LIVING WITH S(K)IN: AN ANALYSIS OF TATTOO REMOVAL Emily Dow ning, B.A. Thesis Prepared for the Degree of MASTER OF ARTS UNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS August 2004 APPROVED: Brian Lain, Major Professor John M. Allison Jr., Committee Member Lori Byers, Committee Member John Gossett, Chair of the Department of Communication Studies Sandra L. Terrell, Dean of the Robert B. Toulouse School of Graduate Studies Downing, Emily, Living with s(k)in: An analysis of tattoo removal. Master of Arts (Communication Studies), August 2004, 94 pp., references, 28 titles. This paper investigates the role of tattoo removal in postmodernity. Specifically, I suggest tattoo removal is a technology of self in which the tattooed person can attain absolution from a “sinful” tattoo. This paper explores the construction of the confessional act in two parts: the construction of the confessing subject and the construction of the medical clinic as the confessor’s listener. Using the texts medical offices place on the internet to advertise their services, I investigate the text’s interpellation of subjects desiring tattoo removal. I then examine the construction of the clinic’s status in the confessional act. Websites and brochures on gang tattoo removal provide a dialogue in which the clinic negotiates and attains its powerful position in the confessional act. The paper concludes by investigating the implications of the tattoo remnant, the material effects of the technology of self, and the benefits of studying the body-skin in rhetoric. TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter Page 1. INVESTIGATING NOTIONS OF BODY, DESIRE, AND FANTASY……….…............1 Introduction Statement of the Problem Review of Literature Method Subsequent Chapters 2. THE SEARCH FOR IDENTITY: TATTOO REMOVAL AS A CONFESSION OF SELF….……………………………………………………………………..................28 Introduction Technologies of Self Tattoo Removal: A Postmodern Condition The Text Method Textual Analysis Conclusion 3. CONSTRUCTION OF ENUNCIATIVE STATUS: AN ANALYSIS OF GANG TATTOO REMOVAL……………………………………………..............…………..............…50 Introduction The Text: Gang Tattoo Removal for Juveniles Visibility of the Apparatus Rhetorics of the Body-Skin Curves of Enunciation Conclusion 4. CONJOINING DESIRE AND CONFESSION……..…………….............……….…….72 Summary of Chapters Redemption and the Remnant Material Efects Body-Skin and Rhetorical Studies Rhetoric and Desire Conclusion ENDNOTES………..……………………………………………………………...............…..83 REFERENCE LIST………………………………..……………………………….................86 ii CHAPTER 1 INVESTIGATING NOTIONS OF BODY, DESIRE, AND FANTASY Introduction Distorting the lines between art, fashion, and illustration, tattooing in contemporary America is a way of defining ourselves and expressing our beliefs. Tattoos have a long history, dating back to the Stone Age and recognized as an established art form since 1000 B.C. (Sanders, 1989). Despite this longevity, scholarly works as well as social commentaries consistently discuss tattooing as a unique display of identity. Current mainstream society seems more accepting of tattoos, placing less emphasis on the association of tattoos with deviance and transgression. Perhaps this shift in attitude occurs in part because of the narratives persons in the 1990s used to justify their tattoos (DeMello, 2000, Langellier, 2001), the representation of tattoos in the media (DeMello, 1995), and other informal negotiations of the stigma attached to tattoos (Irwin, 2001). Take, for example, the following testimony. I am probably the person that anyone would least suspect of having a tattoo: I am a very conventional soccer mom…conservative in outlook and work at a bank. Up until a year ago, I was one of those people who looked down on people with tattoos. But that all changed last year... Barbara, a college sophomore, who babysat our children one night (and who had a very nice tribal tattoo on her lower back) explained to me very intelligently and eloquently the reasoning behind so many young women getting tattoos these days. After that conversation, I began to consider the possibility of getting a tattoo myself. I selected a design that I 1 loved and would feel comfortable with for the rest of my life. Nowadays, not a day goes by without my taking a few minutes several times a day to look at my beautiful tattoo in the mirror. I love it and so does my husband. He says it is exciting to know that his conventional, traditional wife has this wild side to her. My tattoo does give me a sense of empowerment and control over my life, and it also enhances my body's natural beauty. (Mary, 2003) In addition to soccer moms, tattoos are commonplace among professional athletes (Wise, 2003), Hollywood actors (Signature Group, 2003), career-oriented moms (Armstrong, 1991), and college students (Degelman & Price, 2002). No longer seen as deviant, the status of this particular cultural assertion of individuality seems to be improving (Vail, 1999). As DeMello appropriately puts it, tattoos are “not just for bikers anymore” (1995, p. 