Lisa Jones’ Combination Skin: Embracing the Combination

Lisa Jones’ Combination Skin (1996) is not simply an attempt to play around with the TV show format that seems to be regarded as the most overly popular variety at that particular period of time. Its complexity extends further than only to re-emphasize series of problematic yet widely-accepted ideas regarding the discourse of race, color and culture. The play portrays not only the natural binary oppositions but also the unnatural effort in actually embracing the unavoidable variety. Its approach by utilizing TV’s variety show format ends up aiding the play to construct its own variant and response to such variety.     

Despite its obvious attempt to differentiate yet assimilate the well-known issues within racial and cultural discourses, Jones’ own variety of actually situating such problems is worth the effort of a thorough dramatic—though mostly textual—analysis. Her unnatural construction situates a distortion within the aforementioned popular discourses, and also a distortion between notion of Mind and Body. Both of which does not only make strange the already-established ideas regarding such issues. Both of which also attempt to formulate, again, seemingly new understanding towards the discourses. It is a new understanding that tends to embrace its varied elements rather than abruptly differentiate them.  

Depth and Variety of Culture

With its depth and complexity, the play seems to problematize broader matter of race and culture. It doesn’t single out each problematic element but rather assimilate them into a web of interrelated issues. As interrelated, intricate and complicate as an actual television broadcasting network.

Generally and initially speaking, as its preliminary attempt of actually situating such culture-related issues, the plays seems to broaden its grasp towards a wide yet popular context by creating certain allusion and subtle—or not so subtle—references towards other well-known or generally accepted things and ideas. Such textual yet dramatic manipulation is located within certain dialogues, stage direction (that includes details relating to the background music, things being shown in the billboard, etc.) and even the characters. 

“(We hear electronic instrumental version of “We Shall Overcome.” VENDETTA and TEEN BOMB do church rock to music.)
VENDETTA …You know, we’ve got to run a tight ship here ‘cause the colo0r question could take us anywhere, couldn’t it? Where you want to go? Capetown? The Cosby Show? Or you could just walk on by”
(Jones in Perkins and Uno, 1996: 313).

References towards “The Cosby Show” (1984-1992)[1], presence of instrumental rendition of “We Shall Overcome”[2] along with some other variety of music (jazz, rock, etc.), and existence of popular names as references for the characters’ description like Howdy Doody and especially Diana Ross; all of which are the examples of textual and dramatic manipulation observed from within the play.

At certain point, such pop(ular)-references seems to enhance the play’s reach in a sense that with such approach the play is not only focusing itself on particular and obviously specific issue but tries to gather all of the things which are still relevant with its theme. It may also be considered as a mean with which the play tries to make the content less foreign. The intertextuality that the play situates is both a way for it to not only simplify but also make its content and context even more elaborate. Both the reader of the script and the audience of the play may gain the luxury of understanding the text with less difficulty if they already have prior knowledge about the references. Yet such situation may also be considered as an influence for both the reader and the audience to actually enrich their knowledge about the mentioned references. 

Combination and Disorientation of Race and Culture

Viewed from different point of view, the established references seem to construct not only intertextuality but also interculturality between the implied cultural features from each of the references. Albeit its depth and complexity, from the aforementioned examples of references we would already realize that the play itself is mainly going to discuss about matter of race and color within a cultural context. The emphasis from “A note about casting” from the script is another example that signifies its perspective even further. Such problematic interrelation may be called as another example of an irony situated within the play.

The hypnotherapy routine becomes significant as it does not only situate a problem regarding the connection between the unconscious and conscious state of the specimens in terms of gender-related problem. It encompasses an even broader problem that correlates with the culture of each specimen. The significant cultural elements are not only one’s nationality, or a simple place of birth but it also includes one’s family history, place on which one grew up, and even one’s present occupation, achievement and interest. The differences within each of specimen’s elaboration and projection regarding their respective cultural point of view signifies the influence and differences caused by the change of state from being conscious and unconscious (being hypnotized).

The unconscious projection of each specimen seems always be problematic, especially for the respective specimen themselves. Their unconscious thoughts look like a bundle of secret that they are trying to hide through whatever approach, attitude or even perspective which they have already constructed through their consciousness. Rather than correlates with the problematic relationship between men and women, the ideas which they are trying to hide mainly concern about their personal issues and how it eventually entangles with the appropriation of culture that befall them. Whether it is Specimen One’s anxiety with her book, Specimen Two’s problematic family, or even Specimen Three’s White dreams, all of which seems to be under theme that is the thing that each of them is trying to forget and put aside.

