TATTOO - MARKETPLACE ICON

Maurice Patterson, University of Limerick

To appear in Consumption, Markets & Culture 2018

Available At: http://www.tandfonline.com/.../10.1080/10253866.2017.1334280

Abstract

The tattoo may be considered iconic in terms of its ability to reflect and contribute to consumer

culture. It encapsulates contemporary tensions between the paradigm of plasticity that has engulfed

the body and skin and a disavowal of that paradigm by marking the body in a permanent fashion.

Tattoos also manage to articulate discourses of deviance and the mainstream, difference and

sameness. Further, the ‘invariant processual contour’ of tattoo remains the same across cultures and

histories while also managing to evidence differences in emphasis. Similarly, the functions of tattoo

in terms of decoration, ritual, identification and protection continue to trace the boundaries of their

possibilities. Ultimately, in a culture that values individuality, these coordinates of tattoo offer a

clear opportunity to (re)story the self in infinitely customizable ways.

Outlines

No clear recollection of when my fascination with tattoos was born. Snatched half-
memories of Rod Steiger in The Illustrated Man. Homemade India ink tattoos worn
defiantly by the older kids in my neighborhood. Popeye’s anchor. Nor do I have any
vivid memory of getting my own first tattoo. A spur of the moment decision. I wasn’t
under the influence of any substances, just drunk on the sudden excitement of it all.
Drunk enough that the memory is lost behind a haze of diaphanous images and
sensations. Not that I should have been that excited. It isn’t exactly the greatest tattoo
the world has ever seen. Chosen from the yellowed pages of flash art stuck to the tattoo
parlor wall, and reminiscent of an old Irish two-pence piece, the tattoo isn’t even unique
to me. But it was my first tattoo and for that it is significant. Years later, I have woven
together the strands of a powerful narrative about this tattoo that positions it as an
attempt to reaffirm my Celtic heritage while living in a foreign land. And for this too it
is significant. It allows me to tell my story.

!1
The market for tattooing has witnessed remarkable success over the past thirty years. There are

more than 21,000 tattoo parlors across the U.S., occupying both prime and secondary retail

locations (Pew Research Centre 2006). Their colorful facades, almost tattooed themselves, serve as

landmarks both for the avid collector and for the casual passer-by. Tattoos have also inveigled their

way into more venerable buildings. In 2014, Somerset House in London exhibited artworks by

some of the industry’s more revered ink slingers, continuing a trend set by prestigious cultural

institutions such as the American Museum of Natural History with its Body Art: Marks of Identity

exhibition back in 1999. Meanwhile, advertising continues to plumb the depths of tattoo symbolism

to sell everything from coffee to financial institutions. In sum, the tattoo is emblematic of

contemporary culture and its contradictions; a boundary object that seems to encapsulate the

pliability of the body and identity while simultaneously disavowing that very plasticity. The tattoo

has gone mainstream (Bengtsson et al. 2005), and yet it retains an air of mystique through long-held

associations with the deviant (Larsen et al. 2014).

I continue in this paper by tracing a brief history of tattoo as it relates to tensions between deviance

and a movement into the mainstream. The ambiguity surrounding tattoos, driven by these tensions,

arouses a degree of moral panic (Oksanen and Turtiainen 2005) and calls upon tattooed individuals

to justify their actions by constructing related narratives of personalized meaning. Next, I sketch out

the process of tattoo in respect of wounding, healing, and the procurement of a mark, and allude to

the traditional functions of tattoo. This ‘invariant processual contour’ of tattoo (Gell 1993) also

facilitates multiple points of articulation that renders tattoo particularly useful in the construction of

narratives of identity. Finally, I chart the potential for these tattoo narratives but concede that while

often we write our own stories, sometimes our stories are inscribed upon us. Throughout the work I

utilize poetic witness to help represent my personal experience of tattoo “as heterogeneous

!2
constellations of material objects, emotional states, mythic narratives, powerful discourses and

physical forces”, (Canniford 2012, 391).

Storylines

It was the ancient Greeks who observed their neighbors, the “barbarian” Thracians, using tattoos as

markers of status, and thus they themselves began to deploy tattoos as a denotation of Otherness.

