Natasha Speed (s2933988)
Hairstyles, piercings, dieting, hair removal. Body modification is something we all undeniably and irrefutably engage in. Image obsessed, we are bombarded with bod-mod products and services in order to fulfil our consumerist, narcissistic desire to prim, tweak and perfect ourselves. In a world in which simulation and representation has taken forefront, an ideal self is something we all try to attain. We beautify and stylise with grim determination as we mould the ordinary, but also, in today’s standards, very mediocre body, to fit the unrealistic expectations presented to us in the media, (the amount of times I’ve heard friends compare themselves to the beautified, photoshopped women they see in magazines can account for such claims). Body modification, a reflection of such aspirations, becomes habitual as many modifying practices pervade our lives without recognition. The tattoo however, as a conscious and calculated decision, is perhaps an exception to this blind consumerist rule. Moving away from the conventional practices of body mod, tattoos are both ‘invasive and permanent’. Radically transformative, they require the ‘greatest level of commitment’ for the individual involved (Smith and Riley 2009, 269). The tattoo, alongside other body mod practices, situates the body in the foreground rather than the background in the construction of identity. However, unlike the instantaneity of the various fads and phases that dominate consumer culture, the tattoo is for life. It cannot be swapped for the latest style nor can it be removed because it has become unfashionable. However, with more than a third of Britons aged 16 to 44 rocking ink (O’Neill 2012) the tattoo is undoubtedly becoming more and more popular. My question, therefore, is why this invasive form of body mod is becoming increasingly prominent in Western culture.
According to Hewitt (1997) ‘body alteration has begun to filter into mainstream culture as a popular form of self-expression’ (73). In a society in which image has become paramount, this statement certainly holds its credibility. With ‘greater freedom to mark our bodies’ (Smith and Riley, 272) the body, and how we choose to present it, has become a way to reflect our identity. This physical form of expression, Hewitt claims, is now more prominent than ever before. In a culture, he points out, where we lack ‘shared meaningful rituals’ and ‘cohesive values’, the ‘human body has taken in greatest significance’ (20). It is therefore no surprise that we are currently witnessing an exponential rise in tattoo modification. This emphasis on individualisation has led to a thirsty desire to self-articulate and the tattoo has become the perfect and most apparent way to do so. However, there are those who argue that, due to its commodification and commercialisation, the tattoo is now a form of conformity. Individualisation, henceforth, becomes illusionary. A fashion statement rather than a form of self-expression and liberation, tattoos have become a ‘hipster habit, a sheeplike folly a permanent pretension’ (Bidisha 2014). With everyone searching for a means to express themselves it appears a backlash has materialised as the formally expressionist form becomes nothing more than a fashion accessory. Koi carps, Chinese symbolism, stars and dreamcatchers. Inked on countless bodies, these are all tattoo trends that have been and gone. With such tattoo genericness it is certainly viable to pose the suggestion that the body has become nothing more than a standardised, mass produced product in a consumerist machine. As O’Neill points out in his article for The Telegraph, ‘If a deviant is one who “departs from usual or accepted standards”, then it is the non-tattooed, the unbranded who are exercising deviancy in the 21st century’. Ceasing to be anything but a homogenised style, the tattoo, according to O’Neill, becomes a reflection of conformity as opposed to identity. The body, as a physical expressionistic and identifying entity henceforth, is eradicated. Yes, body modification is on the increase, that much is undeniable, but rather than an ‘expression of individualism’ (Smith and Riley, 272) the body, as cultural object, merely becomes a reflection of a standardised consumer culture.
To a certain extent, I myself can see the validity in this suggestion. Tattoos have, in some ways, become a fashionable trend. Yet to lump every man and woman with a tattoo into the same conformist pool is unbelievably naive. Bidisha’s and O’Neill’s argument is perhaps too simplistic and inexorably pessimistic of Western cultural trends. Smith and Riley stress that, because of its permanent nature, it is far too easy to consider all tattoos as part of a fashion culture as fashion requires constant change (272). In fact, they try to avoid these associations as much as possible. As a person who is tattooed herself I can certainly vouch for the belief that not everyone who steps into a tattoo studio is merely getting inked because everybody else around them is doing it. Nervous and sweating, my first tattoo was ingrained onto my skin the day I turned eighteen. In the UK, eighteen is a big deal. A cultural marker, this is no ordinary birthday, it is a defining moment, a mark of independence, of expectations. The baby-like reassurance from parents becoming nothing more than a fond memory, we are thrown out (figuratively speaking) into the world to find ourselves. And, what can solidify this pinnacle moment of independence? Why, a tattoo of course. For Atkinson (2003), ‘Body modification projects such as tattooing are viewed as sources of identity construction because they assert one’s intention to be different and independent, or because they are conducted for deeply personalised and highly private reasons’ (21). Each time I step into the tattoo studio the reasons as to why I’m doing it vary. Whilst some are deeply personalised, marking the death of a loved one, others, such as my first tattoo experience, are markers of independence and difference. Bidisha argues that tattoos have become nothing more than a fashionable, hipster trend but never do I go in with the intention to follow a certain crowd. My designs do not look like they’ve come straight out of ‘A Hipsters Guide for Dummies’, nor do they make me like everybody else. Expressionistic of my own self, my tattoos are woven into the very fabrics of my identity. As a ‘form of visual communication’ (Blanchard 1994, 294), they have become a reflection of my core self as each piece of artwork is representative of my own life journey. Every tattoo, therefore, is a form of difference as they are unique to each individual experience. The suggestion that they are merely part of a consumer culture is quite clearly an oversimplification of this ancient artistic form.
