Am I the only one who thinks that "Frost and Fire" is a neglected masterpiece? Okay, the second part of the story is a bit pulpy, but it's such a wonderful concept, beautifully carried out, that the story should receive more recognition.

Yet, though first published in 1946, it was never even in a Bradbury collection until 1962. It also missed out in the Science Fiction Hall of Fame selections (1965), and when you read about RB, the story is very seldom mentioned. It is in The Stories of RB, but there are a round 100 stories in that one, so that's not very significant.

Did I just read it when I was young and impressionable, or is it an overlooked gem?

Douglas, apparently you're not the only one to notice the story's quality, as reportedly a film is in the works. I don't predict the quality of the forthcoming film, but here is a combination film prediction/story comment: Look for the roles of women in "Frost and Fire" to be way played up from the original. (They could scarcely be played down.) Just read the originals of "Prince of Egypt" (the Bible, that is) and "The Fellowship of the Ring" and compare to the same characters in the movies--you'll see a trend. This neglect of the vital role of women (a necessity in forming a new society--if anything, women should outnumber men for obvious reasons) was the only flaw in an otherwise superb story which I felt like mentioning in my one in-depth conversation with Bradbury. His only comment was, "I'll have to reread that story."

Yes, I knew it had to be a movie someday - but I guess it's too much to hope for that they'll ever do it right. The scene where Sim and his rival duel in the sun is particularly cinematic ... the dropping down on one knee, and so on. The casting will be so tough - they're gonna need at least two actors for some of the roles, young and old. Anyway, I'll look out for it.

I found "Frost and Fire" to be one of Bradbury's most imaginative science fiction stories. The idea of a race with such absurdly short lifespans opens up so many possibilities. How can such a short life be made meaningful? The question might just as easily be asked of our lives. Seventy or eighty years can also be absurdly short when you think about all there is to do, to experience, to learn in this amazing world. Sim is an example of someone who stands out of the crowd, someone who is willing to devote--and possibly even sacrifice--his life for something better. Of course, this is also true of the scientists. Unlike the scientists, who are sacrifing their lives for future generations, Sim wants to improve his own life. I felt ambivalent about that. The scientists' philosophy was noble , whereas Sim was looking out for number one. (Of course, this story reflects an era in which science fiction was action-oriented, not cerebral.) On the other hand, the scientists' proposed solutions all failed due to the fact that they were overlooking the human element. Sim demonstrated the power of the human spirit to fight for his life. It took a combination of inner strength, physical endurance, and sheer dumb luck for Sim to succeed. And of course, Sim is not truly a selfish man, for his first thought after achieving his goal is how to share his new found longevity with the rest of his tribe. Compared with Bradbury's other short science fiction stories, I think this one stands out as among the most original in concept.