Associating tattooing with a lack of civilization, they only used the practice to mark criminals and

slaves, making them visible within ‘normal’ society (Jones 2000). The Romans, in turn, adopted this

method of social control and tattooed their criminals with either the name of the crime, the name of

the emperor under whom the crime had been committed, or with the name of the punishment meted

out (Gustafson 2000). Having fallen into disuse in the British Isles, tattooing was reintroduced in

the late 18th Century by Captain James Cook as a practice of the primitive Other (DeMello 2000).

In an act of subversion, criminals later began to voluntarily tattoo themselves as a means of

documenting their criminal careers and constructing an Othered subjectivity (DeMello 1993; Phelan

and Hunt 1998; Shoham, 2010). Voluntary tattooing also spread to the military and navy where

tattoos were worn as “markers of an esoteric diversity” (Guest 2000, 101), a life lived differently

from those in mainstream society (Steward 1990). The European aristocracy and American upper

class adopted tattooing in the late-nineteenth century (Parry 1933; Sanders 1989). Bradley (2000)

refers to an article in the 1898–1899 edition of Harmsworth’s Magazine that paints the use of

tattooing by royalty as a “queer craze,” rendering them as peculiar and exotic as the “primitives”

from whom they had borrowed the practice. Bailkin (2005, 50) contends that upper class tattooing

represented “an attempt to invigorate a devalued class, a dying breed ... the ‘savage’ tattoo was the

only hope for the aristocracy to modernize, the only way to stay viable in an anti-aristocratic age.”

!3
The connections between tattoo, Otherness and deviance were further strengthened by the

‘scientific’ work of criminal anthropologist Cesare Lombroso in the latter half of the nineteenth

century. Lombroso’s detailed survey of the bodies of 7,000 Italian prisoners suggested that tattoos

were indicative of atavism; that is, a primitive form of humanity characterized by an inclination

towards tattoos and a diminished sensitivity to physical pain (Adams 2009). While such

characteristics were considered natural and to be expected in the Pacific islands, Lombroso argued

that in the West they were clear markers of a different form of human, the ‘criminal man’ (Fenske

2007). For Lombroso (2006 [1911], 58), tattoos mattered to criminals in that they were “external

signs of beliefs and passions”. As a consequence, Lombroso devoted a great degree of his efforts to

studying the iconography of European tattoos, for access to their symbolic code would enable the

scientist to identify the particular depravity of each criminal. In this way tattoos became an external

physical signifier of a depraved moral character within. These associations lasted well into the

twentieth century, and to some extent are still drawn upon today (see Jacques 2017). In these ways,

then, a subtle shift had taken place: where once criminals were tattooed to mark them out, now

anyone who was tattooed was viewed as criminal (Fisher 2002).

However, since the 1980s the shady topography of tattooing has been undergoing something of an

artistic touch-up. The boundary lines were initially re-drawn during what became known as the

Tattoo Renaissance. At this time there were a number of forces working together to considerably

alter mainstream perceptions of tattoos. First, tattoo aficionados began to look to traditional cultures

and their tattoos for inspiration lending their work some degree of ethno-historical significance

(DeMello 2000). Second, the world of tattooing was infiltrated by fine artists who began to see the

practice as a legitimate artistic pursuit (Irwin 2001). Third, the art world began to accept tattoo art

and artists into its realm (Kjeldgaard and Bengtsson 2005) on the basis that many tattoos could now

be argued to have artistic merit and commanded economic value as a commercial investment
!4
(Sanders 2009). The subsequent three decades have witnessed a veritable explosion in the number

of tattoo styles available on the market, from Old School to Tribal, Dotwork to Trash Polka. The

result is an increasingly creative medium for tattoo artists and consumers alike.

As a consequence of these changes, tattoo art has infiltrated the mainstream, firmly establishing

itself with the suburban middle-classes, but ultimately cutting across age, class, and ethnic

boundaries (Kjeldgaard and Bengtsson 2005). Through the 1990s the tattoo sector was one of the

fastest growing service industries in the United States of America. By 2006 $1.65 billion was being

spent annually in the US on tattoos with 40% of adults between the ages of 26 and 40 sporting at

least one tattoo (Pew Research Centre 2006). This mainstreaming of tattoo is supported by its

increasing representation in the media. Indeed, television programs such as Ink, L.A. Ink and so on

work to sanitize tattooing by depicting a practice devoid of pain, where tattoo choices are deeply

meaningful, and highly artistic. Moreover, the media suggest that ours is a world replete with

heavily tattooed individuals and devoid of stigma. Further, tattoos feature prominently in the visual

culture of selfies on social media (Murray 2015). Ultimately, then, the mainstreaming of tattoo

culture has occurred within the parameters of a new ideology of tattooing established by a variety of

cultural institutions.

