Take your dumbest fashion idea, now make it permanent.
Yes, there are some good looking tattoos, though they are extremely rare.
These types of markings need some sort of cultural reference. Assuming you're a 21st century westerner, there's no way you'll come by that cultural context honestly. You aren't a sailor, or a native, or a norse warrior, or a Maori. At best you'll make some lame reference to these. At worst, you'll identify with the only real cultural context that ink and piercings have in our culture -- the loser, trailer park, dope/crack-head, drop out, criminal, ignorant loser. Might as well tattoo a photorealistic vagina on your forehead for all the good a tattoo will do you.
Yes, you can put it somewhere where it's easy to cover-up, but what's the point of the that?
Tattoos are expensive. Wanna make an impression young man? Go buy yourself a nice suit. That's an investment that will repay itself. A tattoo is just an expensive diversion that closes more doors than it opens.
These types of markings need some sort of cultural reference. Assuming you're a 21st century westerner, there's no way you'll come by that cultural context honestly. You aren't a sailor, or a native, or a norse warrior, or a Maori.
I was sat on the Tube about three summers ago opposite these two skater kids, one of whom was showing off his new tattoo on his shin to his friend. Again, it was a Japanese character. "It means hell and death," he said (or something similar to hell and death. "I was going to get 'peace and serenity' but they couldn't find the template."
Oh. And I heard another great tattoo story, which I believe to be true. It was told to me as a first-hand story.
English guy, resident in New Zealand, wants a Maori tattoo, so he approaches Mr Maori Tattoo guy. "I would like a tattoo," he says. "How much?"
"Not so fast," replies the tattooist. "Tattoos have a cultural, personal significance. We have to spend some time together. I'll decide what to give you and to do that I have to know you. We must spend time together."
They spend time together, hanging out. Let's say, a week, having some beers, enough time for the artist to come to the conclusion that the English subject is something of a dickhead. Come tattoo time, the tattooist inks a remarkable design onto the English person. It represents a sort of ritual receptacle, upside down; it's significance is that the man's soul has fallen out.
Bummer. No amount of laser surgery can get rid of that.
Maybe, for instance, a few people here consider that large back tattoo pictured in this thread, of a death figure with its arms outstretched over trees (In a swamp, perhaps? Hard to tell.), with a bullet-wound sun, to be "art".
Notice I said that I wouldn't want that, and it would wear off it's novelty, but that is a pretty cool picture. But I didn't like it when I first saw it. I think it's because it has significance after you watch the movie. It's not just something "supposed to look cool".
Quote:
Originally posted by Matsu
A tattoo is just an expensive diversion that closes more doors than it opens.
DMBand006, how often do you feel the need to change your Desktop Background or buy a new jacket? What music did you love ten years ago and what music do you love now? etc etc Catch my drift...?
I think you should totally get a tattoo if you want one. If you're sure about the reasons, and you're sure about the design, and the design has some significance for you that's deeply-rooted and not going to change for the rest of your life, or if it's definitely beautiful, go on.
These are serious criteria, mind. There's nothing wrong with getting a tattoo; there is something wrong with getting the wrong one in my opinion. The wrong one is ugly or dumb or inked for the wrong reasons.
I was sat on the Tube about three summers ago opposite these two skater kids, one of whom was showing off his new tattoo on his shin to his friend. Again, it was a Japanese character. "It means hell and death," he said (or something similar to hell and death. "I was going to get 'peace and serenity' but they couldn't find the template."
Notice I said that I wouldn't want that, and it would wear off it's novelty, but that is a pretty cool picture. But I didn't like it when I first saw it. I think it's because it has significance after you watch the movie. It's not just something "supposed to look cool".
It's a reference to or image from some movie? That's even lamer than I thought then.
For me, the image doesn't even rise to "pretty cool picture", but even if it did, it's hardly worth more than a poster or a T-shirt, it's not at all worthy of becoming a permanent part of someone's body.
I seriously considered getting a tattoo a couple of years ago; I even went as far as getting the number of a respected tattoo studio from a friend of mine.
I wanted, and actually I still haven't totally counted out getting, a rock engraving of an eland, in white ink, on my ankle. A bit like this one. Although a lot smaller.
White ink because it's practically invisible, and fades in less than a dozen years. If you want to see it you'll pretty much have to be told where to look, and that's OK if you're getting it for you - and if it's going to be part of you then I suppose it has to be for you first. I had the number of this guy (called Nathan Satan, which was quite offputting) who does 'shakku' tattoos - that is, the pigment goes on a needle on a chopstick: no machine. It's supposed to be less painful, believe it or not. He wouldn't do white ink so I decided if I were going to do it it would have to be with the electric needle.
