Reply on two peer's observation Reports

Running head: VALUES AND NORMS INSIDE A TATTOO PARLOR

VALUES AND NORMS INSIDE A TATTOO PARLOR 2

Values and Norms Inside a Tattoo Parlor

An Observational Study

Cascadia Community College

Introduction:

I have chosen to research the values and norms of the subculture surrounding tattoos. While many cultures the world over have had a reverent and traditional relationship with tattooing and other body modifications for generations, western culture has only become more accepting of this form of artwork in the past couple of decades. I was interested in studying this subculture because of the still-evolving shift of opinions about body modification. As mainstream culture becomes increasingly accepting of tattoos, the spaces where they are obtained are, in turn, more popular. Just over a decade after the turn of the twenty-first century, about 40% of Americans between 26 and 40 years old are tattooed (Larsen, Markham, & Patterson 2014), and even television shows centered on tattoos have become successful. However, there is still a fair amount of misunderstanding between mainstream western culture and tattoo culture. At present, there are still individuals and groups, usually who are more conservative, that look down on tattoos, not only on the grounds of relation to criminal activity, but also that the very act of getting tattooed is unsanitary and dangerous. Even in more accepting spaces, people with several visible tattoos are exoticized and can be subjected to repetitive and invasive questions surrounding their body art. In observing a tattoo parlor, I hoped to answer the following questions: In what ways can the process of tattooing be considered dangerous, if any? In what ways do the norms and values of this subculture differ from those of the western mainstream?

Literature Review:

In their review, Larsen, Markham, and Patterson (2014) share various studies reflecting a historically negative public opinion – a “stigma of deviance” – surrounding tattoos in western culture, dating as far back as the ancient Greeks. Deviance, as defined by McIntyre, is “the flip side of conformity” (2014), and the sanctions placed to prevent it from infiltrating the mainstream can have serious consequences. Tattoos represented the “other” in terms of social status and were even given involuntarily as a means of visually differentiating the tattooed person from the rest of society. Later, voluntary tattoos in the west were sought out mainly by criminals, or by those in the military. Tattooed people were not only avoided socially but could also be barred from employment in many spaces. While the twentieth century saw tattoos gain traction as a means of carving out identity, or a form of postmodernist self-expression, they describe a “tattoo Renaissance” taking place in the relatively recent 1980s. At this time, there was a growing focus on the artistry and creativity of tattooing, rather than the denouncement of the “type” of person who would seek it. The stigma, however, was still strong, prompting tattooed people to develop different strategies to deal with it (Larsen, Markham & Patterson 2014). Some choose to cover their tattoos, sometimes out of obligation to their occupation, but also to avoid tattoo-related conversations with strangers, to whom they may not be interested in divulging sensitive information.

Methods:

I conducted an observational study at a tattoo parlor. I saw it as the perfect location as it is not only subject to concentrated groups of those who choose to get tattooed, but also the workplace of artists. However, I was conscious of the limitations of the space – it would be difficult to observe sanctions against the subculture in action, as detractors are unlikely to enter. I entered with a two-part hypothesis: first, the overall atmosphere and behavior in a tattoo parlor is more casual than a typical office-based workplace. Despite this, it is a safe, clean environment where tattoo artists and related administrative staff must maintain a high level of social capability in order to adapt to the needs of clients, who will have varying degrees of exposure and experience with tattoo culture and will require different levels of explanation and care.

Results:

My observational findings have been separated into three categories: environment, practices, and language.

Environment:

The tattoo parlor was located in Everett, which has a mixed reputation as a developing city. At the start of my visit, two receptionists at the front and six visible artists were present in stations that lined the walls. Four were actively tattooing clients, and two were drawing at their stations, likely stencils for incoming clients. All employees were dressed casually. One client was waiting in one of about ten chairs, arranged in a square in the center of the room, and three more came in over the course of my observation. Portfolios in the form of binders were available, as were business cards with the artists’ names and social media handles. There were pictures all over the walls, not only of the previous work of the artists, but art that they admire, in addition to paintings that demonstrated the nautical theme of the parlor (see appendix for images). There were also nautical decorations, such as a swordfish at the back. There was a very clean, antiseptic scent throughout the parlor, and different genres of music played at a quiet to moderate volume, just loud enough to be heard over the buzzing of machines.

Practices:

I was able to witness the intake process for a few clients, and even the entire tattooing process for two of them. Upon walking in, the receptionists cheerfully greet clients. After providing ID as proof of age and signing consent paperwork, they are allowed through the doorway where they can wait in the nearby chairs. Once the artist has completed a stencil, they will use it to help determine placement, but will not put it directly on the skin until the intended area has been thoroughly cleaned. Sanitizing fluids are wiped across the skin multiple times before, throughout, and after tattooing. After the tattoo is complete, clients are permitted to get up from the station and look at their new body art in the mirror before it is again sanitized, then carefully wrapped for protection. Finally, the artist will review aftercare instructions, and clients will pay for services rendered before exiting.

