Multi.Colored—tattooed people, tattoo dreams

I quit watching the Academy Awards ceremonies… well, about the time my son was born, and he’ll be 31 in April.

Up till then, we’d gone to the movies almost every week no matter what was playing, and the chances that I’d actually seen the pictures that got nominated were pretty good. Afterwards, we didn’t go to the movies anywhere near as often, and that was in the days well before video rental stores.

And as time went by, I cared less and less about any of it, to tell you the truth. It was plenty good enough to pick up the next day’s newspapers and glance over the list of winners. I still haven’t seen several of the award-winners from that day to this.

After we moved to California it got better, because the show would be over by the time the 10pm news came on, and we could watch the winners without having to watch all the drivel as well. Pretty sweet deal.

All this is by way of saying that I think Diablo Cody had the best Oscar outfit of all. More red-carpet folks should follow her example, right?

Submit this post to:

Hide Sites

I keep seeing stories about “removable” tattoo ink. Not on the market yet, but apparently in development. The pigment will be encapsulated in some way, so that it’s not really a part of your skin as old-style ink is, and therefore it can be zapped with a laser to burst the little capsules and make it easier for your body to dispose of it.

I’m not so sure this is a good idea.

Right now, tattoo ink can be considered pretty darn permanent, and getting rid of it is a time-consuming, expensive and painful proposition. Knowing this, I am sure, keeps at least some people from getting inked on a whim. If you’re going to have to live with the consequences of your folly pretty much forever, that’s a reasonably good deterrent.

Make tattoo ink easier to get rid of, and then what? Well, less chance of an old Significant Other’s name marring your skin for the rest of your life, but also a greater chance that people will think “Oh well, if I don’t like it I can always get it removed” and heading off ill-prepared into the great beyond.

In this case, I am hoping that the usual market forces apply and the new semi-removable ink costs a LOT more than the regular stuff. That might deter the dilettantes, at least for a little while.

Or it might encourage people to keep trying till their ink is absolutely perfect, instead of settling for whatever happens to hit their skin the first time around.

What do you think?

Submit this post to:

Hide Sites

I’m going to try imbedding a YouTube video. I haven’t had much luck with this so far so please bear with me!

Submit this post to:

Hide Sites

I’m thinking of turning some of my entries into an e-book about getting your first tattoo (which can go into more detail than a blog post).

While y’all wait for me to get that together, there’s an index to my series of posts on first tattoos here. Enjoy. And if there’s any information I left out, be sure to let me know!

Edit:  For some reason the link doesn’t appear to work…  I need to fix that, pronto!

Submit this post to:

Hide Sites

My late father had a unique sense of humor, and he delighted in the ridiculous. Which is why he was a big fan of the Marx Brothers and the British comedians who did the Goon Show and “Beyond the Fringe.”

At one point in my childhood, we had a housekeeper whose first name was Lydia. My father, of course, thought it would be appropriate to sing “Oh Lydia, oh Lydia, the en-cy-clo-piddea” to her, assuming she’d get the reference.

She didn’t.

And thus ruffled feathers had to be smoothed, and explanations had to be given, and my father learned that not everyone is a fan of classic comedy.

Lydia, the tattooed lady of the song, was covered all over with miscellaneous designs. You could see “Kankakee, or Paree, or Washington crossing the Delaware.” From the pictures I’ve seen, heavily tattooed people in those days mostly did the same thing–just kept adding ink-work till there wasn’t much skin left to be covered. There was no overall design. And in those days, heavily tattooed people did make a living as circus performers, so if the average person were to see someone with a lot of ink, that’s what they would have seen.

If you’re only going to get a few tattoos, it doesn’t really matter if they “go along” with each other in any way. Inspiration strikes, ink is added. What feels right at one stage of the game might not be so appealing the next time around. My own three tattoos don’t coordinate with each other visually in any way (although I must admit I have considered commissioning a gifted artist of our acquaintance to design me a sleeve that would incorporate my seven stars). Given that no two of my tattoos are anywhere near each other, it doesn’t matter at all that they don’t coordinate.

However, it does seem to me that if one’s goal is to get pretty well covered, a grand plan makes the whole thing look a lot better. That’s why those Japanese bodysuits look so good. If we just keep adding stuff till there’s no skin left, it comes out looking like what it is: a mish-mosh. Better, I think, to have at least some plan to coordinate everything. But then again, I don’t plan to get completely covered, so what do I know?

What do you think? Grand plan, or individual inspirations?

By the way, if you want to see Groucho singing “Lydia the Tattooed Lady” in his prime, you can find his performance on YouTube here. I have had no luck embedding videos properly, so better you go see it at the source.

Submit this post to:

Hide Sites

One of the things people who don’t want you to get a tattoo often bring up is “What will that look like when you’re [name an age here where people often get saggy]?” The implication being that today’s ink is tomorrow’s runny mess.

That argument doesn’t work with me, of course, because I was 46 when I got my first tattoo and (a) I didn’t get my ink in saggable places and (b) I doubt I’ll get too much more saggy than this, come what may. But does it deter people who are young and still thinking it over?

To sag or not to sag?

What parts of the body are likely to sag (slacken, droop, whatever) with age? The face, surely. The breasts, both male and female. The butt. The upper arm. All but the face are prime tattoo territory. The question is, how will the change in the shape of the skin affect the ink that’s applied to it? I know we’ve all seen older men with tattoos they got in the service, that are mostly a blurry mess due to spreading of the ink over time–even on areas such as the forearm that don’t droop or sag, per se. I can’t figure out whether the spreading of ink is inevitable, or whether that’s just an artifact of the tattoo methods used at the time. Ink that’s applied deeper in the skin does tend to spread. I’ve noticed that on my original ankle tattoo. But today’s artists generally don’t dig so deep.

Tell it like it is

So what’s the best counter-argument to the “It will sag and you’ll be sorry” point of view? Here’s my list. Feel free to add your own in the comments.

• Let’s both get tattooed and we’ll see who sags first.
• You kidding? This skin will never sag.
• The people who will see it won’t be bothered by trifles like that.
• I’m not putting it on a saggy part of the body.
• What’s it to ya???

Submit this post to:

Hide Sites