Didn't do it then, probably never will. I was researching Southern African hunter-gatherer rock art and I thought it was beautiful. Still do.
It's a reference to or image from some movie? That's even lamer than I thought then.
For me, the image doesn't even rise to "pretty cool picture", but even if it did, it's hardly worth more than a poster or a T-shirt, it's not at all worthy of becoming a permanent part of someone's body.
I am not saying it should. In fact, I thought I said that I didn't think it should. What I was saying (which I guess you disagree, but you haven't seen the movie, or even read my previous posts if you didn't know I was referencing a movie.
You are right that it's not worth even a t-shirt though. But don't judge it being a tattoo that "just looks cool" unless you've seen the movie.
I think you should totally get a tattoo if you want one. If you're sure about the reasons, and you're sure about the design, and the design has some significance for you that's deeply-rooted and not going to change for the rest of your life, or if it's definitely beautiful, go on.
These are serious criteria, mind. There's nothing wrong with getting a tattoo; there is something wrong with getting the wrong one in my opinion. The wrong one is ugly or dumb or inked for the wrong reasons.
Why is it so hard for some people in this thread to understand this? I think most people from the United States are a little too conservative for their own good.
Art is good, even if someone else doesn't like it.
Most of the tattoos I see I think are moronic. I'm so tired of the lower back tattoos on the girls, or the sun on the upper back of the shoulder, or whatever. But most of the people in this thread associate the popularity aspect of tattoos rather than the art. And if you can't see that bullet wound as art, you must be blind, no offense intended.
I have a few more tattoos in mind, things that have meaning to me. I think I have three I've been thinking about, and I've already had one for many years. The one I already have I wouldn't get rid of it unless I lost a limb. I'm pretty sure I feel the same way about two of the other three I'm considering. When I'm sure, I'll get them.
i thought through my designs for a long time before getting them. the roger is ironic. cuz i aint like some hell's angels dood; also a reference to my thieving ways. and the syf is cool, b/c the dead's my favorite band, and he's smokin a doob. just because others don't understand em, don't mean they aint cool to me; and in the end, thats all that matters. cus its my body.
Don't get me wrong, of course it's your body to do with what you will, but that doesn't make it wise, or particularly meaningful, even if you tell yourself that it has meaning to you.
Haha...
I say go for it, if it makes for one less competitor, who am I to complain?
I say go for it, if it makes for one less competitor, who am I to complain?
I'm surprised that you'd care this much Matsu. I say if there's a girl that doesn't like you because you have one, or a job that won't hire you, then they're a poor fit anyway. There's always some conformity in society, but that's true of both sides. If people are so dumb that they'll think less of you because you have one then they're not really worth the time anyway.
The same argument could be made of a birthmark. If someone doesn't hire you because you've got a big liver spot on your cheek then **** that job anyway.
i thought through my designs for a long time before getting them. the roger is ironic. cuz i aint like some hell's angels dood; also a reference to my thieving ways. and the syf is cool, b/c the dead's my favorite band, and he's smokin a doob.
Oh, he's smokin' a doob! SMOKIN' A DOOB! Damn, that changes everything!
It's still trite, overused, banal imagery, but "irony" and doobness overcome all.
If Da Vinci had only realized the great depths of artistic expression he might have reached if only he'd had the Mona Lisa smokin' a doob!
Quote:
just because others don't understand em,
No problem here with understanding. The deep meanings here aren't that deep.
Quote:
don't mean they aint cool to me;
Nope, it just means you have rather undemanding standards for cool.
Quote:
and in the end, thats all that matters. cus its my body.
No one's arguing against your right to do dumb things.
Art is good, even if someone else doesn't like it.
I'd agree that "art", as in the general concept of art, is good.
It hardly follows, however, that all attempts at art are good, or that most tattoos even make the attempt.
Quote:
Most of the tattoos I see I think are moronic.
Now there's something I can agree with without reservation.
Let's keep in mind how this thread got started -- someone wondering whether or not he should get a tattoo, simply to fit in better with the "brotherhood" of others in a fire department (denying that peer pressure has a thing to do with it while simulateously spelling out the peer pressure involved).
The actually tattoo design is practically besides the point -- it's clearly become a modern-day initiation rite, a way of establishing tribal/group identity.
unless you live in the midwest which is about a decade behind+ the times.
