Is Broadway Ready for ‘Slave Play’?

Triggering? I thought art was supposed to be triggering.

This is probably the third article I have read about this play in the last year and one of the things that continues to bother me is the lack of any mention of a story in Slave Play. Let's remember that for its time, A Streetcar Named Desire was considered provcative, but there is a compelling story in that play. Fences, by August Wilson, was also provocative, but there's some great storytelling going on, with characters we care about. Raisin in the Sun is almost three hours long (albeit with an intermission) and it covers a great story about the Younger family that still holds up to this day. It goes without saying that a great dramatist should stir the pot and disturb the peace, but there should also be a compelling story included in the play. A. story about a black woman exploring her sexuality doesn't sound particularly interesting to me, and because I'm on a fixed income, I will, more than likely, have to pass on this play.

Time for a real live boor to come stomping in, upsetting any number of apple carts. Me voici! Speaking as an "evangelical"--only the name has become degraded. Debased. You know what I mean. I would suggest: a fair number of those slaves back then were like me. "Evangelical Christians." Or whatever. I would give you Mr. Solomon Northrup. In "Twelve Years A Slave." No no! Not the movie version. Good as it was--and my stars! not only good but harrowing. Oh yes. No, I'm referring to the book. In which Mr. Northrup describes his master, William Ford, preaching Sunday mornings. The movie shows us Mr. Northrup, hearing (in his mind) a derisive chant urging him "to run.' The chant drowns out the sermon. But no. In the book, Mr. Ford is a spellbinder. All eyes (Mr. Northrup tells us) were fixed on him. There was pin drop silence. Mr. Ford (for whom Mr. Northrup professes deep respect) would interrupt his sermon with extemporaneous prayer. Eventually, he became a minister. Full-time. "A slave-owner? Yes," comments Mr. Northrup. "What would you expect? He'd been reared that way." MOVING ON-- --I would point to that vast treasury of spirituals. Men and women crying out to God amid their sorrows. They brought the composer Dvorak to tears when he heard them. They bring me to tears. Not all black people were "evangelical Christians" back then. Anymore than nowadays. But some were. Just like nowadays.

The adjective “American" indicates nationality. American slavery did not begin 400 years ago. America did not exist 400 years ago. Spanish colonizers introduced the first African slaves to what is now the Untied States in 1526, when they brought about 100 slaves to present-day South Carolina. That was 493 years ago, but it was not the beginning of slavery in North America. Slavery in North America predates recorded history just as it does on other continents. The largest slave market that ever existed in North America was the pre-Columbian Aztec slave market at Tenochtitlan. Native American tribes in what is now the United States practiced slavery before the arrival of the Europeans. What can be accurately described as “American slavery” began in 1787 when delegates from the 13 states granted sovereignty by the Treaty of Paris of 1883 signed the U.S. Constitution. Slavery endured from 1787 to 1865 in the United States, a period of 78 years. Some slaves born the day in 1878 when the United States was created lives to see the end of slavery nationwide in 1865, but most states abolished slavery long before 1865.

No thank you. Another morally degenerate Broadway production is not what we need.

I saw it downtown. Spellbound. Do I have "issues" with it? Indeed, but that's why I'm seeing it again on Broadway (I already have my ticket). I'm wondering how they'll transfer the performances, lighting, staging, speech rhythms, etc. But most importantly, on the question of Black American identity, the Broadway institution needs rattling. Otherwise abiding black grievance, something the country is now oh so reluctantly confronting, will go unaddressed in our foremost theatrical arena. This play puts the foundation and persistence of racial injustice right in your face, then jolts you forward into the 21st century to seek answers, if you can devise them. Brilliant. Strange the way some who comment about a play they haven't seen sound as if they want -- or actually fear they NEED -- to be protected from it. Which of course is exactly why they should see it. What do they think the play's going to do, bite them? On the strictly practical level, my guess is that the producers will eventually order that an intermission be crafted and introduced into the running time. IMO if they don't they're going to lose some people's attention -- and the interest of potential ticket buyers -- simply due to uninterrupted playing time. Keeping in an intermission is cutting off their nose to spite their face. It's placing in aesthetic jeopardy a staggering artistic achievement. The producers need to better protect what they've got hold of -- a true change agent of a play.

Prison is the carefully carved colored exception to the 13th Amendment abolition of slavery and involuntary servitude. With 5% of humanity America has 25% of the world's prisoners. And although only 13% of Americans are black like Ben Carson and Tim Scott about 40 % of the prisoners are black. Because blacks are persecuted for acting like white people do without any criminal justice consequences. Instead of seeing a fictional play about slavery visit a jail/ prison and see the reality of slavery.