37). Interestingly, just as society becomes comfortable with tattoos, another phenomenon asserts its presence -- tattoo removal. Despite perceived approval of the fashionable tattoo, technologies for tattoo removal and discourses about tattoo regret are commonplace (Grumet, 1983, Varma & Lannigan,1999). Stories about the tattooed no longer conclude with the existence of a tattoo, what it represents, and the behavioral characteristics of its owner. Currently, society questions the permanence of tattoos and often provides tattooed persons with innovative and safe options for removal. Until recently, few effective and painless methods for tattoo removal existed. People who urgently desire a tattoo gone often try to remove it themselves (Houghton, et al, 1996). Concoctions containing garlic, sulfur, oil, urine, vinegar, honey, and turpentine, and 2 crude blister-inducing methods are reported as early as 54 A.D. (Scutt & Gotch, 1986). Dermatological techniques in the 1900s included grafting and salabrasion (rubbing with salt); however, the most common methods used were dermabrasion (sanding the skin with an abrasive surface) and excision (cutting the tattoo from the skin and closing the wound with stitches). Possible infection and heavy scarring characterize all these methods. Scutt & Gotch (1986) present an interesting narrative of a naval officer, who discusses his experience with tattoo removal. I saw the surgeon and he said that he’d fix me up, but warned me that it would be very painful and the results weren’t all that good, although the scars would fade over time. I was in the hospital for 3 ½ weeks. It was extremely painful. Quite frankly, if I’d known about the pain and the discomfort, well, I wouldn’t go through it again…however, I am glad I had it done, because my wife is much happier, although you can still see the scars. (Scutt & Gotch, 1986, p. 142) The narrative reveals one person’s preference for scarred skin over an unwanted tattoo. Intriguing and emotional stories such as the naval officer’s testimony raise many rhetorical questions about tattoo removal. The simultaneity of narratives such as that of the naval officer and the soccer mom deserve further investigation. Rhetorical analyses of the discourses that constitute and influence the tattooed reveal additional and significant information about contemporary society. For example, rhetoric serves as a valuable tool for questioning how an individual perceives her or his decision to get a tattoo and society’s impact on subsequent decisions by the individual (i.e., decisions to get another tattoo, remove a tattoo, the attitude and conversations that 3 circulate about each individual tattoo). This paper intends to investigate these issues by examining popular discourses on tattooing and tattoo removal through a rhetorical lens. Statement of the Problem Research suggests contemporary tattooed persons continue to struggle against the association of tattooing with socially devalued groups (DeMello, 2000, Sanders, 1989). Many people in society still evaluate the tattooed negatively (Degelman, & Price, 2002; Forbes, 2001), despite tattooed persons’ resistance to long-standing stereotypes (Grumet, 1983; Millner & Eichold, 2001). Additionally, current research on tattoos shows that many of the same deviant behaviors hold true for the contemporary tattooed culture. For example, those with tattoos see themselves as more artistic and risk-taking (Armstrong, 1991; Drews, Allison, & Probst, 2000). Studies show tattooed youth as more likely to use drugs and abuse alcohol (Braithwaite et al, 2001). Statistics that associate tattoos with deviant behaviors partially inspire governmental programs, such as Health One and Clean Slate, which advertise free tattoo removal services for former gang members. The idea that tattoo removal eliminates the desire to transgress seems to permeate these texts. Notions that tattoos hinder one’s chances of getting a job and serve as bad examples to American youth suggest a stigma towards tattoos that continues to perpetuate in the current society. This situation, as the title of this paper suggests, constitutes a problem of sin. Aside from the religious or moral implications of the word, sin refers to the idea that, for some, tattoos represent something inappropriate, offensive, or wrong. If a tattooed individual internalizes this pejorative perspective of tattooing, then how might one interpret the response of tattoo removal? 