Amen to that. My hometown (southern Indiana) SUCKS. If you have high speed internet people think you're from SIlicon Valley (if they know what that is to begin with). Sigh... if only I didn't have to spend the summer there.
Comments
Take your dumbest fashion idea, now make it permanent.
Yes, there are some good looking tattoos, though they are extremely rare.
These types of markings need some sort of cultural reference. Assuming you're a 21st century westerner, there's no way you'll come by that cultural context honestly. You aren't a sailor, or a native, or a norse warrior, or a Maori. At best you'll make some lame reference to these. At worst, you'll identify with the only real cultural context that ink and piercings have in our culture -- the loser, trailer park, dope/crack-head, drop out, criminal, ignorant loser. Might as well tattoo a photorealistic vagina on your forehead for all the good a tattoo will do you.
Yes, you can put it somewhere where it's easy to cover-up, but what's the point of the that?
Tattoos are expensive. Wanna make an impression young man? Go buy yourself a nice suit. That's an investment that will repay itself. A tattoo is just an expensive diversion that closes more doors than it opens.
Originally posted by Matsu
These types of markings need some sort of cultural reference. Assuming you're a 21st century westerner, there's no way you'll come by that cultural context honestly. You aren't a sailor, or a native, or a norse warrior, or a Maori.
I was sat on the Tube about three summers ago opposite these two skater kids, one of whom was showing off his new tattoo on his shin to his friend. Again, it was a Japanese character. "It means hell and death," he said (or something similar to hell and death. "I was going to get 'peace and serenity' but they couldn't find the template."
English guy, resident in New Zealand, wants a Maori tattoo, so he approaches Mr Maori Tattoo guy. "I would like a tattoo," he says. "How much?"
"Not so fast," replies the tattooist. "Tattoos have a cultural, personal significance. We have to spend some time together. I'll decide what to give you and to do that I have to know you. We must spend time together."
They spend time together, hanging out. Let's say, a week, having some beers, enough time for the artist to come to the conclusion that the English subject is something of a dickhead. Come tattoo time, the tattooist inks a remarkable design onto the English person. It represents a sort of ritual receptacle, upside down; it's significance is that the man's soul has fallen out.
Bummer. No amount of laser surgery can get rid of that.
Originally posted by shetline
Maybe, for instance, a few people here consider that large back tattoo pictured in this thread, of a death figure with its arms outstretched over trees (In a swamp, perhaps? Hard to tell.), with a bullet-wound sun, to be "art".
Notice I said that I wouldn't want that, and it would wear off it's novelty, but that is a pretty cool picture. But I didn't like it when I first saw it. I think it's because it has significance after you watch the movie. It's not just something "supposed to look cool".
Originally posted by Matsu
A tattoo is just an expensive diversion that closes more doors than it opens.
Well said!
These are serious criteria, mind. There's nothing wrong with getting a tattoo; there is something wrong with getting the wrong one in my opinion. The wrong one is ugly or dumb or inked for the wrong reasons.
Originally posted by Hassan i Sabbah
I was sat on the Tube about three summers ago opposite these two skater kids, one of whom was showing off his new tattoo on his shin to his friend. Again, it was a Japanese character. "It means hell and death," he said (or something similar to hell and death. "I was going to get 'peace and serenity' but they couldn't find the template."
Great story, Hassan.
I always enjoy your posts.
Originally posted by ast3r3x
Notice I said that I wouldn't want that, and it would wear off it's novelty, but that is a pretty cool picture. But I didn't like it when I first saw it. I think it's because it has significance after you watch the movie. It's not just something "supposed to look cool".
It's a reference to or image from some movie? That's even lamer than I thought then.
For me, the image doesn't even rise to "pretty cool picture", but even if it did, it's hardly worth more than a poster or a T-shirt, it's not at all worthy of becoming a permanent part of someone's body.
I wanted, and actually I still haven't totally counted out getting, a rock engraving of an eland, in white ink, on my ankle. A bit like this one. Although a lot smaller.
White ink because it's practically invisible, and fades in less than a dozen years. If you want to see it you'll pretty much have to be told where to look, and that's OK if you're getting it for you - and if it's going to be part of you then I suppose it has to be for you first. I had the number of this guy (called Nathan Satan, which was quite offputting) who does 'shakku' tattoos - that is, the pigment goes on a needle on a chopstick: no machine. It's supposed to be less painful, believe it or not. He wouldn't do white ink so I decided if I were going to do it it would have to be with the electric needle.
