Said Spider Webb, AKA Joseph O'Sullivan, quoted in "Spider Webb, Tattoo Artist With a Defiant Streak, Dies at 78/Part of a generation that brought serious art credentials to tattooing, he campaigned to overturn a ban in New York and helped the form gain acceptance" (NYT).
When he made the quoted statement, it was 1976, and he was breaking the New York City law against tattooing. He did it publicly, in front of the Museum of Modern Art — "a bit of performance art as civil disobedience" (in the words of the NYT obituary).
He was — in the classic civil disobedience format — arrested. That gave him a chance to argue in court that there's a First Amendment right to tattoo. He lost, but tattooing continued, and ultimately, in 1997, the ban ended.
Posts
38 comments:
So he’s the guy who invented the oxymoron “tattoo artist.” More like tattoo vandal.
Wide spread tattooing is one of the worst things of modern life. Whenever I see a woman - especially a 40 plus woman - with a tattoo, I think to myself, “What the fuck is wrong with you? That tattoo is hideous.”
Ever watch the TV show “Inkmasters?” It is a reality contest show. The “human canvasses” submit to getting tattooed. The judges then criticize the work and the human canvasses hear it. And the judges can be brutal. And now they are stuck with a mistake. Funny! Losers!
Seriously, tats are now a class distinction marker. I’d bet that fewer than 5% of the student body at Creighton and Harvard have tats. None of my kids’ friends at Carleton or Santa Clara had tats.
When I was young, tatts indicated either a lifetime of low earnings ahead or a stint in the US Marines. The great George Schultz, a Marine in WWII, had a Princeton Tiger tattooed on his butt.
Tell us MORE, about this "right to bodily autonomy" that women had, in 1974?
For most of my life; tattoos meant that you were A Rebel! That you're NOTHING like your parents!
(Stupid Parents!!)
So, now that kids are growing up, watching their mom's tattoos fade and sag, Why are kids still getting them? What about, when it's your Grandmothers tattoos?
Tattoos now seem to be a badge of normality.. You are PART OF The Herd. You are like EVERYONE ELSE
yuk!
What are today's rebels supposed to do? Join a Pentecostal church?
My body, my ink...
So he’s the one to blame for my youngest daughter’s tattoo — a tiny cartoon elephant near her heel. You should have seen her face when we mentioned the elephant was the symbol of the Republican Party: Far more effective than expressing direct disapproval.
Classic essay by Theodore Dalrymple on his experience with crimes and tattoos in his experience as a prison psychiatrist
https://www.city-journal.org/html/it-hurts-therefore-i-am-12341.html
John LGBTQBNY Henry
David Begley- I think you’re wrong; not about your particular observations, of course, but tattoos are ubiquitous among the young. I live in a New England county with 4 SPLACs and a BSU; I dunno what the exact % of tattooed individuals is, but it’s high- come to my gym where a lot of the college kids work out- it’s ink city. And sadly it’s both boys and girls. Lots of neck tattoos, even some on the face. I see no sign of this hideousness abating.
Fortunately the t count for my three boys is holding at one- my middle son, who turns 30 this year, when asked if he was getting one like his older brother answered “You wouldn’t put a bumper sticker on a Mercedes, would you?”
The tattoo I really don't understand is the "tramp stamp" or "ass antler"
It literally marks a woman as a tramp. Do women get this because they want to identify as trash? Or do they somehow think "just because I publiclly advertise that I'm a tramp does not mean I am one.
No? Then why pay money to give the impression?
John LGBTQBNY Henry
ganderson said: “You wouldn’t put a bumper sticker on a Mercedes, would you?”
More like painted-on flames.
The topics here are 1. legal regulation of tattooing, 2. civil disobedience, and 3. tattoos as markers of disapproved-of citizens.
Please don't change the subject to bad tattoos, regretting tattoos, tattoo removal, and other general tattoo ideas. This isn't just an okay-talk-about-tattoos open thread, and I'm deleting things that are creating the risk that the discussion will devolve into that. Please understand the topic and jump off from there.
I deleted about 8 comments. Please don't be dismayed if you got deleted, but I want to keep this topic focused.
"They figured that by getting rid of tattoo artists, they’d get rid of undesirables."
A noble experiment. More noble and, while it lasted, more successful than Prohibition or the Drug War.
I got my first tattoo when it was still illegal in NYC. That added to the appeal.
At the risk of going into forbidden territory (irony alert), one reason to make tattooing illegal is "regretting tattoos" and the difficulty of "tattoo removal". You get one when you're drunk or high or with the wrong friends or just being young and stupid. Then you're stuck with it as it fades or stretches or you just think, "I wish I could get rid of that." But it's not that easy. Like trying to quit smoking.
When I see a face tattoo, I know I am looking at an idiot. So, I fully support legal tattooing- it helps people like me to navigated everyday life.
Is there room in the thread for discussion of racial disparity among those obtaining (and removing) tattoos?
Clearly the current technology, with lasers, privileges the pale (persons of pallor) with the choice to both get and remove ink. High-melanin epidermis absorbs the same wavelengths as ink, and so dark-skinned (persons of color) have less choice than their peers.
Many people continue to associate tattoos with undesirable characteristics, and there exist charities formed to help formerly incarcerated persons transition to "good citizens" with, among other techniques, tattoo removal. Removing the art being easier than changing the social bias, but leaving certain groups suffering a double-whammy of bias against both sorts of pigment.
I saw but did not follow and read the link to the Derbyshire essay. My mistake. That essay is brilliant and addresses in full the conclusion I only hinted.