Tattoo: Process and Function

The second time I lie down on a tattooists chair I am committed to a full backpiece.
Seventeen and a half hours over five sittings. The blur that was my first experience
leaves me with few expectations of this one. It soon becomes clear, though, that I have
underestimated the pain of tattoo. The initial scratching sensation turns very quickly to
something else entirely. There is no pain quite like it. Searing and shredding at the same
time. After about twenty minutes, probably as the dopamine or whatever other natural
chemicals flood my brain, I am detached. It is bearable once more. Two hours later the
torment returns with a vengeance. Every pass of the needle brings with it the sensation
that my flesh is being pared from my body. Finally, respite. My tattooist suggests a
break of two weeks between each sitting in order to let the wounds heal. I’m not a good
patient. A cardinal rule. Do not pick at the scabs. It causes the ink to fade. But I
!5
 generally can’t resist scabs. First picking at the edges but eventually getting down and
dirty. Thankfully, because it is on my back, my ability to worry away at the wound is
relatively limited. Still, hairbrushes, chopsticks and all manner of other instruments are
called into action. After close to three months I am the proud owner a work of art that is
personal to me. My tattoo is not beautiful. Despite the Celtic swirls and such it has a
direct, almost brutal aesthetic, and that does me just fine.
In truth, tattoo can be thought of as an event rather than a thing (MacCormack 2006). Alfred Gell

(1993) divides this event, wherever it is exercised, into three stages: wounding, healing, and the

subsequent acquisition of a mark. Cultural context determines which of these three stages receives

most emphasis in readings of tattoo practice, though all stages leave their traces such that the

process:

is always and everywhere submitted to in its entirety, not bit by bit. Hence differential
focalization is always a relative matter; each distinct focalization carries all the others
with it … It is a matter of emphasis (Gell 1993, 304).

The ‘invariant processual contour’ of tattoo (Gell 1993) differentiates it clearly from any other kind

of contemporary fashion statement, for it brings production and consumption into immediate and

painful proximity (Kosut 2006; Sweetman 1999). In the West, according to Gell (1993), we place

most attention on the tattoo artifact itself. In contrast, some forms of Polynesian tattooing operate as

a rite of passage and, against this backdrop, the mark acts as a memento of the wounding process

and the ability to endure (Sweetman 1999). Specifically in a Samoan context, the emphasis is

placed on healing and the ability of the body to complete the tattoo (Angel 2015). Because it is a

matter of emphasis, while Western tattooing does focus in on the design of the tattoo, “even the

most playful and ironic of contemporary tattoos retain an echo of the pain involved in their

acquisition”, (Sweetman 1999, 65).

Tattooing, then, involves the willful solicitation of pain and in this way it may be associated with

the grotesque; at once abhorrent and fascinating, demanding the attention of others and leading to

the inevitable question: does it hurt? MacCormack (2006, 74) describes the pain of tattoo as kinetic

!6
and multiple, the product of “movement, throb and temporality”. This altogether unusual experience

of pain, the prolonged penetration of the body by needles, and the blood, draw the individual into

the immediacy of the real (Patterson and Schroeder 2010). Thus, the wounding of the body through

tattoo brings us closer to an understanding, appreciation and consciousness of the self, its limits and

its potential (Hardin 1999). In connecting to the ‘real’, pain may also help the tattooed individual

emerge from the chaos of the past (Oskanen and Turtiainen 2005). In addition to the ability of pain

to help us connect with our bodies, Scott et al. (2017) identify a role for pain in the unmaking and

remaking of the self in role transitions, and in spiritual elevation. Thus, tattoos may operate as

corporeal signifiers, bearing witness to some of life’s traumatic events while, at the same time,

offering the individual some semblance of control going forward.