First of all, many of the comments below are ridiculous and their writers--not having even seen SLAVE PLAY--are making ludicrous analogies to situations that don't even parallel the situations presented throughout the play. Secondly--the play runs for two hours with no intermission--not 2 1/2 or 3 hours, as one comment states below. As it is written, the play does not warrant an intermission, which would cause the thunderous momentum of the story to be unnecessarily interrupted . I saw this play during its run last December at the NYTW where it originated, and I am going to see it again. The play is superb. It is provocative, unsettling, intellectually brilliant and very cleverly constructed . The actors --many of whom are repeating their performances again on Bway--are excellent. The play will be a critical and popular hit, and word of mouth will be very strong. One only has to get past that title, and buy a ticket for what will be an extraordinary night in the theatre, and definitely a major Tony Award contender next spring.

Where I live in the Midwest we have middle school children have programs were the children are treated as slaves. They are bound, screamed at, humiliated, made to kneel, etc, in an effort to build empathy for the people who lived more than 150 years ago. They do leave out the “n” word. Same at our living history museum and our town fall festival where the slaves are attempting to flee to the North but many don’t make it. This has been going on for over a decade, it’s all very scary and humiliating. Many parents have their children opt out it’s so scary. I am curious why the comments and the article treat this play as original or groundbreaking. Maybe it’s just new to New York. Why isn’t the audience on Broadway bound and made to kneel in front of their masters and humiliated, etc? That would seem more educational than just watching actors.

I was at last night’s preview and whoever commented above and claims to speak for that audience simply does not. The play was shocking, challenging, provocative, uncomfortable - all of the feelings that a close examination of slavery and racism should elicit. It was essential that there be no intermission in order to sustain the story’s dramatic flow. I didn’t see anyone checking the time or showing impatience; the audience around me was 100% engaged, responding intensely in many moments. This is an essential play for the times we live in and you can’t render judgment on it before you’ve seen it. I am awed by the playwright’s gifts and the incredible performances of the actors and I urge people to go, leave your pre-conceptions at home, and experience something that will affect you deeply.

This play is not boring, it's tip-of-your-toes intense the whole way through. It's extremely relevant, and articulates racial struggle in America in a way I've NEVER seen before. The performances were breathtaking. My partner and I were blown away. I was also at the final dress rehearsal and the audience was jumping out of their seats (though I heard from one of the actors that this energy isn't common, I didn't blame them for being so reactive!). GO SEE THIS PLAY!!!

I think its high time we discussed slavery and its evils publicly! It will go a long way to heal hearts and enlighten those that need it. There is a great new play, "Thoughts of a Colored Man", it's outstanding! The play is a moving, thought provoking, emotional narrative which provides the audience with genuinely honest portrayal of African American men today. Heading to Baltimore in October.

It sounds like something for sophisticated adults. That will be a refreshing change for Broadway.

We saw the play last January and were told not to read about it in advance, simply show up, which is what we did. It was exceptional and memorable. I'm not sure what/if they've changed anything from that production, but we were never bored and had a lot to talk about after. Art should provoke emotion and discussion, this does both.

I don't need anything more in my life right now that's going to be "pervasively unsettling." For that, I have Trump.

When I was a young teenager in the 1960’s I saw a play which took place in the bowels of a slave with actors and actresses chained together as slaves crossing the Atlantic entitled Slave Ship. I sat in the front row. During the play an actress reached out to me in horror and grabbed my wrist for help. I’ve never forgotten the look on her face. Being in the audience my ambivalence about how to react and what to do was horrifying to me. A great play. There is also a great painting by Turner entitled The Slave Ship. It is tragic this subject is still so relevant.

“Mr. Harris, then an aspiring playwright in his late 20s who was about to start graduate school, was listening to a fellow reveler describe a kink-fueled sexual encounter. Ever the provocateur, Mr. Harris asked whether the man, who was white, would have felt as comfortable making party chatter about his experimentation if the woman he had been having sex with was black.“ Are we to deduce that a "kink-fueled sexual encounter" means bondage discipline or sadomasochism? Are we to deduce that the intersection of bondage as a form of sexual release and communication intersects or overlaps with the imagery, emotional legacy and manifestations of slavery in challenging ways? If so, why can’t you just say that? Sometimes the language of PR (which this article surely is) puts contempt for the audience in the writer’s and actors’ mouths. This play is being promoted as if the cast feels contempt for its sexually and historically repressed audience. The only casualty of such hyperbole is the play itself. If the play moves the audience, it will sell.

