Typically, children have a very strong connection with their mothers from birth while in a way your father must earn your affection; which society has set a standard that this is achieved through a capital aspect. In today’s society it is expected and assumed that children view their fathers as their main provider financially and view their mothers as their main provider emotionally. They rely on their fathers solely to support them and give them anything they could need without question or concern about the dollar price. However, in “forgiving my father” by Lucille Clifton the main message is how children should view their fathers more as an emotional provider along with how they add value to your life. This is achieved by the author, throughout the piece, by showing the child’s source of bitterness towards him as she tries to forgive him for leaving her with nothing financially or emotionally. This leads to the realization that having a good connection with her father is more important than the financial aspect her father should have provided, which defies the standards of today’s society.

In the past, children were more likely to spend time with their mothers because their fathers would work to support them financially which allowed mothers to stay home to take care of their children, house and everyday chores or tasks needed to be fulfilled. This caused for children to be closer to their mothers, which created a bond that was irreplaceable. They also looked to their mother as an emotional support system who could and would always help them through any situation or trial, as well as someone who brings them stability and can fix ultimately any problem that may occur.  This is shown when the daughter starts off the poem describing her father as a “ghost” who was “standing in my dreams” as someone coming to ask her for “more time,” but the author felt that the time was all gone and “there will never be time enough daddy” while she clings desperately to the memory of her mother who unfortunately laid in her “early grave.” The use of the word daddy in the poem could symbolize her unacknowledged youth within herself that was neglected by her father emotionally while she was a young child and was continued into her adulthood, which allowed the author to feel the emptiness even further. Not only was the author neglected emotionally, but the child frequently refers to today as “payday” and how she wishes her father were rich so she could “take it all” and could “give the lady,” which symbolizes her and her mother, “what she was due.” However, with her mother being deceased, she still has such a strong connection to her that she defends her against her father within the poem. The author defends her mother by saying how her father was “the pocket that was going to open” and reiterates how he was the supporter of the family financially and how he came up “empty any Friday,” which was his payday. However, this “payday” refers to herself needing him to pay for what he did to her mother and her belief that what was due from him went unpaid, which ultimately led to the death of her mother. The daughter also was left with nothing emotionally and feels the absence of her emotional connection along with the stability she received from her mother. The child then clings on to the image of what her father could be in hopes of him eventually becoming that image, within her mind, to fill the void inside her now that her mother was gone.

Throughout the poem the child tries to understand her father figure as she used to see him, which allows bitterness to reside in her heart towards him while she struggles to overcome the emptiness she has felt from her father since birth. She also tries to move forward so she can forgive and understand that everything he did for her and her mother was all he could do. The child soon realizes how emotional currency is just as valuable as real currency. Evidence in the text which can be shown in the beginning of the poem when she states that it’s “payday, payday old man” and refers to him as an “old lecher” and an “old liar”, which led to the realization of the daughter that her father grew up as “the son of a needy father” while, at the same time, it hits her that he is also “the father of a needy son.”_These words clarify to the daughter how she is complaining about needing and wanting the same thing her father did, which is financial stability. This comes to prove, later, to the daughter that she cannot blame him for what he has done. The comparison from the beginning of her father being a selfish “old man” to stating that he “gave her all you had”, even though it was nothing she could ultimately hold or feel emotionally or financially, he still selflessly provided them with everything his name was good for; which today everyone is so eager to take instead of give. Therefore, when the daughter went to go collect his belongings from his bank account it would be him, who lies “side by side in debtors’ boxes” because she had already received his full self and she states “no account will open them up” because the contents within the box have already been claimed, even though she was unaware of it. 

Throughout the authors childhood she would often be caught in-between the arguments of her mother and father.  This became evident in the poem when she states how she wishes she could take it all to give “the lady what she was due” which also allows the author to affiliate Friday’s as “payday” for her family. This can also be seen as a symbol of the end of her long journey between the marital disputes of her parents. However, now that they are both deceased she has no one to fight for and defend, or have someone to receive a payment from and no one to pay; this leaves her alone to fend for herself. This allowed for the author to see what was truly wrong within her family and allowed her to understand how not having money_ was not as important as her family’s connection to one another and realizes how both of her relationships with her parents, regardless of their own arguments, was not as fulfilled as they could have been. 

In the beginning of the poem the author gives off the impression of how her relationships with her mother was stronger than her fathers and this allowed her to stand up for her mother instead of her father. Later, in the poem the reader can see how the author is beginning to realize how her father was truly not as bad as he seemed and how she could have had a stronger connection with him, which could have led to a stronger relationship within her whole. With these stronger connections, they all could still be there and they could rely on one another and overcome the financial, and emotional state they are in. These situations go through the authors mind as the conflict within herself is revealed; whether she should forgive her father or not. The author also recognizes how the parents “were each other’s bad bargain” and not hers, which led her to believe that their issues should be left to themselves and in their graves and not kept within her lifetime.

This poem is a very powerful representation of how society sets standards for how the normal family should be, which includes the father to only be used as a financial provider and how when children become adults they are left to fend for themselves and in a sense their parents become ghosts within their own lives. However, the author realizes how she should not hold her father and mother accountable for their actions and what they could not provide for one another but to reflect upon all the times they had together. The author also finally decides to move on from her parent’s marital disputes and to finally forgive her father and her mother for their mistakes, which allows her to move forward with her life._These realizations overpower the standards society has set and help the author understand how emotional support is overall more important than financial support.