Tattoo styles have increasingly become a matter of individual choice and custom design. The

elevation of the tattoo to artistic status during the tattoo renaissance, and the almost exclusive

representation of highly artistic custom pieces in the media have driven tattooists and their clients to

favor custom designs that demonstrate authenticity and capture the essence of the self (Bengtsson et

al. 2005). In terms of the mark left by the process of tattooing, Gell (1993, 39) reminds us that it is

more than a surface inscription. Rather, because tattoo ink penetrates the skin, inside becomes

outside and outside becomes inside such that the mark represents a fold that:

allows the possibility of an endless elaboration of interacting components of the social

person. The body multiplies; additional organs and subsidiary selves are created; spirits,
ancestors, rulers and victims take up residence in an integument, which begins to take
on a life of its own.

Blanchard (1991) outlines the four interrelated functions traditionally associated with tattooing: a

decorative function, a ritual function, an identificatory function, and an apotropaic function. In a

culture that focalizes the tattoo artifact, it could be argued that the decorative qualities of the tattoo

take on extra significance. From fantastical beasts to religious iconography, tribal swirls to lovers’
!7
names, the decorative function of tattoo plays a major role in media representations and lay

understandings of tattoo in the West. Indeed, the tattoo renaissance was predicated on a reimagining

of tattoo from desecration to decoration (Fenske 2007), and the incorporation of creative

contributions by clients into an increasingly customized art form (Taylor 1995). Further, the

aesthetic dimensions of contemporary tattooing allow consumers to make judgments about which

visual style is for them. In this way tattoos operate as an indication of taste and as a means of

creative expression through which aesthetic sensibilities are inscribed on the body and

communicated to others (Langman 2003). And yet, much of the academic literature on tattoo

quickly dismisses the aesthetic dimensions of tattoo in favor of other interpretations; it seems, tattoo

is more than mere decoration.

From the earliest days of Cook’s voyages to the Pacific it was clear that tattoos could have an

emphatic ritual dimension. Wright (2009), for example, suggests that the sailors on these voyages

were more likely to choose Tahitian designs because they were less codified with particular rituals

than their New Zealand counterparts. She also makes the point that contemporary tattoo is just as

likely to have ritualistic functions. These body rites and intentional ordeals are characterized as

“physically, emotionally, and spiritually challenging activities that are pursued for their potential

psychological, social, and spiritual benefits” (Dryer, 2007, cited in Thomas 2012, 2). Thus, in a

Western society distinguished by the loss of traditional ritual, the long-standing ritualistic

dimensions of tattoo continue to be used to plot important life events and to express a sense of self

and personal growth (Pitts 2002).

Choice enables individuals to pursue fulfillment, autonomy and freedom (Bauman 1988) and

endeavor to ‘become’ (Giddens 1991). In this regard, consumers have long been understood as

identity-seekers and consumption performs a crucial service by bolstering identity over time. As a
!8
process, tattooing testifies to the open-ended and sometimes problematic nature of identity and its

constant (re)negotiation with others (Sullivan 2001); it reflects our dynamic navigation of self and

society, of personal identity projects and commitments to the social. Further, the cultural imperative

to work upon identity has become inescapable, demanding symbolic work of consumers at

unprecedented levels and emphasizing the individual’s responsibility to limitlessly improve and

change themselves in a creative fashion. In contrast to the mass-marketed, pre-packaged, and

commodified forms of difference that most consumer products offer, the potential customizability

of tattoo lends itself perfectly to the demands for difference and individuality in contemporary

consumer culture (Atkinson 2004).

As we have seen, tattooing suggests an opening up of the inner self to the outside world. But it may

also represent a source of protection from that world. Indeed, by intentionally marking the body

through tattoo we manufacture an excess of visibility, reifying the surface of the skin and drawing

attention to its protective features (Bloustein 2003). Tattoos, then, are permanent marks on the body

that operate as ‘character armor’ (Gell 1993), helping to defy change and anchor the self (Sweetman

1999). They allow us to question and ameliorate the uncertainty of the future and the confusion

engendered by the postmodern fragmentation of identity (Benson 2000).

