Quick to Assume

In the poem “My Papa’s Waltz,” author Theodore Roethke portrays the complicated love he has for his father using vivid images from his childhood. Roethke appropriately chooses iambic trimeter as it is poetry’s equivalent to music’s three-quarter or waltz time. The waltz that Roethke describes varies slightly from the traditional alacrity associated with the ballroom dance, yet still invites signs of happiness. Roethke transports the reader to his childhood which was filled with conflicting feelings of idolization, fear, comfort, and dependency.

Upon the first reading of “My Papa’s Waltz,” the reader might assume that the poem suggests that the speaker was beaten as a child by a drunken brute of a father. Yet, after multiple readings, it is clear that Roethke’s choice of words depicts a completely different scenario. It is no accident that the feeling of alcohol-induced clumsiness is prevalent in the first stanza through the slant rhyme of dizzy and easy. (Lines 2 and 4) Yet the pairing of breath and death is potentially misleading, and can cause the reader to hastily come to the conclusion that father and son are consumed by a metaphorical death dance. (Lines 1 and 3) Rather than running away in fear during the “waltz,” Roethke describes the child as clinging onto the father. This suggests that the child is a willing participant in the father’s shenanigans, even though at times it may not be easy. (Line 4)

The second stanza continues the tone of playfulness and critical affection. The use of the word romped in line 5, indicates that the chaotic activity between father and son is benign in nature. Although the mother’s countenance could not unfrown itself, there is no indication that the mother felt compelled to stop the commotion for her son’s safety. (Lines 7 and 8)

The speaker’s discomfort is evident in the third stanza; at every step you missed my right ear scraped a buckle, yet scraped is too gentle of a word to indicate serious harm. (Lines 11 and 12) Additionally, in the fourth stanza, the father beat time on the boy’s head. (Line 13) This could mean that the father literally struck the boy repeatedly, or more likely, Roethke used the musical meaning of the word “beat,” referring to the marking of time. It is only after a close investigation of Roethke’s word choice does it become clear that the father, although a little inebriated, is not hurting the child physically.

The third and fourth stanzas further confirm that the child in the poem is indeed Roethke. The images of the father’s battered knuckles and dirt-caked hands fit the biographical information of Roethke’s father, Otto Roethke. (Lines 10 and 14) Otto Roethke was a German immigrant who owned nurseries and had a strong Prussian temperament. Like many sons, Roethke had an almost religious reverence for his father and was particularly distraught by his father’s untimely death when Roethke was fifteen.
The poem concludes as the father takes the little boy to bed with the child still clinging to his shirt with an unwavering love.
Throughout the poem, there is no indication that the son, Roethke, has any lingering feelings of bitterness or hatred. To think of “My Papa’s Waltz” as an account of the beaten child of an alcoholic would be to over-simplify Roethke’s intricate humor. Although there are dark elements, overall, the poem recounts odd but happy memories.

Persuaded to Read Persuasion

So, I chose Jane Austen’s Persuasion for two fairly simple reasons:


1. I own it on CD and listening to characters speak the dialogue in a book is, personally, a much more enjoyable way of reading.
2. I was amused by the social commentary in Pride and Prejudice and figured that if Ms. Austin wrote one great book then her others would probably be just as wonderful.

I have read only the first chapter of Persuasion but have found it to be just as amusing, if not more than, Pride and Prejudice. This week I have the 6 hour drive to and from California in which I expect to finish (or at least get very close to finishing) the book.

So far I have been introduced to the exceedingly narcissistic character of Sir Walter Elliot. I am excited to see what Ms. Austen has in store for Sir Walter Elliot because he seems to be a perfect character for her to expose the gluttony within society. I have also met his daughter’s Elizabeth, Anne, and Mary who appear to be three very distinct personalities. All in all, I am excited to learn more about the Elliots and what character flaws and strengths Austen has to comment on.

Willy is Beyond Help

Much of the discussion this week was devoted to trying to understand Willy and the impact he has on his family. Personally, I find Willy to be a completely revolting character, but in the interest of further understanding, I am curious as to why his life is a complete catastrophe. It seems that instead of having the perfect cocktail of personality traits for being “successful” he possesses a fatal mixture of greed, narcissism, and delusion.

