Fale 1

Invalidating Child Abuse in Theodore Roethkes My Papas Waltz

A Formalist Analysis
BY APRIL ROSE FALE

Over a half-century ago, poet Theodore Roethke wrote of a frolic between a father and his son. It was a rather short poem, four quick stanzas spoken through a small childs voice. This little piece of poetry that seems an innocent recollection is now the center of a sparking debate. Was Roethke reminiscing a moment of familial bonding, or was he alluding to child abuse? These questions now surround Theodore Roethkes My Papas Waltz. While many readers see the poem as regular father-and-son roughhousing, others cry child abuse hidden behind the poems innocuous faade. Some critiques claim so far as incest (A Deconstructionist Reading). While there is no infallible way of reaching a satisfying conclusion, a study of Roethkes childhood, the character of allegedly abusive father Otto Roethke, and an analysis of the poems controversial word changes show child abuse to be a fantastic accusation. Wordsworth says a poem is an experience recollected in tranquility. In the very likely assumption that this is a poem drawn from experience, it is sensible to look into the poets own childhood for indications of abuse or violence in the home. In this area, child abuse falters. The Glass House, the only extensive biography of Theodore Roethke, describes Otto Roethke and his wife Helen: It was a good marriage. There are no memories of any of the quarrels that make children fear the end of the world has come. The elder Roethke settled potential quarrels with a shrug and a laugh. The household was of a calm nature; family members knew their duty. Helen Roethke may be too meticulous with managing the house, which accounts for her disapproval at the pans that slid from the kitchen shelf (Seager 15). Other than this, there were no violent undertones or evidence of deepset hatred and excessively fearful affections (17).

Fale 2 Teds relations with his father was typical, and showed no signs of maltreatment. Otto would attend to his sons questions or long silent stares and give Ted bits of information about their greenhouse business. Ted would be given small tasks like riding with the delivery van and proudly announcing at the customers door: Flowers from Roethkes! (21). In a high school essay written shortly after his fathers death, Ted wrote of walloping his cousin in defense of his Papa, and related dreams where the two of them were waltzing (23). The character of Otto Roethke is an ineffectual basis for child abuse. He was a tall, blond man with whom Ted bore good resemblance. His movements were slow and deft, hardly aggressive. The neighborhood kids thought him cross but not mean, probably because Otto kept them from playing in the greenhouses (15). His devotion to his work was notable; he would scour the villages for the right cowdung. In this, he could not be corrupted, recalls Ted. Otto valued tuchtig, or doing what was right (13). He was, in essence, a solidly grounded man against whom accusations of child abuse is unreasonable. The contentious word changes in the original manuscripts are virtually inconclusive. The change in the speakers gender from girl to boy could be Roethkes move toward securing public acceptance in the 1940s. The word whiskey always sounds negative when placed in the same situation as a child, but by itself fails to prove child abuse. Hung on like death might be a reference to the relentless hold of death on Roethkes own father. The change from unscrew to unfrown is particularly open to implications other than the formers sexual connotations (McKenna). Aesthetically, a mothers screwed up face is a rather unpleasant image. It may also be a balancing act: a screwed up face, when seen as an exaggeration of a frown, suggests the childs amusement at his mothers reaction to this male roughhousing. Unfrown introduces a less comical image and lends a more serious tone that prevents the reader from taking the poem too lightly. The title itself expresses Roethkes affection for the memory of his father. Revisions and Tones details the six revisions that Roethke made before finally settling for My Papas Waltz (McKenna). Adding the word my indicates proud ownership. The more formal and detached father was replaced with the more affectionate papa. The choice of waltz instead of dance elevates their clumsy gamboling into a proud and dignified action. The extremely negative analysis and general uneasiness toward the poem may be explained without resorting to unsupported conclusions. The faint tension in this playful romp may convey a childs fear, but one that does not exceed the typical fear engendered by a relationship with a familys authority figure (Grimes). It conveys a childs uncertainty with this rare allocation of time by a father who generally devotes his time to the family business. The boy indeed seems vulnerable beside a large man who smells of whiskey. However, to

Fale 3 deduce child abuse is to draw a hasty conclusion beyond the allowances of the poems ambiguity. Roethke, in a stroke of genius, balanced his poem brilliantly. We are like eager children to whom he gives a picture book, made purely of lines and empty shapes that we easily recognize and to which we readily relate. We are free to color as we please. In a just system, the assumption of innocence stands until guilt is proven. For all intents and purposes, Theodore Roethkes My Papas Waltz is simply a recollection of a significant moment between father and son. Until we find irrefutable evidence to prove otherwise, so it will remain.

WORKS CITED

Grimes, Linda Sue. Misreading My Papas Waltz. suite101.com 18 December 2006 <http://www.suite101.com/blog/lsgrimes/ misreading_my_papas _waltz>. McKenna, John J. Roethkes Revisions and the Tone of My Papas Waltz. ANQ, Spring 1998, Vol. 11 Issue 2: p34. My Papas Waltz: A Deconstructionist Reading. bedfordstmartins.com http:// bcs.bedfordstmartins.com/virtualit/poetry/critical_ define/deconessay.pdf>. Seager, Allan. The Glass House: The Life of Theodore Roethke. New York: McGraw-Hill 1968