Tattoo: Narrative

Conversations around me fade. The mechanical buzz of the tattoo machine. The
medicinal yet welcoming smell of green soap. Machine dips into blackness. Lucy’s
hand maneuvers my arm into position. A small group of well-marshalled bees take to
my skin. The slow, hot scratch of the first line. Periods of drifting. Moments of clarity.
Hours later, an image of a warrior princess inscribed in my skin. Sadhbh, Fionn’s wife.
A Celtic myth about a footrace to the top of a mountain to become the chosen one. The
mountain that stood outside the bedroom window of my younger self. The mountain
represented in a local song delivered most famously by my uncle, the tenor. Not Danny
Boy from Miller’s Crossing, but powerful nonetheless. The image itself an illustration
by a famous Irish artist, the one responsible for that iconic portrayal of Che Guevara
and countless Thin Lizzy album covers. In the end an image of a handsome young

!9
 woman in an emerald dress. Red hair, full breasts, and a wild look about the eyes. A
mark of difference. A summons. Metamorphosis. And after all, a mark of sameness.

Tattoo consumption is mobilized, more often than not, in the service of identity, allowing the bearer

to (re)produce a coherent narrative of the self that connects the past, present and future. Indeed,

those of us with tattoos are routinely called upon to justify our actions by constructing narratives of

personalized meaning around them. It has always been thus. Bristolian, John Rutherford turned his

narrative into a profitable enterprise in the early nineteenth century. Rutherford toured his heavily

tattooed body across Europe in the 1820s and 1830s. He claimed to have been captured by a Maori

tribe in New Zealand in 1816 and forced to endure the torture of tattooing against his will. The story

of his time spent with the Maori was embellished with scenes of nakedness, cannibalism, and

marriage to the chief’s daughter. In truth, Rutherford had jumped ship in New Zealand, had

willingly become tattooed, and had in fact collected other tattoos in Tahiti and Fiji (Oettermann

2000), belying his story of six years spent with the Maori. Meanwhile, Irishman James F.

O’Connell, the ‘celebrated tattooed man’, became the first inked individual to exhibit in America.

Part of P.T. Barnum’s American Museum, O’Connell borrowed heavily from the captivity story of

Horace Holden (Oettermann 2000). He told of how he had been shipwrecked on the Caroline

Islands in Micronesia, entertained the natives with Irish jigs, and was forcibly tattooed, head to foot,

by voluptuous virgins. Similarly, Nora Hildebrandt, a circus woman with 365 tattoos, made her

initial appearance in a dime museum in 1882. Her father, Martin, was the first person to open a

permanent tattoo shop in the U.S. To increase the value of her attraction, Nora concocted a story

about how she and her father were captured by ‘red skin devils’ and how he was forced to tattoo her

every day for a year. These narratives speak in similar ways to issues of difference and sameness,

bolstering ‘whiteness’ while exoticizing the savage Other (Braunberger 2000; Werner 2005).

!10
Mary Kosut (2000) charts the coordinates of three broad categories of tattoo narratives that circulate

in popular discourse. Naturally, no tattoo story fits unproblematically into just one of these

categories, but they are useful nonetheless in helping to interpret the stories that people do tell. First

are narratives that chart social landscapes. Here, tattooed individuals understand the communicative

possibilities of tattoos and their ability to mark a person out as Other. At play here are issues of

conformity and resistance, lines drawn between liberation, celebration and agency on one hand and

repression, disciplinarity and conformity on the other. Second are narratives of the self that seek

both to present a symbolic self-portrait of the individual and to document her or his passage through

life. At a basic level tattoos speak of the self through their design and placement. For example,

many commentators have suggested that, as a general rule, men tend to favor large, bold designs on

visible parts of their bodies, while women limit themselves to small, delicate, ‘feminine’ designs

located on parts of their bodies that remain essentially private. At another level the semiotic gloves

come off as people deploy all manner of marks, designs and styles to represent the truth of

themselves. Tattoos may also be used to capture key events and memorialize those things that are

felt to be of significance to the individual. In this way they can be said to chart personal growth,

movement from one version of the self to another - “a flesh journey … [chronicling] … changes in

one’s identity, relationships, thoughts, or emotions over time”, (Atkinson and Young 2001, 118). Of

course, modern methods of tattoo removal mean that some memories, and some tattoos may also be

erased from the body. Third are narratives of the body, acknowledging its mortality, and sometimes

reclaiming it for the self. The mortality of the body is brought into focus by the relatively

permanent nature of tattoo. Contrasted with the aging, deteriorating body, the tattoo is a reminder of

our very corporeality. For some, tattooing may also represent a means of drawing attention to power

relations circulating around our bodies and transgressing everyday injunctions about how our

bodies should look and how their purity should be safeguarded. Across each of these categories

Woodstock (2014, 780) contends that there is increasingly a therapeutic ethos at work: “By placing
!11
their life experiences within the templates of therapeutic narratives, individuals frame themselves as

emotionally sturdy people who can emerge from difficulty able to contribute to a well-functioning

social order”.

