“Something there is that does not like a wall”
Introduction
Throughout the poem, we witness an innocent walk of two farmers. Although they hardly ever speak, the poetic devices make it obvious that the neighbors partake not only in mending a wall but also in a thought-provoking discussion and are a part of all-encompassing opposition against the backdrop of mystery and fantasy. The oxymoron “Something there is that does not like a wall” (line 1) introduces the idea of some strange force, thus leaving the reader fixated on unraveling the mystery (Frost 612). The paradoxical concept that an inanimate “something” could dislike an ordinary object becomes a potent tool of securing the reader’s attention. The next lines gradually unveil the character of this force by personification as it “sends the … swell” (line 2), “spills the upper boulders” (line 3), and “makes gaps” (line 4) (Frost 612). Apart from the atmosphere of mysticism, the writer creates a playful mood by comparing mending to an outdoor game (line 21), the stones they pick up – to loaves and balls (line 17) and personifying the trees (lines 25, 26) (Frost 612). Second, the writer resorts to the repetition of entire phrases as a device to help him build a framework for the above-mentioned discussion. By doubling “the wall between us” (lines 14, 15), the writer marks a big divide, both physical and emotional (Frost 612). The ambiguous “Something there is that does not like a wall” (lines 1, 35) by the speaker and straightforward “Good fences make good neighbors” (lines 27, 45) by his speaking partner are placed at intervals with the second one echoing the first one twice (Frost 612-613). This tentative repetition subtly leads us to the realization that the men are, in fact, opponents. Their outlooks are additionally clarified by a simile that compares the neighbor to a savage (lines 38-40) and therefore reveals a difference in values: progressive and conservative (Frost 613). On balance, the discursive nature of the poem lends itself to a discovery guided by the author via repetition and comparison, and the air of playfulness pervades the first part of it.
Metaphor
Being an implicit comparison, a metaphor enables a writer to highlight an object’s or idea’s quality through an unobvious match and thus to draw on the effect of unexpectedness. The metaphor “wall” is an axis the poem revolves around. Its potential has been thoroughly explored by numerous literary critics, Jerry Flexer being the one whose interpretation seems to be precise and exhaustive. He states that “wall” can be understood as “a barrier to social interaction, connection, and friendship” (Flexer par. 2), “an entrenched belief in a tradition… that inhibits a new approach to a situation” (Flexer par. 3) and “a barrier to enlightened behavior and expanded awareness of self” (Flexer par. 4). Taking this into account, the following passage is primarily dealing with a few peculiarities of the usage of this metaphor rather than restating the well-known. “Mending wall” presents an interesting case of a metaphor tending to a symbol. Unlike a symbol, though, it shares a number of features with its denotata – “personal boundaries” and “psychological barriers.”
Nevertheless, to be considered a well-rounded metaphor, the initial object or idea should have been stated. However, the author avoids mentioning it and just insinuates: “and I’d rather / He said it for himself” (lines 37, 38) (Frost 613). There must be a good reason for that, thus, most probably, the writer had a didactic purpose on his mind. By this insinuation, Frost is, in reality, targeting the reader rather than the neighbor. It is the reader who should untangle the intricacies of their inner world and find an answer to what it is that divides them from the rest and why. After generalizing about the walling process (lines 32, 33), where “wall” is stressed by a play on words “in” – “out,” the writer leaves no doubt that “wall” is the core of an extended metaphor (Frost 612). Having taken the decoding one step further, we see that the stones are nothing else but our evils – prejudice, superstitions, bias, and jealousy and that they shut us out from each other. Altogether, the author looks to rely heavily on overtones in using metaphors as if reluctant to begin an open debate on the topic.
Imagery
Imagery comprises a vast array of vivid descriptions aimed at stimulating a reader’s senses or stirring up certain feelings. For instance, “something” can be easily visualized as a giant since it is capable of making the ground bulge, the stones crumble, and the wall come apart (lines 2-4) (Frost 612). Similarly, we can almost hear the frenzied dogs attacking a rabbit after we read one single carefully chosen word “yelping” (lines 8, 9) (Frost 612). Together with the writer, we observe the neighbor’s instantaneous transformation into a caveman (lines 38-40) and feel an impelling urge to escape (Frost 613). At first sight, the imagery in “Mending wall” seems scarce nonetheless. Upon closer examination, there appears a bigger picture in the form of seemingly unrelated words, which, in actuality, denote separate particles involved in the opposition. Otherwise, neutral words gain descriptive power and serve the purpose of emphasizing a clash between opposing parties, or rather notions, namely: the mundane (mending (line 11), cows (line 31)) versus the otherworldly (something (line 1), elves (line 36)). The same is observed between pragmatism (set the wall (line 14)) and flights of fancy (some are loaves (line 17), an old-stone savage (line 40)); labor (we wear our fingers rough (line 20)) and magic (we have to use a spell (line 18)) (Frost 612-613). On the whole, the choice of words reflects the controversial essence of the topic in question.
Theme
The main theme is without a doubt that of human relationships and anything that stands in the way of mutual trust and understanding. It is worth noting that the author avoids taking a moralizing stand on relationship issues, preferring to sow the seeds of doubt with a series of questions (lines 30-34) (Frost 612). What if we are “walling in” our hearts and preventing them from spreading their warmth, and what if we are “walling ourselves out” from a helping hand or a life-changing experience? Questions like these may vary, but they definitely deserve to be asked if we are to interpret the underlying theme of the poem. The theme is progressively developed by the writer since he remarks in the end: “He will not go behind his father’s saying” (line 43), meaning that we pass on the baggage of moral values from generation to generation without ever questioning them (Frost 613). Vehemently yet blindly, we adhere to beliefs that might have long outlived themselves. Central to the theme also is some mystical force Frost has recourse to portraying (lines 1-4, 35-36) in order to encourage the reader to look deeper into the heart of the matter (Frost 612-613). The presence of it manifests Frost’s belief that there exists a more natural and fairer word order and that “something” ultimately stems from the universal principle of goodness.
Conclusion
All things considered, what could have been a rebuke on the part of the author took the shape of a light-hearted story with soul-piercing questions. His appeal met no response in his neighbor’s heart, whereas the reader might uncover the secret and reconsider the attitude to some of our problems. They even might wonder whether humanity has advanced in morals already as we are living in the new age sharing economy and social media used to share virtually anything with strangers: our knowledge, feelings, photos, cars, flats, and food.
Works Cited
Flexer, Jerry. “‘Wall’ as Metaphor in Robert Frost’s Mending Wall”. Online Academic Community, Web.
Frost, Robert. “Mending wall” Literature to Go, edited by Michael Meyer, Bedford/St.Martin’s, 2011, pp. 612-613.