Willy has an obsession with being well-liked and financially successful, yet he fails miserably at achieving these goals. Mediocrity chronically permeates every aspect of Willy’s life. In a vicious cycle, each facet of Willy’s life impairs another component of his existence. In business, Willy can not seem to embody the charismatic salesman who effortlessly networks and establishes a loyal base of clientele. This in tern instills a sense of failure that Willy hesitates to reveal to his family and wife. Willy’s insecurity is shown in his habit of exaggerating his accomplishments (lack thereof) at work for his wife. By attempting (unsuccessfully) to keep his wife unaware of his lackluster performance at work, Willy creates a lonely existence for himself. Willy’s self-induced seclusion prompts him to begin an affair to salve his feelings of isolation which then affects his parenting. When Biff walks in on Willy and “The Woman,” Willy sets an example for Biff that encourages cheating in all aspects of life.

It is surprising that a man so preoccupied with achievement could not accomplish anything worthy. I am still uncertain how Willy could not have foreseen or at least comprehended the source of his failures, which can be attributed to his lack of integrity and overwhelming feelings of self-loathing. In Willy’s mind he knows the formula for his perception of success, yet he continuously fails to embody his own expectations.

Having It All

The ending of “Doll House” was terribly bitter-sweet for me. It is difficult to whole-heartedly say that Nora made a commendable decision to leave her children. I am ambivalent.

Nora’s strength is apparent by her confrontation with Torvald. During Nora’s conversation with Torvald about their relationship, Nora voices many of today’s feminist ideals. She bravely demands equality in a time when gender roles were rigid and limiting. Her convictions, ahead of her time, were not only admirable but daring. However, I am confused why her idea of freedom and equality could not include her children. Ibsen’s choice for Nora reflects a time when being a wife and mother robbed a woman of her selfhood. It seems that the purpose of the story is to promote gender equality, yet Nora has to sacrifice more than respect and position. She pays a much higher price by giving up contact with her children.

Then again, I might be making the cardinal mistake in cultural anthropology by comparing “Doll House” with my own concept of what should be possible. Rather than reaching a conclusion by considering only the standards of the time.

As a feminist I reject the idea that it is impossible to have a life that is fulfilling in many different aspects. Nora leaving her children demonstrates Henrik Ibsen’s dramatic dynamic. The significant impact that the story leaves is the pain and sacrifice in exchange for independence.

To Kill Or Not To Kill

Are there any acceptable justifications for murder? Religions, philosophies, laws weigh this question. For the last week, we have considered this in relation to Shakespeare’s play, “Hamlet.” At times, the discussion has been heated.

Shakespeare’s story of Hamlet asks the audience to ponder that question along with the protagonist. Is taking revenge for his father’s murder the right thing to do? Hamlet grapples with the matter and so do I. Shakespeare ratchets up the stakes by exaggerating the damage Hamlet’s revenge will make. Hamlet’s decision results in multiple deaths. I am troubled and do not have a conclusive opinion. Part of me understands Hamlet’s feelings of anger, confusion, pain, and mistrust. Hamlet is outraged by his uncle and mother’s crime and betrayal. The audience can empathize with Hamlet as a son being betrayed by his mother. It is the natural order of affairs for parents to act to protect the child. When Hamlet can no longer trust any of his loved ones, even his best friends, he feels like he has lost everything. His approach has been analytical but his emotions take over and Hamlet acts on his desires for vengeance and follows the ghost’s instructions. My initial response was to object to the degree of Hamlet’s revenge. Why did so many lives have to be lost by Hamlet's destiny to avenge his father's death? Killing Claudius was more justifiable than the other murders.

It is possible for me to intellectually understand that killing is wrong in the absolute. That murder isn’t ever right even in relation to great wrong. In my mind, however, I believe that Hamlet’s revenge is justified. I’m just not sure that Hamlet couldn’t have found a nicer way to have his revenge. I would like to think that Shakespeare saw this subject as a human dilemma and wrote Hamlet to help his audiences consider this important, timeless, unanswerable question. Using the fictional story of Hamlet, we can benefit from contemplating the implications of Hamlet's situation. What Hamlet decides about revenge isn’t as important noting the choices Hamlet had and how he weighed them against the other. I believe Hamlet’s actions were rational but I don’t know if they were moral.

