Aug201006
Guest Blog: Still Not Just for Sailors Anymore...
11:41 AM
Guest Blog by Dr. Matt Lodder *
tattoo history 2.jpg
As an opening line for an article in a popular newspaper about tattoos, the suggestion that "tattoos are not just for sailors anymore" is a familiar one. We saw it last month in an article in The Guardian called "The Rise and Rise of the Tattoo", whose subheading read "Just why has the art form of sailors, bikers and assorted deviants become mainstream?".

And just last week, an article in the Astbury Park Press declared that although "Traditionally viewed by Americans as the crude art of roughnecks or drunken sailors, tattooing has turned a corner, moving toward acceptance as legitimate art".

Indeed, it often feels as if the same sentiment graces every article about tattooing in the mainstream press: Tattooing, we've been told again and again recently, is coming of age - finally coming out of the murky shadows of the deviant underworld to leave its mark on the most well-heeled. Tattoos are now to be seen on catwalks, on trading floors and around the chicest tables.


The hacks who churn out these stories might be surprised to learn, then, that the popular media has been reporting the arrival of tattooing in high society for nearly one hundred years.

In his 1933 book, "Tattoo: Secrets of a Strange Art", Albert Parry reports that the onset of the Great Depression hit tattooists hard, as their usual clients - lawyers and bankers - were hard-up, unable to afford the highest rates for large tattoos. An even earlier article, from Tatler Magazine (the periodical of the British upper classes) in 1905, reports:

"The tattoing [sic] craze which first broke out in America has now come to this country, where its chief exponent is Mr. Alfred South of Cockspur Street. During his career Mr. South has operated on upwards of 15,000 persons, including about 900 English women, the designs in a great number of cases being of a most peculiar description. There are some instances where ladies have had the inscriptions on their wedding rings tattooed on their fingers beneath the ring. Ladies who like to keep pace with the times may be adorned with the illustrations of motor cars." (26th November 1905, p. 311)

There's simply no truth to the common tale that tattooing has always and forever been the domain of the seedy, the deviant and the marginalised in the West, though the tale is a persistent one. It pervades even the few serious academic histories of tattooing in the West, all of whom who almost universally agree that prior to about 1965, tattooing was less of an art form than some kind of ritual practiced by easily-identifiable groups of the underclass. The 1970s onwards are referred to in these texts as "The Tattoo Renaissance", as if the period before had been a dark age.

Recently, a colleague of mine passed me a fantastic article she stumbled across in the course of some archival research. Titled "Modern Fashions in Tattooing", it's from Vanity Fair, dated January 1926 (pp 43, 110). In its opening paragraph, the author confidently exclaims the; very same sentiment we saw only last month in The Guardian:

"Tattooing has passed from the savage to the sailor, from the sailor to the landsman. It has since percolated through the entire social stratum; tattooing has received its credentials, and may now be found beneath many a tailored shirt."

Even by 1926, magazines were announcing to their readers that tattoos were now popular amongst people like them. And these were not small flash designs either - the article reports large chest pieces, backpieces and designs artistically rendered to the desires of each individual client. It talks about re-works and cover-ups, and tattooing kings and queens. The article even mentions an old-salt tattoo artist called Professor Sharkey, bemoaning the good old days when tattooing was "art for art's sake" and not some modern fad. "It's too bad to have to tattoo diving-girls and Venus rising from the sea when you have it in you to do things like these," he says, gesturing at his collection of rare prints.

Tattooists, it seems, like tabloid journalists, have always stuck to the script.

--
* Dr Matt Lodder recently completed his PhD thesis in art history at the University of Reading. His research applies art-historical and art-theoretical methodologies to tattooing and other forms of body art. For more about his research, click here. Matt is on Twitter and can be contacted directly via mattlodder at hotmail dotcom.
2 Comments

what a great post, I love this blog for its sensitive attention to history. As a student of history, I've found that the past is so much more varied and nuanced than we'd like to believe and also that people really haven't changed in terms of their desires and motives. And as a lover of fashion, I've come to think it only moves in one direction: reverse
I've read a bit about early victorian trends for tattoos and piercings amongst wealthy, powerful europeans and americans (male and female) as a means of showing off how travelled and cultured they were amongst elite circles.
The association with tattoos and seedy underbelly, I've read, had a lot to do with the late 19th century practice of phrenology, a quack "science" which correlated physical features with moral traits (basically a way to legitimize racism). Many phrenologists claimed criminals actually lacked an ability to feel pain, hence why they committed violent crimes and had a propensity for tattoos.
anyways, I think tattoos like every other visual/cultural trend will go in and out of mainstream favor and perception same as everything else. Thrilled to see a tattoo blog acknowledge the rich and varied history of tattoos.



Interesting and well informed commentary Dr. Lodder. ALWAYS love hearing about, discussing and learning tattoo history. Kudos to you.

If you out there in blog-land have not yet read "Tattoo: Secrets of a Strange Art" I highly recommend it. You can get it on amazon.com for a reasonable rate. I noticed when reading it that a lot of the trends and notations back in 1933 are very similar to today... from the economics of the day to the trends of who is getting inked.

Recent work in a Chicagoland tattoo shop has lead me to the conclusion that, even though the economy appears to be recovering, the only people who can afford to get ink anymore are those who reside in the upper-crust... John Q. Traditional can no longer afford to get that sleeve at the going rates anymore because everything seems to cost so damned much these days, and he has to save just to buy food.

What most tattooers are left with are bargain hunters and folks who are looking to become tattoo chic at insanely low costs. Beyond that, everyone and their mother (literally in some cases) is a tattooer these days... in Chicago you can't walk down the street without passing 7 "shops" in one block. In fact I was visiting a friend just the other night and someone had a ink-jet printed sign in their apartment window for their "studio". Kitchen Magicians abound.

The problem with all of this isn't that it is becoming more exceptable, hell I embrace that, even if it's just because it makes my life easier. The problem is that with everyone wanting to do it for a living, artists who are passionate about the sacred tattoo are being forced to charge so little they can't even make a living at it anymore... I am a prime example. I just recently hung up my machines for a desk job... there just isn't enough money to go around if everyone is doing it. Not only doing it, but charging less and less and undercutting artists. A pro just can't do that sleeve for $50, just because your friend's cousin's nephew hooked your friend up.

Bottom line: I applaud the popularity of tattoos, but am definitely a little more than jaded and bitter about the biz right now... I still love the art, am more than amazed by the work being put out and I am still as in-love with the history and mystique as the day I stumbled upon it... this wasn't meant as a rebuke, just my view from my little corner. Hope I didn't offend.

Man. I missed this website. Good to be back.

Cheers.





connect with us
archives
advertisement



EDITOR IN CHIEF:
Marisa Kakoulas
CONTRIBUTORS:
Miguel Collins
Craig Dershowitz
Brian Grosz
Sean Risley
Patrick Sullivan
© ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
Needles and Sins powered by Moveable Type.

Site designed and programmed by Striplab.

NS logo designed by Viktor Koen.