This sense of individualism is emphasised by postmodernists. By adopting Baudrillard’s theory that reality and representation have become blurred it is arguable that the tattoo is longing for authenticity. According to Baurdrillard, society has become hyperreal; we can no longer distinguish the fictional simulation from an authentic reality. In a consumer culture many bod-mod products promote simulation. Selling the idea that an unattainable image is achievable, advertisers encourage and manipulate consumers into buying the latest invention to ‘perfection’. The tattoo however, is a deviation from this. The tattoo does not promote an image of perfection, an inked body is not unattainable and, perhaps most importantly, a tatted (and excessively photoshopped) model is very much absent in mainstream media. A simulation, henceforth, ceases to exist. Through this deviation, the tattoo becomes a reclaimer of authentic space in a hyperreal world. By marking our bodies we are symbolically deviating from the consumerist, media obsessed society as our identities, meanings and ways in which way make sense of the world become ingrained upon the surface of the body, enabling us to achieve genuine individualisation. Whether this is intentionally or unconsciously done, it is conceivable that this is perhaps a reason as to why the tattoo has become so appealing in contemporary society today. However, if we do indeed live in a postmodern society, culture, rather than a fixed unchangeable structure, is in a constant state of flux as truth becomes exchanged for fragmentation and multiplicity. This, in relation to the tattoo, can be troubling for some. Our ability to manipulate the body through modification has meant that identity too, has undergone a process of fluidity and instability. As Smith and Riley reinforce; ‘we have come to understand our bodies as ongoing processes that can be intervened in and changed in specific ways as part of our construction of self-identity’ (268). The possibility to adapt ourselves through appearance positions us in a place of power and control, that much is undeniable. However, living in multicultural, fragmented and globalised society has arguably resulted in the dilution of an authentic culture as many individuals in Western society are now sporting a postmodern mashup of tattoos. Badly translated Chinese words, tribal, and buddhist symbolism; all promote a fragmented, ‘global’ identity, and all advocate the idea that authenticity has arguably been exchanged for poor imitation. Covered in Roman numerals and Latin quotes celebrities such as Victoria Beckham and Angelina Jolie are exemplars of such cultural disintegration. Despite this, these tattoo trends, whilst offensive for some, are undeniably representative of a cultural shift. No longer confined by definitive boundaries, the body has become a symbol of liberating freedom as we can now choose to adopt various global identities if we so desire.
The tattoo therefore, according to postmodernists, is a way to express the individual self. As an outcome, tattoos have become increasingly popular as we try to define ourselves in a fragmented social climate. Has the tattoo, henceforth, lost its mark as a form of deviation and subcultural identity? Pre-commodification, the tattoo ‘marked someone out as a rebel, as an individual who has voluntarily cast himself out of the mainstream’ (O’Neill). As an accepted modifying practice, the tattoo is no longer a mark of unconventionality. However, for Smith and Riley the tattoo still represents a ‘oppositional political or subcultural identity’ (272). Indeed, there is certainly a difference between those who belong to a tattoo subculture and those who still identify themselves with mass society but have tattoos. Tattooing is still an identifying form of mainstream opposition, the tatted individual has merely had to up their game to single them out from the token-tattooers. In terms of physical appearance, highly visible tattoos such as sleeves, hands, face and neck are ways in which the tattoo subculture continues to shock and stigmatise themselves from mainstream society, their dedication to the ink separating them from, say, the suburban mom who has a butterfly on her ankle. Committed to an alternative lifestyle, the motivations and reasons behind such heavy tattooing typically differ from society’s preoccupation with self-absorbed construction. Rather, the overtly tattooed body is symbolic of a subcultural identity as it becomes a reflection of various alternative values such as opposition, originality and beating the system. The tattoo, therefore, is truly unique in the sense that it allows us to modify ourselves for whatever reasons we so desire, whether it be a form of self-expression or a symbol of an alternative lifestyle making it an authenticity individualistic form.
So, whether tattooing represents a conscious use of the body to articulate not only ourselves, but our place in society (or our opposition to it) or simply just another form of adornment, it is undeniable that the tattoo has, in the ways I have outlined, become an identity project. It is a reflection of who we are and a representation of cultural shifts in Western society. A tattoos significance is dependent upon the individuals own conscious interaction with their bodies and therefore cannot be oversimplified in its relationship with society. As an outcome of such multidimensionality, the tattoo has inevitability become a popular form of body modification in contemporary society today.
References
Atkinson, M. (2003) Tattooed: The Sociogenesis of a Body Art, Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Bidisha (2014) ‘Sleeve tattoos are now a hipster habit’, from http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jun/10/sleeve-tattoos-hipster-habit-unartistic-art (accessed 21/06/2014).
Blanchard, M (1994) ‘Post-bourgeois tattoo: Reflections on skin writing in late capitalist societies’ in L. Taylor, ed., Visualizing theory: Selected essays from V.A.R., 1990-1994, New York: Routledge.
Hewitt, K. (1997) Mutilating the Body: Identity in Blood and Ink, Ohio: Bowling Green State University Popular Press.
O’Neill, B. (2012) ‘Tattoos were once a sign of rebellion—now they are evidence of craven conformity to cultural norms’, form http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/brendanoneill2/100175760/tattoos-were-once-a-sign-of-rebellion-now-they-are-evidence-of-an-individuals-craven-conformity-to-cultural-norms/ (accessed 21/06/2014).
Smith, P. and Riley, A. (2009) ‘The Body in Cultural Theory’ in Cultural Theory: An Introduction, Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 263-279.
