Noel Coward Theatre, til 21 September 2024

⭐⭐

Uncomfortable exploration of sexuality and race brings edge without insight.

I’m always hesitant when reviewing something like Slave Play – a work that deals with serious issues I haven’t experienced in my own life. Slave Play is deeply uncomfortable to watch, but by design. Do I have a right, as white woman, to critique Black playwright Jeremy O Harris’ scathing and unflinching exploration of the racial dynamics of sex? Maybe not. Maybe there are audience members for whom this play will resonate in a profound way, a way that I can’t understand. But I’m eager to write about it and share my thoughts, because though I certainly didn’t like this play, it was one of the more thought-provoking theatre experiences I’ve had in a while. I have tried to sit within and reflect on my own discomfort around this play, and attempt to find a greater meaning. But for me personally, there just isn’t enough of value in this play – not enough meaning, not enough insight – to counterbalance what makes it so difficult to sit through.

Slave Play begins on the MacGregor cotton plantation, with three lengthy and graphic sex scenes (more graphic than anything else I’ve seen on stage). I don’t think I’m a prude for finding these troubling to watch, as the slave-era setting calls into question the consensuality of the sexual encounters, which all involve mixed-race partners. A white plantation worker beds the slave who is his maid; the wealthy wife of the owner turns her attentions to the half-Black house servant; two male slaves (one white, one black) have a tryst while working out in the field. Harris forefronts the racial and power dynamics at play in each of these scenes; though none of the characters is actively resisting, it’s impossible to see the partners as being on equal footing.

About a third of the way into the play, there’s a dramatic shift. It’s difficult to discuss this, as it would be a major spoiler – it does completely recontextualise the scenes that have come before it. To keep it vague, I’ll simply say that Harris adds two new characters and a completely different setting which allows the characters the opportunity to directly discuss their own identity and desires. 

I think the intersection of sexuality and racial identity is an interesting topic that’s well worth exploring in theatre, as evidenced by plays that tackle this theme in a really engaging way, like For Black Boys or A Strange Loop. But to me Slave Play gets a bit lost on this subject, and doesn’t manage to add any profundity or insight to the discourse. Despite the characters speaking explicitly about their own sexuality and identities in the latter part of the play, I never felt really satisfied that this got to the heart of some of the challenging questions raised by the opening scenes. Questions like – why might a person of colour find it arousing to be racially degraded? Is it inherently impossible for a mixed race couple to be equal sexual partners? The second half of the play dances around these but doesn’t seem to have a clear point of view to impart. Of course, this is a topic of such complexity and nuance that it would be unreasonable to ask Harris to give us a single declarative perspective or message. But when I left the theatre, I was disappointed to feel that I wasn’t coming away with greater illumination or insight.

I think part of the problem is the setting for the latter half of the play (which I can’t specifically name without giving away the major plot development). The chosen setting is parodied completely, with the two additional characters an obvious send-up of the stereotypical people we expect to find there. Though this is obviously a deliberate satirical choice, it’s leaned on too heavily to be funny and makes the two characters just tedious to be with. It also (to my mind at least) undercuts any profound revelations or self-insights the characters experience, because we the audience have been led to believe this whole set-up is ludicrous in the first place. 

Another issue I had with Slave Play, which might simply be another clue that I’m not quite the target audience for this play, was that there are a lot of lines played for laughs that I just didn’t find funny. It’s not just the two added characters that are stereotypes – each of the other protagonists has moments where they play up to a cliche in the name of humour. It seems as though Harris is doing this ironically, but to what end? I’ve heard this play described as a satire, but what exactly it’s supposed to be satirising was unclear to me and I found many of the jokes fell flat.

It feels pointless to talk about the cast, staging and direction of this play when I found the central concept so unsatisfying. All I could say is that the cast are perfectly satisfactory, and the directing choices from Robert O’Hara went completely unnoticed by me. 

I think it’s important that theatre is bold and confronting, and that it invites audiences to explore challenging ideas. I’m not mad I went to see this play – it’s been extremely thought-provoking, which is maybe the entire point. But my overall feeling was that I felt grubby for being exposed to something deliberately provocative, without the upside of learning something new or seeing a new perspective. The lasting impression for me was one of failed edginess – it seemed to me as though Harris is trying to opt for a shock-factor in the name of tackling big topics, but never manages to back it up with a sophisticated reflection on sexuality. As I’ve mentioned, I’m probably not the target audience for this play and I don’t begrudge anyone who felt this story spoke to their own perspective or life experiences. But just based on my own view, I couldn’t recommend this.