changes that occurred in the 1960s and 1970s
helped many Americans feel, for the first time,
that they were truly a part of the society in which
they lived.
Kim Chi-Ha
The collection that ‘‘St. Roach’’ comes from,The
Gates, was written after Rukeyser traveled to
South Korea to protest the imprisonment and
scheduled execution of the poet Kim Chi-Ha. In
1974, Kim was arrested after the publication of
his collection Cry of the People, and Other
Poems. The poems constituted an angry tirade
against the government, calling upon students
to stand up and fight against the existing order.
The government of President Park Chung Hee
detained Kim with sedation and sentenced him
to death.
South Korea had declared itself an inde-
pendent nation in 1948. During the Korean
War (1950–1953), it fought for its independence
from North Korea, a struggle which left the two
nations as separate political entities but which
also left South Korea suffering, with a damaged
economy. The corrupt government was over-
thrown in a coup led by Park Chung Hee in
1961, and in 1963 Park assumed the powers of
a civilian president. His policies helped stabilize
the economy and made South Korea competitive
on the world stage, but domestically he relied on
strong-arm, repressive tactics to control citizens.
Rukeyser became involved in the case of the
poet Kim as the president of International PEN,
an organization devoted to supporting writers
and their rights to freedom of expression.
When she traveled to South Korea in 1975,
Kim had been accused of infiltrating the Catho-
lic Church for the Communist party and had
signed a confession that he later explained was
coerced. After pressure from International PEN
and other groups, his execution was commuted,
though he was sentenced to life in prison in 1976.
In 1979, Park Chung Hee was assassinated
during a coup in which the head of the Korean
Central Intelligence Committee assumed power.
Kim Chi-Ha’s sentence was commuted, and he
was released from prison in 1980.
Critical Overview.
Muriel Rukeyser’s poetry has always been
closely associated with her political activism.
While most critics have lauded her writing for
its heartfelt passion, some have questioned
whether that passion is matched with technical
skill. Although the poet was recognized early in
her career, she was never grouped with the high-
est ranks of her peers in literature. Critical
acclaim for her work has tended to vary, often
depending on how much a particular reviewer
felt Rukeyser’s social conscience to be an inte-
gral part of her literary accomplishments.
In a 1995Ploughsharesarticle, the famed
literary critic M. L. Rosenthal addresses the
issue of Rukeyser’s reputation as a writer. After
making it clear that he is delighted over the
reissue of her work inA Muriel Rukeyser Reader,
Rosenthal explains how the poet’s particular
skills ‘‘have a special place in our poetry,’’
going on to explain that she ‘‘was a driven artistic
experimenter.’’ He later declares that ‘‘Rukeyser
was, indeed, a true poet.’’ David Orr, discussing
the 2004 release ofMuriel Rukeyser: Selected
Poemsin Poetry magazine, makes the same
point about critical handling of Rukeyser’s rep-
utation. Indeed, Orr’s own assessment is split:
‘‘At its best, Rukeyser’s work can be open, ener-
getic, and well constructed, if a little enamored
of its own goody-goodness.’’ He goes on to note,
‘‘At its worst, her work has the campy, creepy
tone of someone soliciting for the International
Union of Absolutely Good People.’’CRITICISMDavid Kelly
Kelly is a writer and an instructor of creative
writing and literature at two colleges in Illinois.
In the following essay on ‘‘St. Roach,’’ Kelly
explains that even if the poem’s social impact has
diminished over the years, its understated struc-
tural control makes it worth continuing study.
Muriel Rukeyser’s ‘‘St. Roach’’ is the sort of
poem that is likely to be described by readers as
straightforward. As a description, this is often
meant as a positive critique, indicating that the
poet has allowed the poem’s message to speak
for itself, plainly and simply. The straightfor-
wardness of this poem is twofold. First, there is
its lack of poetic technique. ‘‘St Roach’’ is pre-
dominantly written in free verse. It does not
follow any standard poetic form, and it does
not create a standard for itself by sticking toSt. Roach