I think this is cheap and desperate. People will do almost anything for money. It’s the same thing, I think, with that Chapelle show act that’s been in the news recently. To me, it’s people being so desperate for attention and the money and fame or increased fame, or reigniting of their careers that a well-orchestrated controversy can bring. A “perfect” controversy will drown out the outrage while successfully helping cloak the work of hate or ignorance or pure greed, as “art,” or “raising good questions.” To me, it’s just unfortunate and pure shameless and old fashioned desperate greed. They can’t get attention through their creativity in an over saturated market, so they resort to outrage and hate-baiting! And, just to be sure they’re “safe,” it’s seemingly often minorities who do these pieces for companies owned by non-minorities, so that it’s sort of difficult to criticize them! If white men or women were to try this, these very artists and many like them would probably lead the charge against them! And, another way to understand these desperate shows I think is that they also feel they can do this partly because the occupant of the White House at the moment is engaging in plain overt intolerance and racial or ethnic outrage. So, the “market” for attention is saturated. To me, this is cheap and artless!!!

The most tedious night in the theater I had in a very long time.

Let's see how regional theater handles this one...

It's really interesting that the director felt a bit removed when first reading the first act, but because he stayed with it to read the second act, really got it at that point. I've got to wonder: If the script didn't come with being suggested by a very notable theater, meaning it had been through several readers who had found it worthy, he might have stopped reading after page 10 or so and asked "What can they be thinking?" For me, the biggest example on Broadway recently was (of all shows) "... Margaritaville." At intermission, it was "What could have attracted the esteemed director, and one of my favorite TV writer/performers to choose to spend years on this story? Surely, not just money." But at least to me. the second act started peeling off and commenting with emotion on the amorality of what we'd seen and it was "Oh, this was what they were leading up to" - and with the bad reaction, it showed (at least to me) that it's almost impossible to push aside what you have the crowd feeling in the first half hour, and then during intermission. My mind stayed with that show because of the creative team, that this can't be all there is. Maybe storytelling demanded not pausing 15 minutes. Here, unlike the usual, the more they herald the respect the play has gotten, that what is upfront does serve an important point, stay for the journey of the whole play; publicize the play's pedigree and earlier reception, the more audiences will be able to relax for the set-up.

The power of images out of context when the subject matter is this divisive, with the work having gone from the nonprofit world to the for-profit world of commercial theater. In non-profit, so few shows really need box office to exceed cost, and at least in the minds of its often-loyal audience carries a purpose of giving voice to important issues whatever the financial risk. Inflammatory publicity drawing crowds in jan a feel of trying to share a meaningful work with as many people as they can. In the for-profit world of commercial theater, the understood strategy is find what sells, and sell, sell, sell - premium if at all possible. If the "nut" is not met, no matter how high the quality, we close, and if the show makes money, Broadway will be able to do more risky shows like this. (Could any of us have imagined themes like those in "Dear Evan Hansen" yielding a premium hit, even after Ben Platt? It gives hope for Broadway and the road and the future audiences. And its success will mean more will try to tackle that kind of subject matter. Some of the marketing, like wear these polo shirts and implicitly identify with the damaged Evan, feel like they came from marketers who have no idea that the idea is to NOT feel like Evan. Hopefully, the marketers will "get" this play

Last night, I went to that first preview with all the models and designers. I went into the show purposely knowing nothing about the play but its title and the creative team. This was a good idea because at least for me, while watching the play there were some surprises that unfolded. But, as I left the theater after the mandatory standing ovation, other than talk about the after-party (which I happily skipped), the only discussion I heard was this: why was a two and a half hour show in 3 acts presented without an intermission? "Slave Play" just went on and on. What was supposed to be shocking or provocative was simply boring by the halfway mark (during the end of Act 2). People around me were checking the time by 9:45pm, but last night the play kept rolling on until 10:25pm. By the end, we weren't triggered; we were bored. In the years-long journey to Broadway, why didn't someone (Anyone!) take a red pencil and give this play a good old-fashioned edit?

Sitting here in south central Texas, albeit near Austin, I doubt I'll make it to this provocative performance. But I applaud any production that grabs the puritanical neck of America and shakes the entire body. Especially when race, power, and sexuality are involved -- we need art to bring clarity to the mess we have made of things.

This is a brave production. An important production. I saw the final dress rehearsal for this Broadway production, and I will never forget it.

I can not wait to see this play. And then I will comment on it. Which is what all of us should do. I have little respect for anyone who critiques and/or bans a play/movie/book without first experiencing it. Jeremy O Harris and Robert O'Hara are stars on the precipice of stardom. I couldn't be happier for them.

Go. See. It. Unforgettable

I am very much looking forward to seeing this play. It is important in today's America that we as a society remain open to all kinds of opinions and perspectives on race and sexuality . If we fail to so MAGA wins.