Classic and Contemporary Poetry: Explained

Tom Wayman’s "Surplus Value: Chalk White" is a critique of the economic structures that govern education, labor, and compensation. Written in free verse, the poem exposes the complex financial machinery behind a university classroom, where students and faculty alike are caught in a system that extracts more than it gives. Wayman employs an observational and reflective tone, using the voice of a professor who sees himself and his students as part of a larger economic transaction rather than a purely intellectual exchange. The poem?s title references Karl Marx’s theory of surplus value, which describes how capitalists profit from the unpaid labor of workers—a concept Wayman applies to the realm of academia.

The opening lines establish a sense of routine as "the students wander into class," setting up a seemingly ordinary classroom scene. However, the professor immediately shifts perspective: "I wait by the door / and think of the fees they paid in September." The focus is not on learning but on financial transactions—the tuition students have paid to be part of this classroom experience. The phrase "admission charges to my act today, / to a whole term of performances" frames teaching as a staged event, reducing education to a commodity where students are paying customers and professors are performers. This theatrical metaphor implies a degree of artificiality, suggesting that the university system prioritizes financial sustainability over genuine intellectual engagement.

Wayman then highlights the financial underpinnings of higher education: "Yet this show is also subsidized / by taxes." The mention of "taxes: deducted from shifts the students worked last summer, / or the past few years, plus everybody else?s time" connects the students’ tuition to broader labor and economic forces. The students are not just paying for knowledge but are financing the institution through their labor outside the classroom. This observation extends beyond the students—Wayman underscores that education is funded through collective labor, including "the hours I am employed." By acknowledging that everyone’s work contributes to the university’s financial operation, the speaker hints at a system of economic exploitation that extends far beyond the classroom walls.

The poem builds on this critique by mapping out the various expenses that siphon away wages: "All this money / -suitably apportioned of course— / might be my salary." The conditional "might" signals that this is not the case. Instead, the funds are dispersed elsewhere: "there?s the building to pay for and heat and light and keep clean, / and someone to admit, counsel, record, write letters, purchase supplies, / plan residences, hire and fire." This long list of administrative and logistical necessities emphasizes how the financial resources of the university are spread out, often away from those directly engaged in teaching and learning. The choice to list these tasks without punctuation creates an overwhelming, almost breathless effect, reinforcing the idea that bureaucracy dominates the institution.

Wayman then introduces a striking comparison: "like the expensive office tower / of steel and glass filled with men in suits / that rises from the work of a young man on a sidehill / in the mud, kneeling to pull a choker cable under a fallen spruce." This shift in imagery moves from academia to industrial labor, drawing a parallel between the professor’s situation and that of a manual laborer. The juxtaposition of the corporate office with the physically demanding task of "pull[ing] a choker cable under a fallen spruce" highlights the exploitation of workers at different levels of society. Both the professor and the laborer contribute to systems that generate wealth for others, yet their work is undervalued.

The focus then shifts to those who benefit from this system: "these people stand on the back of my voice / in the seminar room now, on my papers scrawled with my notes for today." This line emphasizes that knowledge production—like manual labor—is foundational to the economic hierarchy. The professor?s "voice" and "notes" symbolize the intellectual labor that underpins the university, yet others profit from it. The imagery of people "standing on the back" of the professor reinforces the idea of exploitation, where those higher in the hierarchy thrive on the labor of those below.

The poem’s most explicit critique comes in its discussion of wage disparity: "Among these men and women is one who decided / he should receive twice my wages for his work / and his secretary should get half / and the person who waxes the floor, half." This unequal distribution of wealth is not based on necessity but on decisions made by those in power. The repetition of "half" underscores the hierarchical structure where compensation is determined arbitrarily, with administrators disproportionately benefiting while those performing essential tasks receive significantly less.

Wayman then exposes the fundamental injustice of capitalism: "This man takes / from their work and mine to fatten himself, / he seizes from the labour all of us do— / all equally necessary—more cash for himself." The use of "takes" and "seizes" conveys an act of theft, reinforcing the Marxist idea of surplus value—where profits are derived from the unpaid labor of workers. The assertion that "all of us do— / all equally necessary" challenges the conventional logic that justifies wage disparities. If all work is essential, why should some individuals receive disproportionate compensation?

The poem closes with a bitter confrontation of the economic system: "At the end of each month he hands me an envelope / and announces: ?This is what you?re worth.?" The quotation marks around "This is what you?re worth." make the phrase stand out as a direct challenge to capitalist ideology. The employer determines worth not based on contribution but on economic power. The repetition in the final lines—"This is not what we?re worth. / This is not what we earned."—serves as a final rejection of the system’s logic. The speaker reclaims the idea of worth, arguing that wages do not reflect the true value of labor.

Structurally, the poem’s lack of rhyme and its free verse format mirror the speaker’s stream of thought, reinforcing the sense of spontaneous critique. The enjambment throughout the poem creates a sense of continuous movement, mimicking the relentless economic cycle the speaker describes. The absence of stanza breaks further emphasizes the uninterrupted flow of exploitation, reflecting how capitalism operates without pause.

"Surplus Value: Chalk White" is a powerful critique of economic inequality within academia and, by extension, society. Wayman exposes how universities operate within a capitalist framework, treating education as a commodity and intellectual labor as a means of generating profit for administrators. By drawing parallels between the professor, students, and manual laborers, he underscores the pervasiveness of exploitation across different sectors. The poem challenges the reader to reconsider how wages are determined and to question who truly benefits from their labor. Through sharp irony, vivid imagery, and an unwavering critique of surplus value, Wayman forces us to confront the economic realities that shape our professional and educational lives.

Copyright (c) 2025 PoetryExplorer

Discover our Poem Explanations and Poet Analyses!

Other Poems of Interest...