The stories we tell of our tattoos borrow heavily from the narratives that surround us in popular

culture. It is no accident, therefore, that in contemporary society tattoo narratives speak to the

demand for work on the body and, particularly, to the pursuit of individuality through

customization. The reservoir of narratives is also full to overflowing with tales of deep meaning and

personal significance that serve to legitimate the practice and bestow upon the individual an aura of

responsibility.

Alas, we are never free to just tell our own story. The interpretation of lived bodies, and the

legibility of identity though tattoo and other consumption artifacts, is never guaranteed. Though the

tattooed surfaces of bodies may come with a degree of pre-coded significance, we can rarely control

the meanings brought to bear by others. Moreover, embodiment and identity are written upon as

much as they are processes of writing (Fenske 2007) and our skin is both a primary site for the

inscription of ideology and a text upon which we as individuals write our own stories. While

tattooing carries with it the potential for agency in narrating our identities, it may be nothing more

than a brief stepping out from under the smothering inscriptions of ideology (Braunberger 2000).

A tattoo convention. A protracted negotiation with a deaf tattooist. By evening a

mermaid on my forearm. Strong. Carrying a sword. Ready for battle. Resonances,
reverberations, a doubling back. More Celtic mythology featuring Fionn. This time a
fishing trip and Fionn’s accidental consumption of the salmon of knowledge. Whoever
eats the flesh of the fish attains all the knowledge of the world. An academic life.
Knowledge equals power. Or just a mermaid. I like mermaids.

!12
References

Adams, Josh. 2009. “Marked Difference: Tattooing and its Association with Deviance in the United
States.” Deviant Behavior 30 (3): 266-292. DOI:10.1080/01639620802168817

Angel, Gemma. 2015. “Roses and Daggers: Expressions of Emotional Pain and Devotion in 19th-
Century Tattoos.” In Probing the Skin: Cultural Representations of Our Contact Zone, edited by
Caroline Rosenthal and Dirk Vanderbeke, 211-238. Newcastle-Upon-Tyne: Cambridge Scholars
Publishing.

Atkinson, Michael. 2004. “Tattooing and Civilizing Processes: Body Modification as Self‐control.”
Canadian Review of Sociology 41 (2): 125-146. DOI: 10.1111/j.1755-618X.2004.tb02173.x

Atkinson, Michael and Kevin Young. 2001. “Flesh Journeys: Neo Primitives and the Contemporary
Rediscovery of Radical Body Modification.” Deviant Behavior 22 (2): 117-146. DOI:
10.1080/016396201750065018

Bauman, Zygmunt. 1988. Freedom. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.

Bengtsson, Anders, Jacob Ostberg and Dannie Kjeldgaard. 2005. “Prisoners in Paradise:
Subcultural Resistance to the Marketization of Tattooing.” Consumption, Markets & Culture 8 (3):
261-274. DOI: 10.1080/10253860500160320

Benson, Susan. 2000. “Inscriptions of the Self: Reflections on Tattooing and Piercing in
Contemporary Euro-America.” In Written on the Body: The Tattoo in European and American
History, edited by Jane Caplan, 234-254. London: Reaktion Books.

Bjerrisgaard, Sofie Møller, Dannie Kjeldgaard and Anders Bengtsson. 2013. “Consumer–brand
Assemblages in Advertising: An Analysis of Skin, Identity, and Tattoos in Ads.” Consumption
Markets & Culture 16 (3): 223-239. DOI: 10.1080/10253866.2012.738067

Blanchard, Marc. 1991. “Post–bourgeois Tattoo: Reflections on Skin Writing in Late Capitalist
Societies.” Visual Anthropology Review 7 (2): 11-21. DOI: 10.1525/var.1991.7.2.11

Bloustien, David. 2003. “Oh Bondage, Up Yours! Or Here’s Three Chords, Now Form a Band:
Punk, Masochism, Skin, Anaclisis, Defacement”, In The Post‑Subcultures Reader, edited by David
Muggleton and Rupert Weinzierl, 51-63. Oxford: Berg.

