Melting Pot: Slave Play and the Pitfalls of Contemporary Interracial Relationships
〰️ - 〰️ -
〰️ - 〰️ -
Playwright Jeremy O. Harris’s award winning 2018 production, Slave Play, has stirred up considerable buzz in the theatre-going community as a drama that isn’t afraid to test its audience's mettle. The play’s deeply sexual, yet humorous air serves as the vehicle for some shockingly profound racial content that lingers in the minds of both readers and audiences long after the curtain falls. As a gay, Black artist, Harris displays incredible vision in his ability to deliver consistently triggering, racially specific concepts to predominantly white, New York audiences in ways that manage to provoke thought sooner than resistance. Despite the various accolades the play has netted in the short time since its release, it was still met with poor reception from select critics that found Harris’s approach to racial themes uncomfortably heavy-handed. Regardless, the play is unrelenting in its attempts to shed light on a number of under-examined issues. The first of these issues is the contemporary problem of “racial neutrality” and the American practice of “color-blind” ideologies that serve to grant White people a degree of separation from their heritage and disincentivize them from accepting accountability for past injustice. This concept is granted broad representation by the play’s three white characters, each with their own unique method of racial suppression and avoidance. Harris also wrestles with the complications of intersectionality in mixed-race individuals, as well as the reticence these individuals exhibit in claiming personal traumas, both racial and sexual, that bring into question their unsettled racial identities. Phillip best exemplifies these issues during the group therapy narrative of the second act. Perhaps most importantly, Slave Play packages these prominent issues of racial consolation and personal identity; delivering them in concert to produce an unprecedented and thought-provoking account of the pitfalls of contemporary interracial relationships.
Instances of “racial neutrality” and/or “color blind” ideology are present throughout the production, but make themselves especially prominent in the group therapy scene of the second act. Each White character is revealed to be suppressing or avoiding their racial lineage in a way that is adversely affecting their relationship with their respective partners. While the White characters do not practice this destructive behavior in explicit hopes of alienating their significant others, their very ability to do so is based in innate privilege, and facilitates the continued supremacy of those with the option of putting their race away. An article by author Erin Pryor published in the Michigan Sociological Review in Fall 2018 seeks to highlight the pervasive nature of color blind ideology, especially with regards to intimate interracial relationships:
“In general, whites, more so than Blacks, claim to be color-blind about race and love, suggesting that race should not factor into intimate partner selection (e.g. ‘People should just be with who they love’ and ‘I just date who I like or who I am attracted to’)”
This mindset is bountifully evident in the relationships of Slave Play, especially in the cases of the White characters. The most prominent example is that of Dustin, a White male character who’s in a relationship with Gary, a Black male character. Throughout the proceedings of group therapy, Dustin repeatedly insists, outright, that he is “not White.” This gradually enrages Gary, who is unable to deny the societal pressures that he endures as a Black man. Though Dustin does not mean to be destructive or ignorant of Gary’s position, he fails to realize that his ability to deny his race is a direct product of White privilege. Furthermore, he will still be afforded the benefits of having White skin in America whether he identifies as Caucasian or not. In contrast, any racial denial by Gary will still net him the same disadvantages that are forced upon every person of color. This therapeutic discourse sees Dustin become increasingly defensive and noncommittal as he maintains his stance on being without race. Finally, Gary becomes confrontational and demands to know what Dustin could possibly be, if not White. In comparison of their respective experiences, Gary begs Dustin to say how his being falsely profiled as White could be anywhere near as difficult as Gary’s growing up undeniably Black:
“...People have seen so much color in me that they could make / a new rainbow with the shades but they always go back to black. / Because even with all the shades / they still call me black. / Now I could call you / off white / dark white / eggshell! / But every time I still go back to white with you. / So what are you, if not white?”
The confrontation proceeds with Gary rebuking Dustin for having subliminally utilized their relationship as a means of solidifying his sense of non-conformity to his race. As Dustin takes his turn in becoming enraged, Gary recognizes that his Anhedonia had lifted during the Fantasy Play because he was finally treated like the prize, rather than the recipient. Gary determines that they no longer have any worth to one another, and Dustin instigates a physical altercation. The passage is illustrative of the downfalls of the system of partner selection that Pryor laid out in the above excerpt.