4 This thesis speculates that tattoo removal is a form of public confession for the tattooed. I intend to investigate the position of the confessor (i.e. the tattooed individual confessing through tattoo removal) in relation to the listener (i.e. the medical clinic that provides the removal services). An analysis of this confessional relationship is necessary, because at stake in the confession is the agency of the tattooed subject. In other words, it is important to distinguish when people mark his or her own body in the form of a tattoo and when society (re)marks the skin as sinful. Certainly, the notion of physically altering the body to confess a sin deserves additional attention. Also at stake for this study is the status of the body and skin, not only for the tattooed body, but also for non-tattooed persons. Before considering the skin, I first question what motivates individuals to remove a tattoo. An initial, logical explanation for the rise in tattoo removal suggests that the act literally removes the tattoo, while the confession symbolically purges the feelings or affiliation associated with the tattoo. One may speculate that rhetorical discourse about confession and tattoo removal supports a societal desire to forget past regrets. However, this metaphoric connection ultimately fails; most dermatological surgeons caution that complete tattoo removal remains impossible. Early removal methods resulted in scarred skin. However, as the narrative of the naval officer demonstrates, this scarring was not always unsatisfactory. Contemporary methods, such as the technologically advanced laser, also leave remnants of the original tattoo. If the confession via tattoo removal seems to be gaining popularity, then what are the implications of the contradictory remnant still visible on the body? Indeed, the body (and the skin) seems to hold a lower status than the fantasy of confession. 5 Initially, it is easy to follow the suggestion that the act of tattoo removal symbolically represents purging past mistakes, by erasing (or confessing) the visual reminder from the body. That is, until one considers the tattoo remnant. The public demand for the procedure suggests that the possible scarring, faded tattoo or splotchy skin does not diminish the appeal of the confession for the unhappily tattooed. Even in the best scenario, in which a laser completely clears an individual’s skin of ink, the only natural protection of human integument -- the hair -- is permanently removed. Indeed, if the symbolic aim of the procedure is to recapture the previous and unmarked condition, the symbolic connection fails as an impossible and a misguided effort. Excogitation of the actual removal process falls short in answering the original question about the rise in tattoo removal, as the remnant on the skin obscures the more obvious explanation for the confession of tattoo removal. Study of the removal process also generates additional questions regarding desire. Apparently, a desire for a certain image, identity, or recognition spurs one’s decision to get a tattoo removed. Therefore, the introduction of desire leads this paper to psychoanalysts, who typically specialize in the study of desire. Psychoanalysts, such as Joan Copjec (1994), postulate that desire and language often possess a negative relationship. In other words, what one articulates is not necessarily what one desires. In the confession (through tattoo removal), perhaps the desire to remove a tattoo stems not from the desire to erase the tattoo, but a desire to perform a socially acceptable procedure. Tattoo removal possibly operates as a process of confession for the societal sin of tattooing. The juxtaposition of the skin and the corresponding discourses on tattoo removal reveal a space in which one may reevaluate or rearticulate desire. This 6 preliminary speculation exemplifies the type of reading that Copjec encourages cultural scholars to practice. Copjec entreats researchers “to become literate in desire, to learn how to read what is inarticulable in cultural statements” (1994, p. 14). Copjec criticizes studies that explore only the structures of experiences and events, claiming that “structures do not march in the streets,” and that one must investigate the motivation, or desire, that exists below the surface and outside of the structure (p. 1). In addition to the discourse surrounding the confession, this study includes the study of skin (the most relevant part of the body for the study of tattoo removal) to address and critically interrogate Copjec’s appeal. Having established the importance of desire in the study of confession and tattoo removal, I now attempt to answer how one uses rhetoric to analyze desire. If rhetoric traditionally relies on language, and desire transcends language, one is challenged to find an isolated area in which the two overlap just enough to reveal one working inside or around the other. This action proves tricky, as Lacanian theory instructs us that desire steps in to negotiate the lacuna between being (i.e., the order of the real, the generative principle) and appearance (i.e., a structure, language). The dimension of being and appearance prevents an imbrication between the two. At this juncture, I reframe the study of tattoos as a study of confession and desire, in hopes of resolving the distance between the tattooed body-skin and the psyche of the individual. Past research on tattoos reveals rare scholarly discussions of the tattooed skin itself; instead, researchers ignore the skin in favor of examining individuals’ personalities (Degelman & Price, 2002; Forbes, 2001; Houghton, et al, 1996). Mark Taylor (1997) asserts the importance of the study of the skin. Taylor opens 7