Bradley, James. 2000. “Body Commodification? Class and Tattoos in Victorian Britain.” In Written
on the Body: The Tattoo in European and American History: edited by Jane Caplan, 136–155.
London: Reaktion Books.

Braunberger, Christine. 2000. “Revolting Bodies: The Monster Beauty of Tattooed Women.” NWSA
Journal 12 (2): 1-23. DOI:10.1353/nwsa.2000.0030

Canniford, Robin. 2012. “Poetic Witness: Marketplace Research through Poetic Transcription and
Poetic Translation.” Marketing Theory 12 (4): 391-409. DOI: 10.1177/1470593112457740

DeMello, Margo. 1993. “The Convict Body: Tattooing among Male American Prisoners.”
Anthropology Today 9 (6): 10-13. DOI: 10.2307/2783218

!13
DeMello, Margo. 2000. Bodies of Inscription: A Cultural History of the Modern Tattoo Community.
Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

Fenske, Mindy 2007. “Movement and Resistance: (Tattooed) Bodies and Performance.”
Communication and Critical/Cultural Studies 4 (1): 51-73. DOI: 10.1080/14791420601138302

Gell, Alfred. 1993. Wrapping in Images: Tattooing in Polynesia. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Giddens, Anthony. 1991 Modernity and Self-Identity: Self and Society in the Late Modern Age.
Cambridge: Polity Press.

Guest, Harriet. 2000. “Curiously Marked: Tattooing and Gender Difference in Eighteenth-century
British Perceptions of the South Pacific”, In Written on the Body: The Tattoo in European and
American History, edited by Jane Caplan, 83-101. London: Reaktion Books.

Gustafson, Mark. 2000. “The Tattoo in the Later Roman Empire and Beyond.” In Written on the
Body: The Tattoo in European and American History, edited by Jane Caplan, 17-31. London:
Reaktion Books.

Hardin, Michael. 1999. “Mar(k)ing the Objected Body: A Reading of Contemporary Female
Tattooing.” Fashion Theory 3 (1): 81-108. DOI: 10.2752/136270499779165734

Irwin, Katherine. 2001. “Legitimating the First Tattoo: Moral Passage through Informal
Interaction.” Symbolic Interaction 24 (1): 49-73. DOI: 10.1525/si.2001.24.1.49

Jacques, Scott. 2017. “What Criminals’ Tattoos Symbolize: Drawing on Darwin, Durkheim, and
Lombroso.” Deviant Behavior, in press. DOI: 10.1080/01639625.2016.1197606

Jones, Christopher. 2000. “Stigma and Tattoo.” In Written on the Body: The Tattoo in European and
American History, edited by Jane Caplan, 1–16. London: Reaktion Books.

Joy, Annamma and Alladi Venkatesh. 1994. “Postmodernism, Feminism, and the Body: The Visible
and the Invisible in Consumer Research.” International Journal of Research in Marketing 11 (4):
333-357. DOI: 10.1016/0167-8116(94)90011-6

Kjeldgaard, Dannie and Anders Bengtsson. 2005. “Consuming the Fashion Tattoo.” In Advances in
Consumer Research, 32, edited by Geeta Menon and Akshay Rao, 172-177. Duluth, MN:
Association for Consumer Research.

Kosut, Mary. 2000. “Tattoo Narratives: The Intersection of the Body, Self Identity and Society.”
Visual Sociology 15 (1): 79-100. DOI: 10.1080/14725860008583817

Kosut, Mary. 2006. “An Ironic Fad: The Commodification and Consumption of Tattoos.” The
Journal of Popular Culture 39 (6): 1035-1048. DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-5931.2006.00333.x

Langman, Lauren. 2003. “Culture, Identity and Hegemony: The Body in a Global Age.” Current
Sociology 51 (3-4): 223-247. DOI: 10.1177/0011392103051003005

Larsen, Gretchen, Maurice Patterson and Lucy Markham. “A Deviant Art: Tattoo‐Related Stigma in
an Era of Commodification.” Psychology & Marketing 31 (8): 670-681. DOI: 10.1002/mar.20727

!14
Lombroso, Cesare. 2006 [1911]. Criminal Man (trans. Mary Gibson and Nicole Hahn Rafter).
Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

MacCormack, Patricia. 2006. “The Great Ephemeral Tattooed Skin.” Body & Society 12 (2): 57–82.
DOI: 10.1177/1357034X06064321

Murray, Derek. 2015. “Notes to Self: The Visual Culture of Selfies in the Age of Social Media.”
Consumption Markets & Culture 18 (6): 490-516. DOI: 10.1080/10253866.2015.1052967

Oettermann, Stephan. 2000. “On Display: Tattooed Entertainers in America and Germany.” In
Written on the Body: The Tattoo in European and American History, edited by Jane Caplan,
193-211. London: Reaktion Books.