Didn't do it then, probably never will. I was researching Southern African hunter-gatherer rock art and I thought it was beautiful. Still do.
Originally posted by Jubelum
If you did get one, it would have to be on the "fire" theme. Flame on!
A
Probably I should finally make some bigger pictures of it. (and put them somewhere else, I can't stand that hosting anymore)
I feel sexier with it than before it. On the geeky way but hey..
And when I tell people to "kiss my apple" I pretty much mean it.
Originally posted by shetline
It's a reference to or image from some movie? That's even lamer than I thought then.
For me, the image doesn't even rise to "pretty cool picture", but even if it did, it's hardly worth more than a poster or a T-shirt, it's not at all worthy of becoming a permanent part of someone's body.
I am not saying it should. In fact, I thought I said that I didn't think it should. What I was saying (which I guess you disagree, but you haven't seen the movie, or even read my previous posts if you didn't know I was referencing a movie.
You are right that it's not worth even a t-shirt though. But don't judge it being a tattoo that "just looks cool" unless you've seen the movie.
Originally posted by Hassan i Sabbah
I think you should totally get a tattoo if you want one. If you're sure about the reasons, and you're sure about the design, and the design has some significance for you that's deeply-rooted and not going to change for the rest of your life, or if it's definitely beautiful, go on.
These are serious criteria, mind. There's nothing wrong with getting a tattoo; there is something wrong with getting the wrong one in my opinion. The wrong one is ugly or dumb or inked for the wrong reasons.
Why is it so hard for some people in this thread to understand this? I think most people from the United States are a little too conservative for their own good.
Art is good, even if someone else doesn't like it.
Most of the tattoos I see I think are moronic. I'm so tired of the lower back tattoos on the girls, or the sun on the upper back of the shoulder, or whatever. But most of the people in this thread associate the popularity aspect of tattoos rather than the art. And if you can't see that bullet wound as art, you must be blind, no offense intended.
I have a few more tattoos in mind, things that have meaning to me. I think I have three I've been thinking about, and I've already had one for many years. The one I already have I wouldn't get rid of it unless I lost a limb. I'm pretty sure I feel the same way about two of the other three I'm considering. When I'm sure, I'll get them.
Haha...
I say go for it, if it makes for one less competitor, who am I to complain?
Originally posted by Matsu
I say go for it, if it makes for one less competitor, who am I to complain?
I'm surprised that you'd care this much Matsu. I say if there's a girl that doesn't like you because you have one, or a job that won't hire you, then they're a poor fit anyway. There's always some conformity in society, but that's true of both sides. If people are so dumb that they'll think less of you because you have one then they're not really worth the time anyway.
The same argument could be made of a birthmark. If someone doesn't hire you because you've got a big liver spot on your cheek then **** that job anyway.
Originally posted by thuh Freak
i thought through my designs for a long time before getting them. the roger is ironic. cuz i aint like some hell's angels dood; also a reference to my thieving ways. and the syf is cool, b/c the dead's my favorite band, and he's smokin a doob.
Oh, he's smokin' a doob! SMOKIN' A DOOB! Damn, that changes everything!
It's still trite, overused, banal imagery, but "irony" and doobness overcome all.
If Da Vinci had only realized the great depths of artistic expression he might have reached if only he'd had the Mona Lisa smokin' a doob!
just because others don't understand em,
No problem here with understanding. The deep meanings here aren't that deep.
don't mean they aint cool to me;
Nope, it just means you have rather undemanding standards for cool.
and in the end, thats all that matters. cus its my body.
No one's arguing against your right to do dumb things.
Originally posted by bunge
Art is good, even if someone else doesn't like it.
I'd agree that "art", as in the general concept of art, is good.
It hardly follows, however, that all attempts at art are good, or that most tattoos even make the attempt.
Most of the tattoos I see I think are moronic.
Now there's something I can agree with without reservation.
Let's keep in mind how this thread got started -- someone wondering whether or not he should get a tattoo, simply to fit in better with the "brotherhood" of others in a fire department (denying that peer pressure has a thing to do with it while simulateously spelling out the peer pressure involved).
The actually tattoo design is practically besides the point -- it's clearly become a modern-day initiation rite, a way of establishing tribal/group identity.
Originally posted by pfflam
unless you live in the midwest which is about a decade behind+ the times.
Amen to that. My hometown (southern Indiana) SUCKS. If you have high speed internet people think you're from SIlicon Valley (if they know what that is to begin with). Sigh... if only I didn't have to spend the summer there.