The rise of the indelibly-illustrated everyman
standpointmag.co.uk
The rise of the indelibly-illustrated everyman
1–10 of 68 posts
Re: The rise of the indelibly-illustrated everyman
#2It was obvious that tattooing was undergoing a change: it was becoming professional and increasingly skilled. The increasing skill of it appalled me, for what should not be done at all is all the worse for being done well.
Well, fuck you too, friend!
We've found ink on the bodies of priests, shamans, warriors and kings going back as far as there have been humans. Both sexes. Nearly any culture you'd care to name.
Why the visceral hate?
Re: The rise of the indelibly-illustrated everyman
#3It was obvious that tattooing was undergoing a change: it was becoming professional and increasingly skilled. The increasing skill of it appalled me, for what should not be done at all is all the worse for being done well. Well, fuck you too, friend! We've found ink on the bodies of priests, shamans, warriors and kings going back as far as there have been humans. Both sexes. Nearly any culture you'd care to name. Why…
Pretty typical for Standpoint. It's a Britsh, culturally conservative magazine, so the default position you might expect is that anything that Her Majesty wouldn't approve of is morally abhorrent
Re: The rise of the indelibly-illustrated everyman
#4The author needs to maybe get over it? He goes through the typical complaints.
>They think that by having themselves tattooed they are shocking the bourgeoisie à la Baudelaire; and in so far as their parents don’t like it, and are in effect silencing them by a fait accompli of which it is useless for them to complain, they are exercising power over them.
>It seems obvious to me that if a person feels he has to tattoo himself in order to “express” his difference from others, he must have some difficulty in individuating himself, perhaps indicative (when this difficulty is on a mass scale, as it clearly is) of an individualistic society without individuals.
But in large part people get tattoos because they like them, nothing much more than that. It's just a skin mod, not a big deal, not worth wringing hands over.
It sure is nice that people don't usually get beaten up anymore for having weird hair or modifications.
Re: The rise of the indelibly-illustrated everyman
#5It was obvious that tattooing was undergoing a change: it was becoming professional and increasingly skilled. The increasing skill of it appalled me, for what should not be done at all is all the worse for being done well. Well, fuck you too, friend! We've found ink on the bodies of priests, shamans, warriors and kings going back as far as there have been humans. Both sexes. Nearly any culture you'd care to name. Why…
Pretty typical for Standpoint. It's a Britsh, culturally conservative magazine, so the default position you might expect is that anything that Her Majesty wouldn't approve of is morally abhorrent
King Harold II of England had a number of tattoos. After his death at the Battle of Hastings in 1066, his tattoos were used to identify his body.
and more here - https://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/nigelfarndale...
Re: The rise of the indelibly-illustrated everyman
#6It was obvious that tattooing was undergoing a change: it was becoming professional and increasingly skilled. The increasing skill of it appalled me, for what should not be done at all is all the worse for being done well. Well, fuck you too, friend! We've found ink on the bodies of priests, shamans, warriors and kings going back as far as there have been humans. Both sexes. Nearly any culture you'd care to name. Why…
Pretty typical for Standpoint. It's a Britsh, culturally conservative magazine, so the default position you might expect is that anything that Her Majesty wouldn't approve of is morally abhorrent
https://www.tattooarchive.com/history/queen_victoria.php
Edward VII was inked up, with his mother's approval. If it's good enough for the son of Victoria, it should be fine, even for the prudes.
Re: The rise of the indelibly-illustrated everyman
#7It was obvious that tattooing was undergoing a change: it was becoming professional and increasingly skilled. The increasing skill of it appalled me, for what should not be done at all is all the worse for being done well. Well, fuck you too, friend! We've found ink on the bodies of priests, shamans, warriors and kings going back as far as there have been humans. Both sexes. Nearly any culture you'd care to name. Why…
> Well, fuck you too, friend!
> Why the visceral hate?
Pot, kettle.
Re: The rise of the indelibly-illustrated everyman
#8It was obvious that tattooing was undergoing a change: it was becoming professional and increasingly skilled. The increasing skill of it appalled me, for what should not be done at all is all the worse for being done well. Well, fuck you too, friend! We've found ink on the bodies of priests, shamans, warriors and kings going back as far as there have been humans. Both sexes. Nearly any culture you'd care to name. Why…
Pretty typical for Standpoint. It's a Britsh, culturally conservative magazine, so the default position you might expect is that anything that Her Majesty wouldn't approve of is morally abhorrent
While Standpoint is culturally conservative, the way you've worded it implies that because it is British it necessarily mean that it is culturally conservative. A version of this could equally have appeared in a publication from any English speaking nation.
However, the author -- Theodore Dalrymple (not his real name) -- is a particularly interesting character.
He is almost exclusively pessimistic about humanity, with a particular dislike of anyone less fortunate than himself. He seems to believe that everyone ends up in life where they deserve, taking to an extreme the idea of personal responsibility, and draws on his experience as a prison doctor to try to excuse his writing career of finding ever new ways to look down on others.
Re: The rise of the indelibly-illustrated everyman
#9It was obvious that tattooing was undergoing a change: it was becoming professional and increasingly skilled. The increasing skill of it appalled me, for what should not be done at all is all the worse for being done well. Well, fuck you too, friend! We've found ink on the bodies of priests, shamans, warriors and kings going back as far as there have been humans. Both sexes. Nearly any culture you'd care to name. Why…
> Well, fuck you too, friend! > Why the visceral hate? Pot, kettle.
Not at all. Its an unprovoked insult versus the retaliation.
Re: The rise of the indelibly-illustrated everyman
#10Hey fellow hackers, I think you need to work on your sense of humor.
As someone who is inked, I not only found this hilarious, but interesting and well-written, and the author actually has experience with prison tattoos, which makes him more expert than 99% of us, easily.
Also, this may shock you, but I'm going to go out on a limb and agree with the author that your tattoo is neither original nor cool, so if that's what you find offensive then you've totally missed the point!