White Dust: A Mirage for Death
In her poem “George Robinson: Blues,” Muriel Rukeyser narrates the perspective of black men in the tunnels of Gauley Bridge, West Virginia, as they were building a new hydroelectric power plant. As construction began under the management of the Union Carbide and Carbon Corporation, it became evident that the dust within the tunnels contained silica. This dust [can] give exposed people silicosis, “a disease that infects the lungs and gradually causes cells to digest themselves” (Lucas, Paxton 1). There is an estimate of 700 people who died from the disease alone, and many of the victims remain anonymous (Lucas, Paxton 3). Rukeyser uses archetypal criticism to portray the misleading nature of the silica dust, and to create a false sense of security, not revealing the dust’s harmful tendencies until the final four stanzas. This illusion allows the reader to experience the evolution of knowledge people had about the silica dust, which in turn creates a more impactful poem. Rukeyser highlights the ignorance of the people of Gauley Bridge, and portrays their struggles as ones that occurred and resolved over time.
Archetypal criticism is defined as using recognizable symbols in society, including colors and reoccurring motifs as a method to interpret a text (Delahoyde 1). The archetype for white, the color Rukeyser uses to represent silica dust, is often associated with purity and innocence (Guerin 185). In the 7th stanza, Rukeyser uses this archetype to portray the dust as an innocuous material that should not prevent the miners from returning to the mine after an accident. Rukeyser says, “When the blast went off the boss would call out, Come, let’s go back, / when that heavy loaded blast went white, Come, let’s go back,” (22-23). By mentioning that the blast was white, which according to an archetypal critique represents safety and innocence, Rukeyser illustrates the ignorance of the workers at the time the explosion occurred. They believed that is was safe to reenter, and that the dust was harmless. This critique aids in Rukeyser’s portrayal of the workers’ realizations because she misleads the reader into thinking that the tunnels were safe, similarly to what the workers had thought.
Immediately after, Rukeyser portrays the realization of the workers that the dust is the cause for their illness. In the 8th stanza, she writes, “The water they would bring had dust in it, our drinking water, … / we cleaned our clothes in the groves, but we always had the dust” (25, 27). At this point, she reveals the dust’s harmful nature and no longer uses color in its description because the white dust now represents the opposite of what it represented archetypally, which was purity and innocence. Since it is now known that the dust is dangerous, Rukeyser no longer uses “white” as a way to romanticize it and hide its threats. In addition, Rukeyser shows the realization of the workers by saying, “… but we always had the dust”. This figuratively represents that the workers could clean themselves, but they would always face the effects of the dust. They are now aware of its dangers and like its people, Gauley Bridge will always be intertwined with the silica dust and its destruction.
Rukeyser’s choice of a poem to tell this story provides the reader with the experience of the miners and the evolution of their knowledge about the dust, which in turn provides not just an understanding of the tragedy, but a quasi-recollection of it as well. In Matthew Zapruder’s Why Poetry, he mentions that “when a person truly falls in love with a poem, it is usually because it feels like a private experience” (xiv). This characteristic in writing creates a more personal connection to the piece of literature because it allows the reader to step into the world of the specific poem; the reader becomes a character within the poem instead of an outside viewer.
In conclusion, Rukeyser successfully recreates the emotions of Gauley Bridge’s people and the disguised dangers of silica dust. However, she also brings up an important debate about racial assumptions. Rukeyser uses the color white’s archetype in her poem to show the realizations of the miners, but in addition, she uses it to illustrate that stereotypes that exist in society that stem from color are often incorrect. At the time of the Gauley Bridge incident, black men and women were represented as inferior, and forced to believe that white was the superior color. However, in this poem Rukeyser shows that ideal to be false, as the dust that killed hundreds of people was white. Through the discussion of Gauley Bridge, Rukeyser exposes the racist tendencies in society, and challenges the reader to look past preconceived notions in order to truly understand history.