Language:

Artists and reception staff spoke freely with each other. Swearing was peppered throughout most conversations but was neither aggressive in itself nor met with aggression in turn. There was also a very direct, information-based way of speaking. The only conversations between employees related to expected appointments. If an incoming client was described as potentially indecisive, mild frustration was expressed. I also noticed that language used when speaking with clients was varied. When two young women without visible tattoos came in, employees’ tones were softer and there was little swearing. The artist who assisted them also went over aftercare more slowly and in great detail, pausing for their questions. Alternatively, when an older, heavily tattooed – thus more experienced – male client’s latest work was finished, the artist reviewed aftercare very quickly and in an ostensibly rehearsed manner. Conversation between the artist and this client was more similar to those between parlor staff.

Discussion:

While I found my hypothesis proven correct, I found notable differences between the tattoo parlor and mainstream establishments. My first hypothesis was that it was a more casual environment than a typical office. This was evident in certain norms, such as the casual dress of the employees and the manner in which they spoke, which may be considered gruff or uncouth compared to a typical workplace. However, the casual nature did not detract from the “business” aspect. In contrast with the stigma that tattoo parlors are unsanitary and locations of illegal activity, keeping a clean, lawful space was clearly a major value. Patrons could not pass the doorway into the tattooing space without signing paperwork and providing a form of photograph identification showing that they were of legal age. Clean needles were unsealed in front of clients to show that they were previously unused, and the tattooed area of skin was sanitized several times to prevent infection. All three clients whose tattoos were finished during my visit were also guided through aftercare (though more succinctly with those clearly more experienced). Other values include conciseness and decisiveness, displayed by communication between staff. While decisiveness is also valued by the mainstream culture, I believe that speech in a tattoo parlor tends to be more direct than cluttered with mainstream niceties.

I also noticed a form of code-switching as a norm, which speaks to the adaptability of the subculture. When dealing with less experienced clients, the swearing is toned down significantly, and artists took more time to explain the healing process and best related practices. More experienced clients, based on their behavior, do not require such lengthy, detailed explanation. Knowing which clients may need more gentle handling requires staff to pay attention not only to how they look (several visible tattoos versus few to none), but also their overall demeanor. A nervous client would also likely warrant different behavior than one who is relaxed. I predict that the ability to cater to clients’ needs and make them comfortable will propagate the continued growth in popularity of tattoos, as well as strengthen the notion that the tattoo subculture is not dangerous or unsanitary when professional service is solicited.

(Word Count: 1515)

References

Larsen, G., Markham, L., Patterson, M. (2014). A deviant art: tattoo-related stigma in an era of commodification. Psychology & Marketing, 31(8).

McIntyre, L. (2014). The practical skeptic: core concepts in sociology (6th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Education.

Appendix

1. Image of cleaning supplies and wall art

2. Image of one artist’s station, his admired art and previous work, nautical-themed art

3. Field Notes

· Arrival time: 3:56 PM

· Multiple pictures related to shop theme (giant swordfish at the back, sea and sailor related pictures

· Blue walls, potentially in line with nautical theme

· Sounds of casual conversation and tattoo machines

· Smells very clean, mostly of antiseptic

· About 10 chairs in seating area, arranged in square

· One present client waiting, white male, 18-21 years old, no visible tattoos (long sleeves and pants, potentially covering previous tattoos)

· Pool table with flash tattoos

· Mostly male artists (5 male, 1 female) and only female receptionists (2), all heavily tattooed and/or pierced

· Artists’ stations have their work and art they admire

· Various types of music, all uncensored

· Very straightforward manner of speaking

· Annoyance at indecisiveness (staff members discussing an incoming client), but patience with inexperience (staff interacting with clients)

· Process for two inexperienced clients (young white women, both approximately 18-21 years old, casually dressed, no visible tattoos)

· Entered, greeted by receptionists

· Prompted for ID

· Receptionists explained consent paperwork before having them sign it

· Waited in waiting area for about 10 minutes while artist prepared stencil and supplies

· The stencil was held near intended spots (hovering over skin) in front of a mirror to confirm desired design and location

· Clients shown to station, intended tattoo area cleaned, shaved, cleaned again before stencil placement

· Sanitized again before tattooing began

· Tattoos took about 20 minutes each, cleaned several times throughout

· Both were cleaned and wrapped afterward, artist went over aftercare procedures

· Both had questions about aftercare, promptly and gently answered

· Tone with these clients was very gentle and nearly devoid of explicit language

· Paid in cash and left

· Similar intake process for another male client, 20-25 years old with 2 visible tattoos

· Process for experienced client (white man, approximately 30-35 years old, innumerable visible tattoos)

· Was already in the process of being tattooed, seemed to be finishing an extensive appointment

· Paused session twice due to pain

· Finished roughly 1.5 hours after my arrival

· Artist went over aftercare very quickly while wrapping (policy on aftercare instructions?), also paid in cash

· Leaving time 6:00 PM