In Radical Chic Tom Wolfe explained the timeless appeal of adopting lower-class signifiers as a strategy to elevate yourself above the boring propriety of the middle class. I’d quote it here but I see you gave it a post of its own eight years ago, on June 4, 2014.
A tattoo is about expression. I'm injecting ink into my skin to express myself, and you're not allowed to question it, lest you be labeled an undesirable.
My willingness to take another seriously is directly proportional to the number of tattoos which I can see. And if that person has any above the shoulder line that willingness is reduced to zero.
Earnest Prole said...
In Radical Chic Tom Wolfe explained the timeless appeal of adopting lower-class signifiers as a strategy to elevate yourself above the boring propriety of the middle class.
Exactly. I see middle aged women with tattoos that have responded to gravity. It's sad.
My middle daughter, back when she was about 18, came home one day with a little tattoo on her shoulder. After I freaked out, she peeled it off. It was a little stickie thing she got at the County fair. No tattoos on my kids.
The legalization of tattooing did society a great service by allowing people to instantly signal to others how much their judgment should be trusted.
Here is 4Chan's map of the meaning of tattoos on different parts of the body.
Interesting that this follows the Architects Rage Against Health and Safety Standards article.
Tattoos and piercings seem to go hand in hand as body modifications. Both of these are, absent any artistic merit, medical procedures. Penetrating the skin with needles is hard to justify as a non medical act. Tattoo and piercing parlors are open air operating rooms and the ones I have walked past, with their barber chair line up and patients on display should be regulated like a Texas abortion clinic.
The days of getting hepatitis from reused needles is on the wane but infections and sepsis are way too common in body modification community.
The real reasons for social standards are...
"The legalization of tattooing did society a great service by allowing people to instantly signal to others how much their judgment should be trusted."
Amen to that Tom T. I don't want to associate with tatted people.
A Bar Association grievance was filed by a young lawyer against me when I expressed my opinion that her lip and nose piercings were not worthy of a Nebraska lawyer. I was actually doing her a favor. I said nothing about her neck tats.
I filed a 12(b)(6) motion and the grievance was dismissed.
But now the Bar wants to adopt a speech code for lawyers. The Supreme Court, however, has to approve it. Won't happen.
What's missing is any recognition that tattoo needles can easily be a source of HIV and hepatitis infections.
Requiring "clean" procedures was always offered as a justification for regulation, and it was disingenuous of the now-deceased "artist" to ignore that fact.
People have the right to mutilate themselves as they choose; but I do associate tatoos with lower class people.
'The great George Schultz, a Marine in WWII, had a Princeton Tiger tattooed on his butt.'
Not Snoopy?
'3. tattoos as markers of disapproved-of citizens.'
In Japan, tattoos are associated with the Yakuza (essentially mafia). If you are an American with visible tattoos, you will usually be treated fine only because the Japanese are just so damned polite.
But if you try to go to a bathhouse, for instance, it would be be quite common to be denied entry...
"The real reason it was made illegal was that people associate tattoos with undesirable types. They figured that by getting rid of tattoo artists, they’d get rid of undesirables."
No, they figured that by getting rid of tattoo artists they’d get rid of tattoos. Getting a tattoo doesn’t change a person’s character. It’s the tattoo itself that makes the person undesirable. In the good old days tattoos, like graffiti, were regarded as visual pollution. Nobody wanted to see that shit, and cities did the best they could to get rid of it as a quality of life thing. Now that “art” has devolved to include graffiti and tattoos, we just have to live with it.
No need to ask about tattoos as markers of disapproval. Just read this comment thread. I'm surprised, actually, to see such homogeneity of opinions here. Tattoos are so mainstream, so accepted now.
I got a tat at 16 (1979) from a biker running a shop on main street. Two other girls and I did it as a rebel move. He was legal, but it definitely wasn't a place that saw a lot of well-bred middle-class young women. I think he was amused by our notion of rebellion, but he was respectful and professional.
Getting a tattoo doesn’t change a person’s character. It’s the tattoo itself that makes the person undesirable. In the good old days tattoos, like graffiti, were regarded as visual pollution. Nobody wanted to see that shit
The reason for the season.
The tattooists display their licenses upon the wall, as well as their membership in various organizations of tattoo artists, as doctors in America do.
I read that essay by Anthony Daniels (Dr Dalrymple) many years ago; it was a pleasure re-reading it. I'd send the 'artists' all of them underground by making their 'art' illegal. Let those who want their tattoos visit the underworld to get them.
A Bar Association grievance was filed by a young lawyer against me when I expressed my opinion that her lip and nose piercings were not worthy of a Nebraska lawyer. I was actually doing her a favor. I said nothing about her neck tats.
I once told a female medical student that her pink hair and body piercings should not be present when she was dealing with patients. I told her that is was especially important because those patients were County Hospital patients and had no choice. When she had her own practice she could dress as she chose. Her patients would then be able to choose.
Now, of course, I would be out of step with the new Woke medical school. Thank God I quit teaching.
Face and neck tattoos, are pretty much a scream for attention ("look at me!") or an indicator of emotional issues. The pretty much guarantee the wearer will never hold a productive job. But they're great identifiers after a gas station robbery.
Nothing screams individualism like doing exactly the same thing everybody else is doing.
There's no one with a tattoo who wouldn't look better without one.
Kate said..
I got a tat at 16 (1979).. He was legal,
contradiction. I GUESS you mean, he was legal.. When he wasn't doing illegal stuff?
How about this?
I got a bottle of whiskey at 16 (1979) from a biker running a shop on main street. Two other girls and I did it as a rebel move. He was legal..
starting to see the problem?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SO-yVHaAlyA
Tom Macdonald.
I love him.
I have no tattoos: yet.
I love the white tattoos best.
Post a Comment