Alegría’s book of poetry, Fugues, received a generally unfavorable review by the anonymous writer at Publishers Weekly, who reviewed the book for the October 18, 1993 publication. Among this writer’s criticisms was the length of many of the poems, which are described as “mere aphorisms.” This reviewer also stated that the poems in this book were “[s]parse on imagery.” The reviewer referred to these poems as “tidbits” that “ask little from readers, and give little back.” An additional complaint focuses on the poet’s use of classical figures from Greek mythology, whom according to the reviewer “seem wholly out of place in both her [Alegría’s] physical and emotional landscape.” The poems in Fugues were translated by the author’s husband. This reviewer cites Flakoll’s translation as one aspect of the book that does not work, calling the translation “littered with cliches.” This review of Alegría’s book ends with the admonition that readers who “open this book expecting the work of a master” will instead find a book that “reads like a naive first collection.” At the end of the review, the book is given a D grade.

Alegría’s publisher, Curbstone Press, also provides limited reviews of the books they publish, and while they are not an unbiased source, they do include a review of Fugues written by poet Luisa Valenzuela, who says, “Illumination is the word that comes to mind when reading these poems.” Valenzuela explains that Alegría’s “simple words . . . allow us to see the duality of life as one single luminous flow of love.” While it would be easy to dismiss the reviews provided by Curbstone as just an effort to sell books, they support the general view of Alegría’s poetry. The review of Fugues published by Publishers Weekly also contradicts the most common assessment of Alegría’s body of work. In her essay, “The Volcano’s Flower,” Chilean poet Marjorie Agosín calls Alegría’s poetry “clear and defined.” Her poetry is “stirring” and it “moves us and liberates us, not just to feel but also to think.” In a 1991 interview with Marcia Phillips McGowan, Alegría stated that her poetry was “subjective.” Clearly, reviews of her poetry are also subjective, and so perhaps that accounts for the wide disparity in opinions of reviewers of her work.