Derek Walcott’s interest toward the idea of amnesia and its correlation with all of the post-colonial intricacies (along with its manifestation in culture) which is elaborated in What the Twilight Says (1998) seems to be relevant with similar issue constructed within Jones’ play. Walcott’s amnesia refers to an attempt of actually forgetting dreadful memories that have become one of the most problematic influences for contemporary post-colonial writer. It is a process of trying to detach one’s self from the story and history that have formed not only their past but eventually their present (1998: 5). However, such amnesia seems to be significant only for the mind not for the body. It would be easy for us to intentionally try and erase something inside our memory and thoughts while fully conscious but it would be so much difficult to do the same for our body. The idea of a person who is able to forget the cause of every single scar (it doesn’t have to always come in an actual scar) that he or she has seems to be illogical as both the feeling and experience of it will always be recorded in his or her body’s memory.

The hypnotherapy that occurred in the play then can be considered as the mean with which the play provides an access towards the part of the specimen’s thoughts and memory that have been the casualty of the aforementioned amnesia.  Series of projection that contrast each of the specimens’ earlier explanation of their own lives situate a distance between their present conscious mind with their unconscious and bodily memory. Appropriation of culture ends up influencing respective specimens to censor their own subjective and personal intention just because they have to fit into certain kind of role with which they can barely exist within the present community. In terms of this particular play, race and color have become the appropriation devices that force the specimens to present their post-amnesia selves. It forces them to eventually detach from their own body and to put aside their personal interest for the sake of the appropriation. As the private space of the specimens is influenced by the external yet public appropriation, referring to Bhabha’s “The World and the Home” (1992), “…the border between home and world becomes confused; and, uncannily, the private and the public become part of each other, forcing us a vision that is as divided as it is disorienting” (pg. 141).

“VENDETTA There’s no place like the black unconscious…
SPECIMEN NUMBER THREE There’s no place like the black unconscious. There’s no place like th black…
(VENDETTA snops her fingers. SPECIMEN NUMBER THREE edges back to her cushion, embarrassed, as if caught in a very personal act.)
SPECIMEN NUMBER THREE…Toto, are we black?
VENDETTA (Teary-eyed) Yes dear, we’re still black. What a gifted child, a carte-blanche to her race”
(Jones in Perkins and Uno, 1996: 326). 

The problems that emerge from the hypnotherapy ends up disorienting each specimen in a sense that they became unsure about their own orientation—especially in relation to race, color and approach towards the problematic culture—and, to some extent, their own origin. In Specimen One’s case, the disorientation emerges from the problem that her book causes as it tries to portray something that both her and it do not have sufficient amount of experience to actually create such Black experience. It is then considered as a careless attempt and even mockery towards the sacred and sensitive Black experience. Specimen Two’s disorientation correlates mainly with her own intention in actually attempting such heroic act of “…willing to die for my people” (pg. 321) or just simply guiding her away from the problem that lies within her own family. The disorientation experienced by Specimen Three is her own fascination and astonishment towards her White dream. Her concern by asking the question “are we black?” and then followed by Vendetta’s confirmation “we’re still black” is indeed an indication for her own disorientation in terms of her own classification of color and race. Even though it is ironic to see that the disorientation also influences the so-called winner of the show.

The irony doesn’t end there. Pulling the focus into a wider point of view, each specimen’s political elaboration (before they were hypnotized) already situates certain several problematic symptoms. Even though its differences are already obvious as they were indeed elaborated by different women, each variant seems to represent a particular approach in facing the problem of race and color within the context of the Tragic Mulatto itself of course.

Specimen One’s attempt of generalizing the problem by showing such ignorance towards the differences and hiding herself under the platonic term “the human family” (pg. 315) signifies her own arrogance and carelessness. Such generalization indicates her shallow experience in approaching such vast yet problematic discourse like race and color. Even though she is able to manipulate and to abruptly enhance her scarce knowledge in such field through her book, her later unconscious projection shows that she is indeed hiding her lack of understanding and experience under her own approach that is to carelessly generalize and also under the blinding title of her own problematic book.

Vigorous heroic gesture and effort showed by Specimen Two seems to be as deceiving and careless as Specimen One’s.  Her attempt to both announce her own introduction and to represent her “people” is indeed a contrast of Specimen One’s generalization as it is not only an attempt to regain and re-establish the relation between men and women but also to rebuild the race and color appropriation. Albeit her noble intention, such approach is considered as a typical attitude of the New World which according to Walcott’s elaboration in “The Muse of History” (1998) “has produced a literature of recrimination and despair, a literature of revenge written by the descendants of slaves or a literature of remorse written by the descendants of masters” (pg. 37). Yet even though Specimen Two’s attempt is not actually a literature, her usage of language in re-establishing the relation and appropriation can be considered as her own production of text in which she tries to infuse her political intent. It is also emphasized by Bob’s remark saying that Specimen Two’s demand to read her own introduction is “something about linguistic appropriation and taking back the night…” (Jones in Perkins and Uno, 1996: 320). Such situation is yet again similar to the typical Third World point of view “who think of language as enslavement and who, in a rage for identity, respect only incoherence or nostalgia” (Walcott, 1998: 37). Nonetheless, similar with the problematic truth experienced by Specimen One, Specimen Two’s vigorous and noble intention eventually falls into another ironic situation as through her unconscious projection it is uncovered that her heroic gesture is solely based on series of problem with her family and lineage. 

