Introduction
This poem elicited a lot of controversies because the scene in the poem is now considered child abuse. Some critics have said they believe that Roethke was angry with his father. Others suggest ambivalence toward him. I believe we have to consider Roethke’s time and place, not our own, when we analyze this poem and remember the culture from which he came, the working classes in the early twentieth century in what was a poor section of the country when we read these words. Roethke’s papa may have been drunk and a bit rough with his boy, but there is no anger here and certainly not ambivalence, or the poem would not have been written at all. Poets do not take subjects about which they are ambivalent. In truth, this poem shows a lot of respect and genuine love for both his parents. It is a somewhat nostalgic memory of a home scene when the poet felt safe and warm.
Meaning of verses
Most criticisms stem from the mention of whisky in the first verse, and the fact that Roethke used the word “death” for how he hung on. This line says that he hung on with every ounce of his strength, and the connotation we give it is not there. If we match this to the last line of the poem, we see that he is “clinging” to his father’s shirt as his father waltzes him off to bed. This is not a memory of abuse. The poet would not use the verb waltz if he were angry. Waltzing is a happy word.
The second verse paints a picture in which a small boy would take absolute delight: making his mother mad, but not having to take the heat. Their dancing shook her pans off the shelf. He would feel like he got away with something because she would blame his father and not him, so he would be free and clear to enjoy the spectacle of her face, which could not unfrown itself.
We figure out how young the poet was in the next verse because his ear is only at the level of his father’s belt. We now have a complete picture of him and his papa, he is standing on papa’s shoes and clinging to his shirt, while papa holds his right wrist with a battered hand, and they are “romping”. Here we have another very happy word. Two people do not “romp” alone, it is a cooperative activity, and it has a very fun connotation. So the dancing has become a “romp”.
The last verse uses another word that has elicited an outcry of “abuse”: beat as in “you beat time on my head”. I don’t think the poet was using this word in its isolated sense of beating, but rather, in its combined phrase sense of “beating time”, which is no indication of the force of the blows. For all, we know it could be a light affectionate tap. The next line has no reason for being if we are expected by the poet to note the word “beat”. It shows that his father worked hard and may have only just come in from work. His hands are caked “hard” with dirt. His hands were not merely dirty, but they were habitually dirty or they would not be “caked hard”. We get the image here that even when his hands are clean, working in the dirt made them hard. This was a man who worked very hard to support his family, and this was respected in his culture. To Roethke, this was a telling detail that pointed to his father’s good character.
The last two lines speak volumes. Being tucked in is a very important part of a young child’s day, and it is always remembered with fondness. His father plays with him first and then waltzes him off to bed and we assume he tucks the boy in. This is a perfect portrait of a happy family. His father may not have been perfect, but to this small boy, he was a jolly giant.
References
Roethke, Theodore, 1948, My Papa’s Waltz.