Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Can anyone explain the "We’d rather have the iceberg than the ship" expression? I understand the overall point of the article, but I'm having trouble parsing the last paragraph, where he seems to assume that one reading of that expression is somehow obvious. Is it the ship that's ephemeral, or the iceberg? (It seems like a reference to the Titanic, and at least in my mind, both the Titanic and the iceberg were ephemeral.)


The author isn't going for direct metaphor. But it appears to be around the concept that icebergs eventually melt. So if you were traveling/floating on an iceberg it would eventually go away. A well built ship on the other hand could last indefinitely or much longer at least.


I think you've nailed it - I was racking my brain connecting the article with any interpretation of the poem, rather than the literal text. This feels closer to using Mending Wall to justify a taller border fence.


Yeah, it’s not very clear to me either. From my reading, the poem is comparing the overwhelming majesty and elegance of the natural iceberg to the comparatively shoddy man-made vessel. But it’s open to interpretation.

The author definitely doesn’t do themselves any favors, though, by making an analogy with a fairly obscure poem and not even bothering to explain it.


After reading the poem, I agree that it's open to interpretation, but I also wonder whether the author of the linked article has really thought about what the poem means.

As far as I can tell, the poem seems to be about how icebergs exist in some majestic perpetual space of recurrence. The first stanza talks about how icebergs are impermanent, melt and eventually turn into rain ("Are you aware an iceberg takes repose / With you, and when it wakes may pasture on your snows?") but then the last stanza talks about how they perpetually arise again ("Like jewelry from a grave / It saves itself perpetually").

If anything, the poem seems like it would be perfect for referring to America's perpetual capacity to reinvent itself -- i.e., areas may fall into decay but then are rebuilt, much like urban Detroit is enjoying a revival -- not the more pessimistic take of the author of the piece.


I read it as "if we have to choose between maintaining nature and having cruise ships, we'd rather maintain nature and not have cruises".


The solution is worse than the problem.


Society, on the whole would rather have solutions that are more romantic/grandiose, albeit fleeting, uncontrollable and less practical




Consider applying for YC's Winter 2026 batch! Applications are open till Nov 10

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: