Last night, the much-anticipated "Tattoo Nation," a documentary on the history and evolution of black & grey tattooing, premiered in Los Angeles, complete with a red carpet laid out for tattooing's own A List, including Don Ed Hardy, Jack Rudy, Freddy Negrete, Good Time Charlie Cartwright, Tim Hendricks, and Cory Miller (who narrated the film), among many others.
Danny Trejo was also in attendance, as his own experience getting needled in prison plays heavily into the narrative of the film. There's even footage of him taking his daughter to get tattooed (in a studio, not a cell).
Check the Tattoo Nation Facebook page for photos from last night.
As noted in my last post on the film, the nationwide release is next Thursday, April 4th. In some cities, like LA and Modesto, the film will play for a week, but in most others, it is an initial two-day limited engagement. There are over a hundred cities and locations for the screening, which are largely listed on www.Dandeentertainment.com.
** For those in NYC, I'll be hosting one of the Manhattan premiers: The April 4th showing at AMC Empire 25 at 234 West 42nd St. in Times Square at 8pm. I'll be handing out N+S stickers and buttons and also selling copies of my Black & Grey Tattoo box set in the lobby. The screening may sell out, so it's best to buy your tickets in advance. **
I've given this film a thumbs up already, but it's also been given shout-outs from outlets like the Hollywood Reporter, LA Weekly and a mention in Variety. And as a number of reviews have noted, this isn't just a movie for tattoo collectors, but anyone interested in art, culture, or just a shirtless Trejo. Director Eric Schwartz may not have any tattoos, but he really does our community justice, reflecting the true reality of tattoo culture.
While black & grey is the central theme, the film examines tattooing in contemporary US history overall. It's strength lies in the oral histories of those who created history, like Hardy, Rudy, Cartwright, Negrete, Mark Mahoney, Shanghai Kate Hellenbrand and the other greats featured. Check the preview below to get a taste, but I highly recommend you going out to see it.
And for those in New York, I hope you'll see it with me on Thursday.
Earlier today, Total Tattoo magazine shared a link on Facebook to an interesting BBC article, which I wanted to pass along to you as well.
"The rise of the Maori tribal tattoo" written by Dr. Ngahuia Te Awekotuku begins with somewhat of a primer on Maori tattoo traditions, briefly discussing the history of Moko, its practice and symbolism. She then discusses her own experience as a Maori woman taking on the facial Moko in commemoration of the life of Te Arikinui Dame te Atairangikaahu, "the Maori Queen," who died in 2006.
As in a lot of discussions on indigenous tattooing, she briefly addresses the issue of cultural appropriation of Moko. Here's a bit of that:
[...] Moko, most of all, is about life. It is about beauty and glamour, and its appearance on the bodies of musicians such as Robbie Williams and Ben Harper is not unusual. Although it is often contentious, raising issues of cultural appropriation, and ignorant use of traditional art as fashion.
Photos by Uriel Sinai.
Yesterday's The New York Times featured the article "Proudly Bearing Elders' Scars, Their Skin Says 'Never Forget'", which talks about Holocaust survivor families getting tattoos of the numbers etched into the chests and forearms of their parents, grandparents, aunts and uncles who were prisoners at the Auschwitz and Birkenau death camps. The families do so as a way to honor their elders and also to remind others of the atrocities. This method of doing so has caused some of controversy.
The Times article is inspired by the documentary "Numbered," directed by photojournalist Uriel Sinai and Dana Doron (a doctor and daughter of a survivor) who interviewed 50 tattooed survivors. These survivors discuss their horrific experiences and what they carry with them, beyond the numbers in their skin. Their descendants who seek to keep their stories alive through their memorial tattoos face strong reactions, particularly by those who feel that wearing a "scar" or a mark that dehumanized people should not be a form of Holocaust remembrance.
The article describes the experience of 21-year-old Eli Sagir who got her grandfather's number on her forearm:
Ms. Sagir, a cashier at a minimarket in the heart of touristy Jerusalem, said she is asked about the number 10 times a day. There was one man who called her "pathetic," saying of her grandfather, "You're trying to be him and take his suffering." And there was a police officer who said, "God creates the forgetfulness so we can forget," Ms. Sagir recalled. "I told her, 'Because of people like you who want to forget this, we will have it again.'"Another reaction is the misconception that one cannot be buried in a Jewish cemetery if tattooed. [Read Craig Dershowitz's post on tattoos and Judaism here.] Then there are those who just find it "tacky," as I read in comments on the article.
What do you think? Feel free to share your thoughts in the comments section to this post on our Needles & Sins Syndicate group page.
"Numbered" premiers in the US at the Chicago International Film Festival next month. Here's a clip below.
Backpiece by Tim Kern.
Tattooing got another huge legal boost on Friday when the Arizona Supreme Court ruled that tattooing is free speech in the zoning case of Coleman v. City of Mesa (link to decision). This is the first time in the United States that a state supreme court has extended First Amendment protections to tattooing.
A federal court, the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, ruled in 2010 that "tattooing is purely expressive activity fully protected by the First Amendment" in the case of Johnny Anderson v. City of Hermosa Beach, which was also a case where tattooists were denied the right to open up shop due to zoning restrictions. [My giddy discussion of that case can be found here.]
The Arizona Supreme Court noted that courts have been divided on the issue of tattooing being constitutionally protected expression (and gave example of different cases) but found that "the approach adopted in Anderson is most consistent with First Amendment case law and the free speech protections under Arizona's Constitution."
In both the Coleman and Andersen cases, the courts found that, not only tattoos but the process of tattooing, and therefore, the business of tattooing are protected speech. The Arizona Supreme Court also noted that this protection applies even if an artist is using "standard designs or patterns" like flash, just as cable TV companies are "engaged in protected speech activities even when they only select programming originally produced by others" (citing Turner Broad. Sys., Inc. v. FCC).
This is a win for the Colemans but the fight isn't over. The case now goes back to the superior court, which originally dismissed the tattooists' claims as a matter of law saying that the Mesa City Council decision in 2009 to deny the Colemans a permit to open their tattoo shop was "a reasonable and rational regulation of land use." The Colemans appealed and the Arizona Appeals Court overturned the Superior Court's dismissal finding that they should have had the opportunity to make their case. The City of Mesa appealed that, which is how the case found its way to the Arizona Supreme Court.
The Superior Court will now look at whether the decision to deny the permit served a compelling governmental interest and was reasonably related to furthering that interest. Local government does have an interest in regulating tattooing by protecting the health and safety of the public. The issue is whether the rules further that purpose.
In this case, the Mesa planning board had recommended that the Colemans be given a permit subject to certain conditions, like limiting the hours of operation, loitering, refusing to do racist and gang tattoos, and also working with police to identify known gang tattoos. They agreed to those conditions. But the Mesa City Council denied the permit, according to the Yuma Sun, "after hearing concerns from neighbors about the shop possibly drawing crime and reducing property values. Only Mayor Scott Smith was in support." Now Mesa needs to show that this decision was not arbitrary and irrational and did not go against the Equal Protection and Due Process clauses of the Constitution.
I'm guessing, or at least hope, that this case will settle. The tax payers of Mesa have already spent enough money on trying to stop a business from opening, when all a long they could have taxed them and gained revenue for the city -- and also made Mesa more artful.
Yesterday, The New England Journal of Medicine published the article "Tattoo Ink-Related Infections --Awareness, Diagnosis, Reporting, and Prevention." The article is based on investigations by The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) into an outbreak of tattoo-related skin infections cased by a family of bacteria called nontuberculous Mycobacteria (NTM) that has been found in a recent outbreak of illnesses linked to contaminated tattoo inks. Coordinating their investigation with state and local health departments and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), they discovered 22 confirmed cases of this infection primarily in New York as well as Washington, Iowa, and Colorado. It was found that the inks were contaminated before distribution and is believed to have occurred during the production process. The inks in which the bacteria were found have been recalled.
You can find all the details in the following reports:
* FDA: Tattoo Inks Pose Health Risks
* CDC: The Hidden Dangers of Getting Inked
* CDC: Tattoo-Associated Nontuberculous Mycobacterial Skin Infections -- Multiple States, 2011-2012
Here are some key aspects of the reports I think are worth highlighting:
First, the FDA is quick to note that no matter how diligently tattooists follow hygienic procedures, infections can still incur because the bacteria were found in non-opened bottles of ink and contamination is not often visible.
Fourteen of the confirmed NTM infections, specifically Mycobacterium chelonae, came from Upstate Tattoo Company in Rochester, NY. YNN.com reports that one of the tattooists bought ink at an Arizona tattoo convention and used it on clients and the co-owner of the shop. A second supply was then ordered and that batch had the bacteria. The ink allegedly is "Catfish Carl's Realistic Wash." While the CDC does not specifically name the inks recalled, on the FDA's Enforcement report for May 23rd, 2012, it does list a recall of three different Catfish Carl's Realistic Washes. Ynn.com says that Upstate Tattoo is considering legal action against the ink manufacturer.
[Update: Upstate Tattoo Co. has been given a clean bill of health by the Monroe County Health Department, which stated the shop followed all hygienic procedures.]
The infection was first identified by a dermatolgist who contacted The Monroe County Health Department when a patient's rash persisted for a long time after receiving a tattoo at Upstate. The rash was located in the specific area where the grey wash was used, not throughout the entire tattoo. This sparked the investigation.
The CDC blog says that, after it was notified about these NY cases, it issued a public health alert and found two clusters of tattoo-associated NTM skin infections in Washington state, one in Iowa, and one in Colorado. Contamination was found in inks produced by other manufacturers, which they do not identify, and could have come from unsanitary manufacturing processes or the use of contaminated ingredients. It adds the following key fact:
[...] All were related to inks likely contaminated by non-sterile water either during the manufacturing process or during dilution by the tattoo artist just prior to tattooing a client.
Non-sterile water includes filtered or distilled water as well as tap and regular bottled water.
NTM infections look like allergic reactions and can be hard to diagnose and treat. Different types of antibiotics are often prescribed. [Ointments won't treat the problem.] If not properly treated, the FDA says that Mycobacterium chelonae can cause lung disease, joint infection, eye problems and other organ infections.According to the FDA's Office of Cosmetics and Colors, Dr. Linda Katz, if you experience tattoo-related complications, notify your tattooist and the FDA through its MedWatch program.
Photos via Siberian Times.
A number of you passed along this Daily Mail article entitled: "The astonishing 2,500 year old tattoos of a Siberian princess, and how they reveal little has changed in the way we decorate our bodies." Considering the nature of the tabloid [one reader called it "Daily Fail"], the real meaty info of the news is buried at the end in favor of quoting a scientist at the onset discussing how Greeks make fun of British tourists' tattoos. They do, but the scientist had more to say.
So I hit up the original article quoted by The Mail, which was in The Siberian Times and it is packed with much more interesting information.
The Siberian Princess is also called the Pazyryk Mummy because she and the other bodies found with her are believed to be from the nomadic Pazyryk tribe. She's also known as the Altai Princess & Ukok Princess as she was found in the Ukok Plateau of the Altai Mountains near the border of Mongolia.
The "princess" was discovered in 1993 by Dr. Natalia Polosmak, the archeologist quoted in the articles, and largely kept at a scientific institute in Novosibirsk, preserved by the same scientists who who preserve the body of Lenin.
It's making headlines now because she'll be coming home to Altai and will soon be displayed in a glass sarcophagus in a mausoleum at the Republican National Museum in the capital Gorno-Altaisk.
Believed to be a 25-year-old healer, storyteller or shaman, the mummified woman was buried among others, including two tattooed men who also had intricate tattoos. Dr. Polosmak offers more on their markings:
Compared to all tattoos found by archeologists around the world, those on the mummies of the Pazyryk people are the most complicated, and the most beautiful. More ancient tattoos have been found, like the Ice Man found in the Alps - but he only had lines, not the perfect and highly artistic images one can see on the bodies of the Pazyryks.
For more on the Pazyryk mummies and additional photos, I highly recommend clicking The Siberian Times article. And if you want even more, check these articles on other tattooed mummies.
And Lars Krutak's texts for The Vanishing Tattoo (like this one).
"Reconstruction of a warrior's tattoos, who was discovered on the same plateau as the 'Princess'. All drawings of tattoos, here and below, were made by Elena Shumakova, Institute of Archeology and Ethnography, Siberian Branch of Russian Academy of Science."
Just got back from vacation and catching up on the tattoo news. Here are some interesting reports and features:
Juxtapoz's post "Grandma's Ink" -- featuring our tattoo godmothers -- inspired Flavorwire.com to create a an extensive slideshow of vintage photos of tattooed ladies, which in turn may have inspired this Daily Mail article (although no credit is given). The Daily Mail article begins with the typical cringe-worthy cliches of tattoos belonging to bikers and "the wayward," and follows with some basic tattoo history and more vintage photos. Nothing mindblowing, but if you want to brush up on your tattoo FAQ, it's worth a quick click. In another UK paper, there was a pretty pathetic article about a mother who was "griefstricken" when her son came home with a tattoo. I refuse to link it or comment because it's pure trolling for clicks and comments to attract more visitors, and thus, more ads. I suggest we all abstain from commenting on these type of editorials. It won't stop the bigotry and feeds into their flaming.
Speaking of tattoo discrimination, in the city of Medicine Hat in Alberta, Canada, a new policy was put into effect where police officers must cover tattoos and remove piercings. I get the piercing requirement for safety reasons like rings being yanked from the body in a scuffle. As for tattoos, I'm on the fence. You'll find I'm mellowing from my previous position where I felt that some tattoo bans were acceptable if they impeded the performance of one's job. It gets tricky with cops. One of the main arguments for the visible tattoo ban by the Medicine Hat police force was that they polled the community last year and residents said they want their officers to cover up. As the police must create trust and respect with residents, the ban was then justified. Will tattoos slow officers down when chasing a suspect? Will it affect the way they gather intelligence when investigating crimes? Will it impeded the ability to write traffic tickets? Looking at the big picture, it may seem obvious to us that it wouldn't. However, those with serious prejudice against the tattooed may argue that suspects could claim they were running from cops because they thought they were thugs (if out of uniform); or they would not trust an officer to give possible information on a crime; or they might feel intimidated by officers at the traffic stop. Ridiculous you may think, but stereotypes are generally ridiculous. I've written about tattoo discrimination before here and here on the blog. Feel free to offer your thoughts on this in the Needles & Sins Syndicate Group on Facebook.
In a different vein, the WSJ had this video report on tattoos seen in the neighborhoods of Williamsburg and Greenpoint, Brooklyn -- where not having a tattoo puts you in the minority. Talk of tattoo acceptance is a big part of the piece, which brings up the point of location and culture in the discrimination discourse. Also some great shots in the video of local tattooed hotties. Bonus!
Helping to bolster stereotypes is this report on the "Anus Tattoo Trend." I swear I'm not making this up. Cameras at the 17th-annual South Florida Tattoo Expo caught a near-naked drunk girl getting her butt tattooed in the middle of the convention. It's NSFW and just gross on many levels. If you want to get angry, click it.
It thought it was pretty funny that I soon found this Sun Sentinel article touting the convention as a "family friendly event."
