The poem “My Papa’s Waltz” (Roethke, 1948) seems like a very simple poem that is a rather straightforward recollection by the author about an event in his past. Yet this poem is subject to several interpretations. Modern readers, especially those who are unfamiliar with Roethke’s work can see a description of an abusive relationship hidden in the lines of this poem. Reading this poem with a bit of insight regarding the time period that it was written about and listening to the dance found in the poem can lead to the interpretation that it is simply a poem about a time the son spent with his father. The imagery in the poem causes the conflict in interpretation but the meter, rhythm, the voice of the speaker and even the simple characterization of the three people lead to a more favorable interpretation.
The meter in this poem is very interesting and significant. This poem is written in iambic trimeter. Iambic means that a stressed syllable follows an unstressed syllable (DiYanni, 2002) and trimeter means that there are three stressed syllables in each line. This specific meter mimics the waltz that it is discussing because a waltz is composed in ¾ time and has a three beat step. In ballet a waltz step essentially goes down, up, up and you hear that exact cadence when you break down the syllables in the poem.
Of similar importance to this poem is the rhythm. While the relationship between the waltz that is spoken of and the beat of the waltz mimicked by the meter has been established, when you read the poem aloud you hear that lilting dance like quality throughout the poem. The only aspect of the poem that loses this quality is when you go to say “My mother’s countenance/Could not unfrown itself.” (pp 786 ll 7-8) Countenance is the longest and most difficult word in the poem and saying it forces you to pause in the reading and lose the feel of the dance. The word unfrown is similarly difficult to say and reinforces the separation between the mother and the feeling of the father and son relationship characterized in rest of the poem.
The imagery in the poem created by several word choices and phrases is what causes the most conflicting responses as to the interpretation. Phrases such as “I hung on like death” (pp. 786, ll. 3), “We romped until the pans/Slid from the kitchen shelf;” (pp786 ll 5-6), “My right ear scraped a buckle” (pp 787 ll 12) ,”beat time” (pp 787 ll 13) and even the choice of the word “battered” (pp 787 ll 10) are all very rough and give a sense of danger to the poem. This may be what causes readers to think, well if this is a nice tale about a dad playing with his son why would the author use such harsh words? Heck he says “battered” (pp 787 ll 10), “scraped” (pp 787 ll 12) and “beat” (pp 787 ll 13) right out. This poem has got to be about child abuse by a drunken father, we all know the evils of that. This is when it is time to take out your retrospective goggles and view this from the time period. Our broad and über sensitive interpretation of the word abuse is a modern construct. If the author wrote this in 1948 but was born in 1908 he would have been 40 upon writing it, to place the author as a “small boy” (pp 786 ll 2) we can assume he was discussing a time before 1920. In this age the rough words would have served the purpose of classifying the family as working class, rough around the edges so to speak. The father coming home after a few drinks was commonplace. Many times we apply modern interpretations to past events and lose sight of what was ‘normal’ for the time.
The speaker is obviously the son, and it seems safe to assume that the author is most likely recollecting an experience from his own past. The poem is written in the past tense and it feels like a person reminiscing about the nostalgia of the past. To go back and relive a time when he and adored his father and even his drunken antics could seem like a fantastic dance. The speaker also seems wistful for these bygone simple events that were an unplanned but enjoyable part of life.
While the poem is extremely short there is significant characterization of each the father, son and mother. We learn most clearly about the father. From the line “palm caked hard by dirt” (pp 787 ll 14) we know that the father does some form of physical labor. From “whiskey on your breath” (pp 786 ll 1) we learn that he drinks. This leads us to the characterization of the father as a blue-collar laborer who goes to the bar and has a few drinks. This characterization leads to seeing the scene as the unintentional roughness of a drunken father playing with his son. The fact that the scene has the sense that it is familiar to the speaker lends a sense that the father has a tendency toward drunkenness but appears a happy drunk. For many who come from an abusive alcoholic home this is all the proof they need that this is a story about abuse. For those who do not have that personal experience there is more leeway.
The characterization of the son is the most important factor in interpreting the poem. From the line “Could make a small boy dizzy” (pp 786 ll 2) we see that the boy is obviously very young and not really aware of the meaning of the whiskey or the drunkenness of the father. The dizziness indicates a sense of innocence. The end of the poem where he states that his father “waltzed me off to bed/Still clinging to your shirt” (pp 787 ll 15-16) seems to show a loving, adoration relationship between a not ideal but well intentioned father and his son. The act of the son clining to the father when he puts him to bed further shows the love rather than abuse. It also seems to be a bit of foreshadowing that soon the small boy will see the drunken romps of his father as something other than the ‘fun’ he thinks of them at this time. This could be another reason for the rough word choices made in the poem. At this time the child is blind to the faults characterized by the roughness but he stands at a precipice of becoming immune to them or overwhelmed by them.
The characterization of the mother is extremely important yet we know the least about her. “My mother’s countenance/Could not unfrown itself.” (pp 786 ll 7-8) The mother is simply frowning, she is not overtly upset. This seems to be an admission of displeased consent. This is another point that illustrates the rough relationship rather than abuse. The mother watches and frowns but does not try to interfere, we are aware that the mother sees the dance for what it is; a drunken father’s unintentional roughness with a son who should be entitled to a more safe and involved father. At the same time she sees that the son is enchanted with the dance and is blind to the faults and wants to keep his innocence a while longer to the faults of his father.
While there are valid reasons for considering either interpretation of the poem, it is important to remember that our modern constructions can skew our interpretations. Looking at all of the subtle aspects of the poem from the enduring title “Papa’s waltz” (pp 786), to the happy dancing beat, to the characterization of each member of the family there is good evidence to believe that this is the cherished memory of a loving son.
References
Barnet, S., Cain, W.E., & Burto, W. (2011). Literature for composition: Essays, stories, poems, and plays (9th ed.). New York, NY: Longman.
DiYanni, R. (2002). Glossary of poetic terms. Retrieved from http://highered.mcgraw- hill.com/sites/0072405228/student_view0/poetic_glossary.html
