to the meaning of the poem. Another use of symbolism is through the use of the word ice. Ice represents hate. Finally, the poet uses the world as a symbol for a relationship. All of these symbols help to tie together the poem by making desire and hate feelings felt in a relationship. In addition to the use of symbols, the poet also uses understatements to add to the tone. The poem ends with the line And would suffice which oversimplifies the meaning that has been created. By using this line, the poet emphasizes the harm of desire and hate in a relationship. Lastly, paradox is used in the line: But if I had to perish twice. While a person is unable to die two times, the line is used figuratively to demonstrate that desire is equally as harmful as hate. Desire and hate, believed by some to be the two largest faults of the human race. Robert Frost explains these two ideas in only nine lines. Fire and Ice is a perfect example of juxtaposition between fire and ice, or, desire and hate. Both are believed to destroy a person if they succumb to its hold. Frost begins with saying that some believe the world will end in fire, some believe ice. In other words, some believe that those who desire too much will perish; others believe that hating so much as to put their whole self into it will have the same result. Frost did not mean that having either of these faults meant physical death, more of a death of the spirit. Those who desire things such as power or wealth soon think of nothing else and lose all touch with everything around them; those who hate never enjoy life and lose touch with what truly matters in life. With either one, the person who suffers from it exists, but does not live. Frost then gives his opinion on fire, or desire. He states that he agrees with those who believe that fire will destroy you, for he has experienced this burning desire and knows how difficult it is to break free from your wants and take another path. Frost then continues by stating that ice, or hate, is just as destructive, for he has experienced that also. He states that they are of equal ability to destroy a mans life, give it no meaning. To desire one thing, such as wealth, and to hate so much as to never be happy with everything will both destroy a mans reason for living

equally. So, no matter which fault the person has they will have the same result so Frost, in the end, agrees with both opinions on which will end the world. Throughout the poem Frost also uses a rhyming scheme to separate the two ideas, every word coinciding with fire rhymes, fire and desire, and everything that coincides with ice rhymes also, ice, twice, hate, and great. It helps to emphasize the difference between the two, showing that, although theyre completely different, they have the same affect. His last line, and would suffice, has no rhyme, showing that neither ice nor fire is more potent than the other in destroying a person, both of them will suffice. Deconstruction broke the convention of each and everything in structuralism. In deconstruction certain terms are used such as difference,deferment,binaryopposition etc .The term difference is used in a sense that the meaning lies in the difference of words such as ,opposing to each other.A word cannot be recognized by a single word.No word has any meaning of its alone,without black there will be no white. Hence in this poem of robertfrost fire which is basically used for desire is there because of ice ,without ice there will be no fire as it is opposing . In deconstruction meaning of word is delayed.It can be interpreted o different levels such as symbolically ,metaphorically etc.the deconstruction theory basically emphasize on the idea that meaning of the word is not fixed,continuously changing forexample summer is a hot season in Pakistan but its a season of spring in west,which means that change of context has changed the meaning of words .no meaning is fixed of one text,in other words hundred people will interpret the same text in different way.

As discussed above the poem is interpreted on different levels such as fire and ice stand for desire and hatred. it can be interpreted as for warmness or life and dead sentiments. Also fire for jealousy and ice to drive the person away due to this jealousy. Hundred and thousands of meaning can be given due to the deconstruction method.

Binaryopposition is the main term used in deconstruction theory .Derrida used the terms central and marginalized for it .According to him one is given more importance than the other.But according to many critics and deconstruction nothing is marginalized the things which are previliged are more important.

In this poem binary opposition is in the form of fire and ice.Fire can be central on the sense as it has some positive features such as life n warmness in attitudes while ice which is stand for dead feelings n sentiments can be marginalized .However both are important as the whole poem revolves around it. Conclusion; Hence the poem fire and ice is a brilliant example of deconstruction ,further the features of binaryopposition,difference ,and multiple interpretation is discussed which makes it more brilliant.