Check some photos (like the one above) from the convention by Adam Baron on CoralSpringsTalk.com.
The Seattle Tattoo Expo also took place this past weekend. Ignore the "Tattoos are no longer just for bikers and sailors..." blah blah and check this video below which features an interesting Nordic-themed tattoo, in Japanese "munewara" style, on a molecular biologist. Much better than the butt tattoo.
Yesterday, Complex Art + Design blog posted this video of Polish rapper and mixed martial arts fighter Popek getting his eyeballs tattooed. The video, beautifully produced by Will Robson-Scott, is graphic. There are close-ups of the needle going into the eye. But if you can get beyond that, it's fascinating to watch Popek explain why he's doing it ["I will be complete"], how he handles the process [smoking], the result [lots of hugs] and the healing process [pain "like putting cigarettes in your eyes"].
Howie/LunaCobra is the one tattooing Popek as he has done many times before. Howie first experimented with eyeball tattooing in 2007 on BMEzine founder Shannon Larratt, Pauly Unstoppable, and Josh. It was all documented on Modblog starting at this post.
In BME's Wiki page on "eyeball tattooing," it is noted that corneal tattooing is "known and done now for over 2,000 years -- it became almost commonplace in the late 19th century and into the 20th century to correct defects such as corneal scarring and leucomas." The procedures on Shannon, Pauly and Josh were not to correct any defects, but as an experiment in body modification. For Popek, he says he felt compelled to do it but cannot really articulate why (beyond any language barrier).
It's easy to point and jeer, "Look at the freaks!" And it's easy to cheer "Bod Mod FTW!" Neither helps any discourse on the seriousness of this procedure. There's little argument that eyeball tattooing could leave people blind, among other complications, and it's difficult to understand why one would take that risk at all. I'd love to see a full length documentary that explores this in some depth.
Many thanks to all who sent me the link to this article, which was front page news in the Wall Street Journal: "Tattoo Checks Trip Up Visas."
At issue here is concern over granting green cards or permanent citizenship to members of foreign gangs. The applications are denied on national-security grounds, but even those who do not have a criminal record could be flagged on the basis of gang-related tattoos. Here's more from the article:
The presence of tattoos isn't enough to deny an application, according to a spokeswoman for the State Department's Bureau of Consular Affairs. She said "more attention has been paid to tattoos as indicators of a gang affiliation during the visa process" as law enforcement has better understood the relationship between "certain tattoos" and gangs. The department doesn't comment on individual cases, she said.But what's a gang tattoo?
The article discusses the plight of two Mexican-born applicants for US residency, Hector Villalobos and Rolando Mora Huerta. Both were denied visas because of their tattoos. The article particularly cites the popular "Smile/Laugh Now, Cry Later" design, which US officials believe to be gang related. While the origins of the motif in Latino art are arguably rooted in prison culture, the symbol has come to mean more than criminality.
As I wrote in the introduction to Edgar Hoill's Latino Art Collection, the ethos behind the Payaso (or Payasa) centers on the belief that one cannot show weakness but should appear strong and happy in the face of adversity and later deal with troubles when alone. It is also said that the motif reflects the ideal of living life fully in the moment without regard to consequences and suffering them afterward. Some even believe that music may be behind the imagery, noting songs like "Smile now, cry later" by Sonny Ozuna.
You don't have to be a criminal to wear this tattoo. Indeed, both men deny any criminal affiliation.
Particularly in black & grey tattoo culture, some of the artwork may find its roots in gangs and prisons, but as a gang expert cited in the article states, a number of these tattoos have become part of "popular culture at large" over the last ten years.
US officials should not decide critical immigration decisions based on how they interpret tattoos and nothing more. What about swastika tattoos? Will all those "gentle swastika" proponents be barred from residency for being in a Neo-Nazi gang?
Perhaps it will take a lawsuit to clear up this issue.