However, such attempts to permanently fix one's identity in one's body are ultimately doomed to failure since the meaning of tattoos is changeable. While the tattoo itself, as a material signifier, may remain unchanged, that which it signifies is mutable, and the various meanings that may be attributed to it are not within the control of the wearer, but are subject to the changing vagaries of fashion. This is particularly the case in contemporary culture, where tattoos have become multivalent symbols invested with a plethora of different meanings. As we shall see the meanings of tattoos during the twentieth century ranged from affirmations of patriarchal masculinity, on the one hand, to subversions of it, on the other, and it is this feature that has recommended itself to advertisers who seek semiotically rich symbols that are capable of appealing to a diverse market. Similarly, the individualistic nature of contemporary tattoos, far from being a hindrance to their incorporation by the fashion industry, has facilitated it.
Whereas once they were employed primarily as symbols of membership of a particular subcultural group, such as bikers, a military unit, or prison gang, now tattoos are seen as highly personalized signs of identity. This is emphasized by Benson, who argues that, today, ". . . tattooing and piercing are read explicitly as statements of the self. No longer is tattooing accounted for as drunken impulse or forcible subjection: tattoos, like piercings, are to be ‘chosen' after much deliberation". The individual who acquires tattoos today sees this most frequently as an act of self-assertion rather than as a capitulation to the trends of fashion or as indicative of conformity with a social group. Indicative of this is the fact that, increasingly, individuals prefer customized designs to the standardized "flash" tattoos that were once the norm. Nowadays, individuals tend to be much more particular about the design and placement of tattoos, often choosing or creating designs that best complement the particular features of their own bodies. In this way, the tattoo acts as "a statement of ownership over the flesh". Benson goes on to suggest that it is within this framework that the significance of the pain undergone in the acquisition of tattoos needs to be understood. As she writes: "Pain, like the tattoo itself, is something that cannot be appropriated; it is yours alone; it stands outside the system of signification and exchange that threatens the autonomy of the self. And . . . like the flesh itself, pain is conceived of as really ‘real'; it speaks its own truth" However, while the highly personal nature of many contemporary tattoos may seem to militate against the idea of them as fashion items, I would argue that it is precisely because of their role as badges of individual identity that they have become popular in the promotion of men's fashion and body care products, where advertisers seek to market mass produced, standardized items under the guise of them being individual statements. One of the main marketing strategies today consists in persuading the customer that in buying a particular product, they are not conforming to a fashion trend but are exercising their individual discernment and judgment.
This is aided and abetted by the construction of a distinctive company identity through the use of eye-catching logos. It is not so much the product, but the brand name, that is marketed, the aim being for consumers to associate themselves with the distinctiveness of a particular brand. As Naomi Klein points out, since the 1980s, the primary focus of corporations has shifted from the marketing of products to the construction of an image or brand name, where what is being sold is an "identity" or "lifestyle" rather than a product. Instead of manufacturing commodities that they then advertise, many of the best known companies today buy products and "brand" them. As the market has become flooded with uniform, mass-produced goods that are virtually indistinguishable from each other, competitive branding has become the primary means by which to establish product differentiation. In this context, logos have come to assume an increasingly important role in serving to counteract the anonymity of mass-produced goods. In the marketing of men's fashion, an increasing number of advertisements seek to associate the tattoo as a mark of the uniqueness of the wearer, with the distinctiveness of the company logo.
The suggestion here is that the brand name, like the tattoo, serves to distinguish the individual as someone who stands out from the crowd. The association of tattoos with the transgressive and the marginalized also enhances their role as individual statements. Previously associated with stigmatized groups, they are seen by those who wear them as badges of nonconformity. In this way, tattoos, like company logos, become a useful means for the marketing of "individuality" in an era where clothing is becoming increasingly homogenized through the globalization of production. Tattoos then, because of their semiotic multivalency and their role as signifiers of individual identity, have become popular icons in the promotion of men's fashion, despite their apparently anti-fashion status.
Our website is not responsible for the information contained by this article. Articleinput.com is a free articles resource thus practically any visitor can submit an article. However if you notice any copyrighted material, please contact us and we will remove the article(s) in discussion right away.
Note: This article was sent to us by: Lucas V. at 12232009
1. Advertisements and the male image
All articles are property of their respective authors. Please read our Privacy Policy!
© 2009 ArticleInput.com.