Oksanen, Atte, and Jussi Turtiainen. 2005. “A Life Told in Ink: Tattoo Narratives and the Problem
of the Self in Late Modern Society.” Auto/biography 13 (2): 111-130. DOI:
10.1191/0967550705ab021oa

Parry, Albert. (1933 [2006]). Tattoo: Secrets of a Strange Art. Mineola, NY: Dover Publications.


Patterson, Maurice and Jonathan E. Schroeder. 2010. “Borderlines: Skin, Tattoos and Consumer
Culture Theory.” Marketing Theory 10 (3): 253-267. DOI: 10.1177/1470593110373191

Pew Research Centre. 2006. A Portrait of ‘Generation Next’, Washington, DC: Pew Research
Centre. http://www.people-press.org/2007/01/09/a-portrait-of-generation-next/

Phelan, Michael and Scott Hunt. 1998. “Prison Gang Members’ Tattoos as Identity Work: The
Visual Communication of Moral Careers.” Symbolic Interaction 21 (3): 277–298. DOI: 10.1525/si.
1998.21.3.277

Pitts, Victoria. 2002. “Review Essay: Reading the Body Through a Cultural Lens.” Journal of
Contemporary Ethnography 31 (3): 361-372. DOI: 10.1177/0891241602031003004

Sanders, Clinton. 1989. Customizing the Body: The Art and Culture of Tattooing. Philadelphia, PA:
Temple University Press.

Sanders, Clinton. 2009. “Colorful Writing: Conducting and Living with a Tattoo Ethnography.” In
Ethnographies Revisited: Constructing Theory in the Field, edited by Antony Puddephat, William
Shaffir and Steven Kleinknecht, 63-76. London, Routledge.

Scott, Rebecca, Julien Cayla and Bernard Cova. 2017. “Selling Pain to the Saturated Self.” Journal
of Consumer Research 44 (1): 22-43. DOI: 10.1093/jcr/ucw071

Shoham, Efrat. 2010. “Signs of Honor” among Russian Inmates in Israel’s Prisons.” International
Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 54 (6): 984–1003. DOI:
10.1177/0306624X09344841

Steward, Samuel. 1990. Bad Boys and Tough Tattoos: A Social History of the Tattoo with Gangs,
Sailors and Street-corner Punks. London: The Haworth Press.

!15
Sullivan, Nikki. 2001. Tattooed Bodies: Subjectivity, Textuality, Ethics, and Pleasure. Westport, CT:
Praeger.

Sweetman, Paul. 1999. “Anchoring the (Postmodern) Self? Body Modification, Fashion and
Identity.” Body & Society 5 (2–3): 51–76. DOI: 10.1177/1357034X99005002004

Taylor, Mark. 1995. “Skinscapes.” In Pierced Hearts and True Love: A Century of Drawings for
Tattoos, edited by Don Ed Hardy, 29-45. New York: The Drawing Company.

Thomas, Morgen. 2012. “Sick/beautiful/freak: Nonmainstream Body Modification and the Social
Construction of Deviance.” SAGE Open 2 (4): 1-12. DOI: 10.1177/2158244012467787

Werner, Anne. 2005. “Savage Skins: The Freakish Subject of Tattooed Beachcombers.” Kunapipi:
Journal of Postcolonial Writing, 27 (1): 11-25. Available at: http://ro.uow.edu.au/kunapipi/vol27/
iss1/4.

Woodstock, Louise. 2014. “Tattoo Therapy: Storying the Self on Reality TV in Neoliberal Times.”
The Journal of Popular Culture 47 (4): 780-799. DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-5931.2011.00814.x

Wright, Kirsten. 2009. “Recording A Very Particular Custom: Tattoos and the Archive.” Archival
Science 9 (1-2): 99-111. DOI: 10.1007/s10502-009-9098-x

!16