“VENDETTA Specimen Three, you must be wearing Mulatto.
SPECIMEN NUMBER THREE Isn’t it divine? So sheer, yet complex.
VENDETTA Bundles of talent, yes indeed, Specimen Three,. You know, you make me happy. You fit in. You do. And I can see that you’re really trying to get somewhere.
SPECIMEN NUMBER THREE Yes, I love networking”
(Jones in Perkins and Uno, 1996: 325).

Without even trying to generalize or even to re-organize the problems, Specimen Three’s approach brings a new fresh fragrance to the mix of the show. Her conversation does not seem to be driven by complaints or even by vigor but by a mere intent to actually talk. Even though the validity of Vendetta’s judgment is still in question, her less sarcastic and cynical response towards Specimen Three’s gesture for the whole show can be considered as an indication of whose attitude that is more acceptable between the three contestants. Her approach seems to accept yet also deconstruct the series of problematic racial, cultural and color-related appropriation similar to Walcott’s hybrid aesthetic that “synthesized components of dissimilar cultures” and thus “work to deconstruct Eurocentric and nativist oppositions” (Stevens, 2003: 450). Furthermore, the audience’s decision to make Specimen Three as the winner of the show can be observed as an acceptance or even a reward for her Mulatto, open-minded, and hybrid-like approach. It seems to be a political gesture by putting such perspective over the attempt of generalization and re-organization showed by the other contestants. It situates an image in which such Mulatto attitude towards the problems is considered as the more acceptable choice than trying to hide under seemingly innocent terminology or to actually initiate a movement against the appropriation.

However, the White dream that comes from Specimen Three’s unconscious projection seems to problematize her validity. Even though the irony looks to be justified by Vendetta’s assurance that they’re still black, the projection of such White dream cannot be despised and it seems to blur Specimen Three’s and even Vendetta’s orientation within such context. Such situation then influences questions like “Why is it okay for a Black to dream about the White or to be White?”; “Why does it become a problem when a Black wants to become White?” It seems to create a notion in which both Specimen Three and Vendetta are not Black or even White.

The term Mulatto thus comes into the play. Whether it is hybrid, mix, or Mulatto, all of those terms imply similar disorientation with much depth of complexity. Such approach does aware of the existent binary perspective within the context of race, color or even culture and it does not try to make something new putting the established ideas aside. It assimilates them into something that is complex yet disorienting. Rather than actually trying to fix itself from the disorientation, the Mulatto approach embraces it. Just like the way Specimen Three embraces all of the different fragrances without actually forcing each of them to wear specific scent. She seems to ignore the differences yet she does aware of their existence. Knowing that the differences are there did not influence her to settle differences away.

As disorienting as the words and one of the issues that I have elaborated through this paper, Lisa Jones’ Combination Skin tries to elaborate the different approaches that people, especially women, may have in terms of racial, cultural and color-related problems. At certain point, through its seemingly chaotic and cliché-ish construction, the play seems to attempt ridicule upon the overly popular binary and mirrored perspective over such discourse. Yet, it seems to also add another approach that is to embrace the already established diversity even though it is still as problematic and ironic as the two-sided perspective.

Bibliography

Bhabha, Homi K.1992."The World and the Home" in Social Text (No. 31/32, Third World and Post-Colonial Issues; pg. 141-153). North Carolina, United States: Duke University Press.

Jones, Lisa.1996."Combination Skin" in Contemporary Plays by Women of Color: An Anthology (pg. 310-327) ed. Perkins, Kath A. & Uno, Roberta. London: Routledge.

Stevens, Camilla.2003.""The Future of Old Trinidad": The Performance of National Cultural Identity in Two Plays by Derek Walcott" in Modern Drama (Vol. 46, No. 3; pg. 450-469). Toronto, Ontario: University of Toronto Press.

Walcott, Derek.1998."The Muse of History" in What the Twilight Says (pg. 36-64) by Derek Walcott 36-64. New York: Farrar, Straus & Giroux.

Walcott, Derek.1998."What the Twilight Says" in What the Twilight Says (pg. 1-35) by Derek Walcott, 1-35. New York: Farrar, Straus & Giroux.

---

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Cosby_Show

[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/We_Shall_Overcome