How Many Times Does The Boy Have to Die?

I fear Gwendolyn Brooks’ “The Boy Died in My Alley,” written in 1975, could’ve been written yesterday. And the day before that. And the day before that. And I pray not tomorrow.

Brooks’ poem aims to address the epidemic of African American boys dying at the hands of gun violence. The shooter is not included in the poem, which I believe she does intentionally. The shooter could very well be the Policeman or one of his colleagues in an act of police brutality, but the shooter could also be another person from their neighborhood. Both are two separate issues that contribute to the epidemic that is African American boys dying long before they should. This poem, along with so many of Brooks’ poems, is timeless, which feels ingenuine to say because it surrounds such a tired and somber subject matter. However, Brooks’ word choice and urgent tone are what contribute to the timeless nature of the poem.

Brooks uses no names and does not describe the looks of a single character in the poem. There is only Policeman, Boy, Father, Mother, Sister, and Brother. Even the title only refers to him as “The Boy.” There are multiple layers to her doing this. The first is that each word stands as a placeholder for the names of real life people who this story could be about. She even capitalizes these words to signal to the reader that a name is meant to fit here. Furthermore, it speaks volumes that she did not choose just one “Boy” to write about. At the time this poem was written, there were different African American boys who were victims of gun violence and police brutality that she could’ve chosen to title and center this poem around, which still would have gotten her general message across. Instead, she chose to leave it ambiguous, alluding to the fact that there is not just one story of an African American boy dying in an alley but many.

The second layer to her choice to write the characters’ roles instead of the characters’ names is that we may not even know the names of these characters in real life. There are African American boys who die in this way who intentionally are not written about. Brooks is arguing that the media does not care about the Boy and neither does society in some regards. It is not a widely discussed issue nor interesting enough story for the 1970s, and American culture consumes that which makes a great story. We know this because writes the speaker “never see[s] the dead” (line 6). They never see the dead broadcasted or addressed. This could also be her way of alluding to police forces “covering up” a murder committed by an officer, again contributing to the lack of news coverage. Overall, Brooks is using generic names and word choice to call out the deafening silence from the media, politicians, and society as a whole.

Moving towards tone, there is a strong sense of urgency in the speaker’s voice. My first thought was that the speaker is trying to convince the policeman that a boy has been shot. She writes, “Shots I hear and Shots I hear” (line 5). This is a cry for help from the policeman in the story but can also be interpreted as a cry for help from the African American community or from America in general. We know this is a true urgent cry because the speaker’s tone is heavily contrasted by the Policeman’s tone. The Policeman’s tone is nonchalant when he simply asks, “’You heard a shot?’” (line 4) in the line before the speaker responds in such a panicked way. Moreover, there is a sense of self-convincing within the tone. Not only does the speaker repeat that they hear shots twice in the first stanza, but they also repeat they’ve heard them twice in the second stanza (lines 7-8). What is even more interesting is that Brooks did not put any of the speakers’ words in quotes like she did with the Policeman’s. This could indicate that the speaker is not responding to the Policeman at all. Instead, they are in a state of shock and are coming to terms with the horror they have witnessed. This is also true for the title, which can be read almost as if the speaker is saying, “The boy died in my alley,” aside to themself in an “what just happened?” moment.

Finally, I want to address the fact that the lack of specific names and the urgency in Brooks’ voice are still so relevant. You could tell me this poem was written yesterday, and I wouldn’t question you. Brooks knew the work that her poem would go on to do. I just wish she could’ve seen a day where her poem became an indication of what our nation used to be, instead of what it still is. To end this discussion post, I leave you all with the question: Do you interpret this poem to be a continuous warning to African American boys in the interest of their safety, or do you find this poem to be a continuous critique of the way that our nation is handling this ongoing issue?