This habit of racial avoidance, or viewing interaction between races (especially in intimate relationships) through a “post racial” lens, inspires ignorance between partners and almost guarantees the denial of the individual needs of one or the other. This denial, especially with regards to the relationships of Slave Play, generally manifests negatively in the experiences of the partners of color. In the case of Alana and Phillip, audiences see that the couples’ disregard for their own racial identities has perpetuated Phillip’s self-destructive mindset of being without substantial racial standing. This concept is introduced through Phillip’s recollection of a collegiate experience in which two teammates discounted his racially divergent experience, bringing him to question whether or not he was allowed to identify with the plights of Black or White, given that he didn’t uniformly fit into either classification. The story gives the audience context to how Phillip views himself with regards to race:
“I can’t remember his name but this upperclassman / like looked over and was like, / ‘Phillip’s isn’t a ni[***]r, Phillip’s Phillip.’ / And yeah / I think, / that that’s basically what everyone thinks of me. / I’m not black / I’m not white / I’m just Phillip.”
With regards to the effects this has on his relationship, the therapeutic exploration reveals that Phillip, a mixed race man, and Alana, a White woman, first met through a dating app for individuals that enjoy kink related sexual relationships. Alana’s desire for Phillip was founded upon her inviting him to engage in the cuckoldry of her former husband, Jonathan. Kaneisha’s revelation that cuckolding has an innately racial connotation places the foundations of Phillip and Alana’s relationship under review. Alana insists that race did not factor into her selecting Phillip for the particular act that began their sexual relationship. Contrastingly, Phillip states that he was certain of the racial undertones that their original arrangement was built upon, and that Alana’s ex-husband was certain of them as well. This brings Phillip to understand that the subtraction of the relationship’s racial implications has led to the evaporation of his sexual investment:
“Maybe my d[**]k only works / When I know I’m black. / And it doesn’t know I’m black / When I’m f[***]ing you / because you love me too much / you see me too—Phillip!”
The couples’ collective realization of Phillip’s affliction causes Alana to become defensive and doubt the therapy’s efficacy, much like Dustin. Harris uses the exchange to outline that Alana’s personal brand of racial avoidance has allowed for the perpetuation of Phillip’s lack of personal racial definition. Additionally, the passage speaks to a racially avoidant society’s inability to foster ideas of intersectionality and account for the needs of those that don’t fall under preconceived classifications of race. Phillip’s difficulty in experiencing arousal with Alana once race is removed from the equation is indicative of the trauma that he has endured in the practice of maintaining an unresolved racial identity. In her book, “Navigating Interracial Borders : Black-White Couples and Their Social Worlds,” Erica Chito Childs speaks on the effect that the racial identity of one, or both partners in an interracial relationship can have on interpersonal dynamics:
“The way the black partner identified racially seemed to influence not only the way the white partner conceptualized race and interracial relations but also the way the couple discussed their relationship.”
Though it doesn’t specifically correspond with Phillip’s struggles to reconcile his mixed heritage, the excerpt illustrates the importance of both parties in an interracial relationship having definite and intentional knowledge of how both they and their partner identify from a racial perspective. In both relationships discussed, the void left by the lack of this knowledge causes ignorance and miscommunication of values in everything from sex to casual conversation.
Beneath a veil of sexual deviance and something select audiences may feel akin to white-shaming, Harris’s Slave Play aims to shed light on issues that aren’t often granted consideration. Navigating the intricacies of contemporary interracial relationships requires both intention and attention on the parts of all parties involved. Harris implements these struggling couples as a means of bringing the audience’s attention to these issues. Each character serves as a cautionary tale, exemplifying the importance of communication and consideration of the history that their respective partners bring to the table. Above all, Harris advertises the dangers inherent in the ignorance or erasure of the personal identities of one or both members of an interracial relationship. Despite the ease or personal comfort that may come of utilizing racial neutrality or color-blind ideologies, these practices generally cause or perpetuate damage in the long-term (especially in partners of color). In his own unique voice, Harris invites viewers to examine the importance of confronting the uncomfortable realities of interracial relationships.
