The United States Welcomes You

Smith’s poem has 14 lines, and each line has around 10 syllables. These sonnet-like qualities stand in stark contrast to the content: an interrogation of someone in the United States. Smith’s speaker takes on the persona of an agent of law enforcement systems, and the addressee of the poem (the “you”) is a suspect of one of these. These systems include the police, border patrol, ICE, and homeland security.

The first two lines of the poem are end-stopped: Each contains one question and a question mark concludes each line. Most of the ensuing lines are not end-stopped (do not have a question mark at the end of the line). This increasing use of enjambment (the continuation of a thought from one line to the next without the use of end stop punctuation) shows how the interrogation quickly becomes more complicated: Each question has additional sub-questions, or underlying questions. The initial question—“Why and by whose power were you sent?” (Line 1)—implies that the suspect lacks power and has a questionable motive. Power can mean money, such as covering the costs of travel to the US, but it can also mean control. The suspect being sent by someone else portrays them as both tool and foreigner, despite their actual citizenship.

The speaker’s second question about theft (in the second line) is repeated later in the poem, but differently worded. In Line 2, the interrogator asks about the suspect’s “wish to steal” (Line 2), and in Line 5, the agent asks if they have already “stolen something” (Line 5). This kind of repetition and variation is a rhetorical device used to achieve different ends in law enforcement and in art. The agent hopes to catch the suspect in a lie with this device, but poetry and music often use this device to make someone feel welcomed or loved. This speaks to the irony in the title of the poem.

In the third line, the rhythm of the interrogation changes. The use of a shorter question followed by an incomplete question in the third line creates implied questions—questions created by line breaks. Enjambment allows the reader to see the incomplete question in Line 3 as yet another question in and of itself. “Why this dancing? Why do your dark bodies” (Line 3) illustrates how law enforcement agents’ questions contain racism. Their questions are actually about skin color and how bodies are differently used by diverse cultures. Furthermore, the authorities often fear such differences.

The fourth and fifth lines continue the line of questioning about cultural differences and negatively portray the suspect’s culture. The agent fears people with dark skin marrying and procreating with white Americans. This is seen in the phrase “dark bodies / Drink up all the light” (Lines 3-4). Marriage and having children not only changes skin tone, but also changes social interactions. Emotions are differently conveyed in different cultures. The agent accuses the suspect of “demanding / That we feel” (Lines 4-5), implying that the suspect is more forthcoming with statements of emotion. This might also be a subtle nod to the way race-fueled acts of violence by authorities often capture the media's attention, "demanding" that people read the story or view the video of the violence. In a roundabout way, Smith may be saying that the speaker feels resentment toward "you," because they are forced to confront deeply rooted--and perhaps quite uncomfortable--feelings.

After the repetition of the question about theft, the idea of emotions is developed in Line 6. The speaker asks, “What is that leaping in your chest?” (Line 6). This imagery of the heart relates to both fear and love—the heart races in both states of emotion. The embodied action of the chest connects to the dancing question in Line 3. Furthermore, the enjambment of the following question leads to “What is” (Line 6) being repeated at the beginning and the end of the line, enclosing the embodied emotional action in demands for logical explanation.

The seventh and eighth lines introduce some religious missionary language. The internal rhyme of “mission” (Line 7) and “confession” (Line 8) connects them and evokes the history of Catholic and Christian missionary work in the US and abroad. The diction of confession is shared by law enforcement, religion, and love. Like theft, confession is repeated later in the poem; in Line 12, “wish to confess” echoes “wish to steal” (Line 2). The middle of Line 8 begins a question that takes a turn in Line 9.

The question “Have you anything to do / With others brought by us to harm?” (Lines 8-9) marks a turn in the poem. Here, the plural first person pronoun “us” represents their government agency, as well as other US citizens. The structure of the interrogative sentence seeks to hide that the government and people of America harm other people. In Line 10, the interrogator implies that if the suspect does not have a vendetta for past harm against their families or people, they should not be afraid.

The question that begins in Line 10 stretches to the beginning of Line 12. It juxtaposes--intentionally places dissimilar concepts next to one another--invasion and someone in a position of surrender. While the speaker accuses the suspect of invading, the suspect is portrayed as having their “hands raised, eyes wide, mute” (Line 11). This posture is asked for when police hold a gun on a suspect. The end of the sentence compares the silence of surrender to the silence of ghosts. Ghosts do not have material power over the living, but are often feared. Furthermore, ghosts are no longer considered human. This is part of policing: to categorize the objects of state violence as non-human, which is also called othering.

Putting the end of the question—specifically ghosts—and another complete question about confessing in the same line connects them. This develops the religious and spiritual imagery that began with missions and confession earlier in the poem. This also marks another shift in the poem.

The final two lines of the poem, Lines 13 and 14, include questions about the process of interrogation, the government, and the culture of the United States. It is a meta-examination, or an examination of the examination, that asks if the interrogation process is an “enigmatic type of test” (Line 13). The reader is left wondering about the stakes of failure. The higher power hinted at in the language of missions and confession comes back in the final line as a potential answer to the question “to whom do we address our appeal?” (Line 14). The governmental and societal power behind law enforcement needs an intervention of epic, even divine, proportions to be reworked so it is a just system. Smith raises questions meant to be contemplated as ways to change society to be less racist.