Family Matters

Since I have missed the entire discussion of Antigone, I will attempt to hold my own AP English discussion in my own home (all is the same except for a smaller table and less formal attire is acceptable, such as pj’s). So, here are my thoughts on the questions that Mr. Coon has posted. I will have to substitute the comments section for the opinions that would normally be expressed during class discussion.

Why is Antigone’s dilemma important?

I think that the question “why is Creon’s dilemma important?” is just as pertinent of a question. Both Antigone and Creon face life-altering dilemmas. The difference is that Creon is not only held accountable to his family, but the entire country as well. His actions directly impact the future of his rule of Thebes and his legacy. Antigone’s loyalties lay solely with her family rather than the social customs and laws of the country. It is Antigone’s familial duty to take care of her brother regardless of his actions.

Antigone’s struggle is important because it is a demonstration of the strong bond between family members. Antigone knows that both of her brothers were deplorable men, but that does not relieve her from fulfilling her familial commitment. The old adage of “you can pick your nose but you can’t pick your family” is particularly well suited for Antigone. (Now here comes the sappy moment) No matter what, family is the most important bond in the world and through inexplicable forces; it determines so many of our actions.

Is either person or position clearly wrong?

Personally I do not think that either Antigone or Creon is “wrong” in their beliefs but Creon’s actions are “wrong.” Antigone and Creon have a responsibility to a different set of people and personal interests. Creon has ascended to the throne which requires him to place the needs of the “Thebians” above his own personal agenda. To rule effectively Creon must believe in the human institution of governance. Antigone, on the other hand, embodies a reverence for the bonds of family. Creon had the opportunity to be more tactful and compassionate while upholding his values which is his fundamental flaw. As the Chorus so artfully expresses, “there is no happiness where there is no wisdom.”

I think that Sophocles would agree with my position because although he killed off Antigone, she died on her own terms and in partnership with the love of her life. Creon is then left to live in the absence of his loves, which is the more severe punishment of the two.

Better Late than Never for Ivan

In the novella “The Death of Ivan Illyich,” Leo Tolstoy uses Ivan’s death as an instrument to examine the substance of Ivan’s life. By placing Ivan’s death at the beginning of the novella, the reader is left in no doubt of the outcome. Ivan’s co-workers and wife offer frank, unflattering information about their perceptions of Ivan. At Ivan’s funeral, Tolstoy employs Ivan’s loved ones, to demonstrate that Ivan lived a superficial, selfish life. Not only did Ivan not accomplish anything praiseworthy, he lived a self-centered existence with no emotional attachment to others.

Choosing to surround himself with people just like himself, Ivan showed no desire for substantive relationships. As an example, his wife was not devastated by losing Ivan. She was not even sad. Instead, she gave herself over to self-pity rather than grief. She was put out by the inconvenience of Ivan’s death. Ivan’s co-workers did not mourn the loss of a friend. Ivan’s death offered them the opportunity for professional advancement.

The novella’s characters reflect the picture of Ivan’s materialism and his desire to maintain the facades of high society, until the introduction of Gerasim. Tolstoy artfully employs Gerasim as a foil to Ivan. By contrast, Gerasim embodies the good that Ivan lacks. In the final days of his life, Gerasim selflessly cares for Ivan. In these last days, Ivan finds comfort in Gerasim. Ivan recognizes his own shortcomings and feels a mounting hatred for the people in his life and the choices he has made. For the first time, Ivan is touched by the happy warmth that can come from helping others. This concept, one which was foreign to his previous nature, makes Ivan question the merit of his actions and his life as a whole.

Gerasim offers a glimmer of hope in a predominantly depressing novella. His character demonstrates the power of generosity, commitment and kindness. For a sap like me, Gerasim provides an uplifting reminder of the good that people can do, even in a discouraging world such as Ivan’s in “The Death of Ivan Illyich”