A Critical Essay on Theodore Roethke’s “My Papa’s Waltz” Analysis

How can a numbers written more than lambert years ago manage to find a more modern-day construe, and inspire a healthy yet critical discussion amid classicists and modernist lectors or audiences? much(prenominal) is the charm exhibited by the poesy My Papas Waltz written by Theodore Roethke. Even before jumping sequent to the discussion of the meat and matter, or the content of the rime itself, there is already so much to say about the poem if we atomic number 18 to test its literary merit in terms of variety show.NARRATIVE STRUCTURE, LANGUAGE AND RHYMEThe poem is precise easily understood and is presented in a clear chronological order, from the completion the father comes home, up to the conclusion of the waltz with the speaker in the poem move out to bed (Roethke). Because of a clear chronology of events, the poem is light, delightful, and yet, remains thought-provoking.The address used is also very light and appropriate, as it is seen that the speaker in the poem is a child and the addressee is the papa, or the father of the speaker (Roethke). Such easy vocabulary is appropriate for the speaker in the poem, thus creating a high level of believability in the reader and lending credibleness to the speaker in the poem.We see clearly and immediately the distinction surrounded by the speaker and the addressee, and we can also create in our minds the right indite for both speaker and addressee in the poem. The rhyme scheme is A-B-A-B-C-D-C-D-E-F-E-F-G-H-G-H.There is a wonderful mix of masculine rhymes like head-bed in lines 13 and 15 (Roethke), and dirt- garb in lines 14 and 16 (Roethke) and feminine rhymes like dizzy-easy in lines 1 and 3 (Roethke), and press- break down in lines 10 and 12 (Roethke) in the poem. The few sloppy rhymes tack together in the poem are also interesting since they can be, again, attri only ifed to the feature that the speaker is a person of tender age.IMAGERY AND FIGURATIVE LANGUAGEThe narrative coordinate of th e poem is further bolstered by a clear and vivid comment of images. The very first two lines The whiskey on your confidential information/Could take up a small boy dizzy (Roethke) clearly and certainly presents a clear mental picture, where, non only the minds eye, simply as well as other senses are open to come in to be specific, in these lines, the sense of smell.Even the minds ears are able to participate in the sensory experience of the poem as attest by lines 5 and 6 We romped until the pans/Slid from the kitchen shelf (Roethke) where one could easily take the racket that these pans sliding off kitchen shelves may have caused.This poem is plain a delight to the senses The use of figurative language is superior as well. With lines 7 and 8 My mothers countenance/Could not unfrown itself (Roethke), and the final lines Then waltzed me off to bed/ Still clinging to your shirt (Roethke) are excellent and very imaginative use of figurative language, not to mention it be ing far from clich.The poem is a brilliant gem of literature that exhibits mastery, not only of poetical form, but as well as content. Speaking of content, this is exactly what has been theatre of heated debates and lively discussion regarding the theme or the reading of the poem.DUALITY OF READINGThe poem presents a multilayered theme, capable of multiple readings. This conflict of reading and interpretation of the poems thematic or symbolic meaning stems from a difference in reader response to the poem.Most classicists view the poem as an innocent and nostalgic retelling of a bonding time between a doting father and a beloved son/child. On the other end of the spectrum are the modernists interpretation of the poem as one which speaks of child abuse by somatogenetic punishment of a drunk father.The classicists argue that a reading of a poem should also take into consideration the era or period at the time of the poems writing. They argue that the poem should not only be read an d appreciated or criticized by employ intrinsic information within the poem, but also extrinsic factors, much(prenominal) as the reference to line 1s whiskey breath (Roethke), and lines 7 and 8s mothers countenance (Roethke).The modernists are in the view that this is not an enjoyable scenario for a child when such a dance is considered not easy (Roethke) in line 4, as well as a hung to death(Roethke) in line3. Furthermore, violence is suggested by the hand holding on to the personas wrist in line 9, which is described as batter in one knuckle in line 10. There is also a strong tinge of violence by the scrapping of the right ear in a buckle at every misstep (Roethke) in lines 11 and 12. Delivering the final grok to the coffin of the argument are the final lines 15 and 16s waltzing off to bed still clinging to the abusive fathers shirt (Roethke), which shows reluctance and forcible tucking in of the speaker to the bed.I identify with the modernists in the reading and interpretat ion of this poem. I see violence and abuse in the poem, but to debate on such matters would be to entirely miss the patch. The point here is that, this work is a marvelous piece of literature because it has the everlasting quality of a classic, as well as a multi-faceted and multi-layered interpretation.After all, a good poem should impart a significant human experience, and it should omit from the reader, empathy, and a participation of the senses. Whether this is a nostalgic recall of good propagation between father and child or a violent circumstance of child abuse, the fact remains that the poem succeeds both in form and substance or content, and transcends time, is of essence. Its allowing for multiple readings is only a testament to the superlative qualities of this timeless classic.