Theodore Roethke in his poem “My Papa’s Waltz”, discusses the dance performed by a young child and his father while the father is intoxicated. The way the young boy narrates the poem creates a mood which can be interpreted as having a positive connotation, for example he describes his father dancing with him before waltzing him off to his room at bedtime. However, a darker and more traumatic meaning can result from the boy’s description of the father’s physical characteristics and abusive behavior toward his son. 

Young children often see interactions involving their parents in contradicting points of view. The young boy in “My Papa’s Waltz”, describes his father as being intoxicated and obnoxious, creating havoc for his wife and all of the kitchenware. The smell of the father’s alcohol consumption was enough to make the young boy dazed, while his heavy footsteps made cooking utensils slide around in the cabinets, disrupting the order of the kitchen. Despite the rough housing performed by his father, the young son continued to dance along with his father every step of the way, refusing to let go. Children in these situations often feel as if they should hold onto their parents for their own protection, even though the parents are creating a worse situation for the children to be in. The boy in this poem may be injured by the father through his stomping or by the father’s grip on his wrists. It would probably be in the son’s best interest to let go of his father or try to break free and end the dancing, but for some reason he continues to cling tight to his dance partner. Perhaps, the boy doesn’t see the father at all during the day and wants to have fun with him before he must go to bed. On the other hand, the father could be stoic while he is sober and never show emotion toward the boy; causing the son to cling to any humorous interaction with the father. Whatever his reasoning, the young boy continues to dance with his father, stomping the kitchen floor and receiving the disapproval of his mother.

Roethke only mentions the mother once in the poem, most likely to focus the story on the father and son relationship. Perhaps, the author wanted to focus on the relationship between the father and son to create the contradicting point of view of the son. Maybe the expansion of the mother’s role in the poem would change the son’s contradiction to a more focused negative view of the interaction between the father and son. Clearly the boy’s mother did not approve of the rambunctious horseplay between her son and husband and if her role had been expanded, she would have likely shut down the dancing. By ending the dancing, the mother would have likely angered the father which, in turn, would shift the focus of the poem away from the interaction of the father and son to a possible confrontation between the mother and father. A disruption of the waltz could also violate the boy’s instincts by tearing him away from his father, likely turning a bad situation into an even worse one. Roethke most likely left out the mother in order to keep the main idea focused on the dancing between the father and son.

Roethke describes the mother’s disapproval of the horseplay as “My mother’s countenance/ Could not unfrown itself”, as she stood watching the raucous play between her husband and son. The mother has a right to be concerned not only for her kitchenware, but also for the safety of her child. Her son is involved in a dance which could be compared to an uneven wrestling match with a man much larger than he. The author describes the dance as “The hand that held my wrist/ Was battered on one knuckle”, the father is holding onto the boy with hands which are already war torn, leading one to consider that the father is violent. What could cause an injury such as this? Was the father in another confrontation earlier in the evening or could there be another cause? Is this implying danger for the boy? 

An injury to a knuckle can occur during an accident or through a physical dispute with another individual. Considering the poem takes place in the 1920’s when public drinking establishments were banned by law, the father would likely have gone to an illegal drinking club to purchase or consume the alcohol. These “speak-easies” as they were called, were not regulated by the government and were often run by criminals. An individual who would risk life and limb operating an illegal establishment would probably not refrain from a physical confrontation. Maybe the boy’s father was injured during a fight at one of these speak-easies after becoming intoxicated. On the other hand, the father may be a laborer who works a physically demanding job such as construction or steel-making. Both of these occupations involve working with one’s hands which leads to the possibility of injury by scraping or knocking. Perhaps, the father dropped a board on his hand at a construction site or was burned by accidentally touching a furnace in a steel factory. Whether the wound was created by conflict or calamity, the reader is concerned about the boy’s safety during the waltz. 

The construction accident theory is supported by “You beat time on my head/ With a palm caked with dirt.”, in which the young boy describes more of the physical attributes of the father’s hands. A hand that is covered with dirt would support this theory because there is a great likelihood of one having filthy hands after working on a construction site. Perhaps, the father was setting down a bundle of lumber to be used on a building and as he let go, the rough edge of one of the boards scraped his knuckle. An accident such as this is common on construction sites in which boards are being used. The father may have been in the wrong place at the wrong time and is guilty of no offenses. He may have chosen to drink in order to take a load off of his shoulders after a long day of work and to find some type of solace. 

In my opinion, the father in this story is guilty of only one thing, worrying his wife by dancing with her son while he is intoxicated and disrupting the order of the kitchen. There is no conclusive evidence to convict the father of any other offenses. He is most likely enjoying the waltz that he and his son are engaged in, even though he is going to have to explain his actions to his wife and straighten up the kitchen. The young boy will probably continue to wonder whether he was beaten during the waltz or only shown fatherly affection. It is the father’s responsibility to explain to his son the meaning of the waltz and to clarify any of the boy’s uncertainties. 
