'Fairview'

I’m starting to see a bit of a theme.

I may be wrong, but Slave Play and Fairview appear to have quite a few similarities. 

both, plays by Black playwrights with great critical acclaim.

one, on Broadway, the other, off-Broadway (but close enough).

both rose to prominence in 2019.

in both plays, the characters deal with race head on. in fact, the plays center racial differences and dynamics. 

both casts feature a set of white people who are ‘trying their best’ to be racially conscious and competent, but failing.

and both plays do that thing/that literary thing where they sum it all up in a lengthy monologue at the end. 

the plays are both exciting to read. they are funny, they are fast paced/they rile/they excite/they do all the things we want a play to do.

but something’s off. 

consider: Fairview seems to perpetuate the theme it is attempting to critique.

I want to be clear as I begin this critique: I enjoyed reading Jackie Sibblies Drury’s Fairview. but I also enjoy roller coasters, and true crime podcasts, and psychological thrillers. I like to go on a ride when I read plays— I wanna feel something! 

and Fairview made me feel… a lot of things.

prior to reading, I understood the concept. 

in act one, we watch what ‘appears’ to be Black family preparing for their mother’s birthday dinner, but it is clear that this family is being watched. 

in act two, we meet the people that are watching them. 

in act three, the people watching merge with the people being watched, becoming members and friends of the Black family. 

from the conversation in act two, one can only assume that everyone watching is white.

the concept is like, BOOM, mind blowing. I’m into it cause I’m thinking it’s going to be suspenseful and intense and/it was all of those things. it’s about living under the white gaze and rejecting the white gaze/reversing the white gaze/gazing back.

right?

before I read this play, I did my research. I wanted to see what the production staff looked like: who directed this? who choreographed this? who was the stage manager? were there Black voices present when this Black art was being created? were Black voices amplified and considered when bringing this Black art to life?

and it it looked like there were. there were Black voices present.

(the director was white)

in the first act, Drury makes it clear that this Black family is someone’s perception of a Black family. she uses words like ‘appears’ and refers to their home as a ‘set,’ describing it with broad adjectives such as ‘very nice.’ 

the family knows they are being watched. 

there are little asides where they ‘fix’ themselves, looking into a fourth wall mirror.

there is overt foreshadowing present in the family’s repetitive remarks about their efforts to be presentable.

and if you needed even more proof that this family is performing under a watchful eye,

they shuck and jive. multiple times.

so, because these Black people are acting as if they are under a white gaze, a white gaze must be present. and having a white person direct this work makes sense.

right?

when the white characters are introduced in the second act, they are watching act one. as the Black family goes through the routine of act one for the second time, the white characters are taking turns to provide their answers to the question:

“… if you could choose a different race, what race would you choose?” (32)

here, in the second act, the Black characters act as props. the focus is on the white characters. their discussion erupts when one of the white characters divulges that if she could choose a different race, she would choose to be ‘African American,’ and recalls a story of a childhood caretaker in a very “I love my slave because it takes care of me” sort of fashion.

the act ends with a white man ranting about how oppressed he is.

…

when we reach the third act, and these worlds collide.

the white people fill in, performing their perception of their roles in and in relation to the Black family. and they wreak havoc.

they assert storylines to create drama within the family, suggesting drug use, gambling, poverty, and struggle though none of these things were originally a part of this particular Black family’s plight.

the play ends with a soliloquy, in which the daughter of the Black family, Keisha, asserts that if she could tell a story to ‘her people’ she would tell them the story of a person who got what they deserved/a person whose outcome was fair compared to their neighbors.

Keisha asks in the monologue: 

“Do I sound naive?

Does that matter?

Do I have to keep talking to them

and keep talking to them

and keep talking only to them

only to them

only to them

until I have used up every word

until I have nothing left for

You? (103)

she says she’s talking to “colorful people/people of color.” 

(I read the monologue a few times and I’m still not sure Keisha is talking to me.)

and to be honest, it feels like Drury has “used up every word” with the creation of this play.

it’s all for them. it’s all about them.

Drury is trying to correct them/she is teaching/she is attempting to make them understand.

and it feels like there’s nothing left for me.