The $15,000 Tattoo
PROTECTED CONTENT
If you’re a current subscriber, log in below. If you would like to subscribe, please click the subscribe tab above.
Username and Password Help
Please enter your email and we will send you a password reset link.
By Bill Hoagland
In the October 18 edition of the Wall Street Journal, there was an article in the “Off Duty” section about “fashionable” tattoos. Apparently, some high-class fashion designer named Tom Browne is going to auction one of his signature logos to a lucky buyer during a digital auction event this week. According to the article, it is anticipated that this “one of a kind” logo will sell for at least $15,000. It is assumed that this logo will become a tattoo on the body of the lucky purchaser after all the legal papers are signed. There will be some papers to sign because there are some “conditions” that go with the purchase and use of this logo; Browne has suggested that the logo, which consists of a 23 mm wide by 25 mm tall series of three colored vertical stripes, be tattooed (tastefully, of course) at the base of the neck. This is only a suggestion as to the location of the tattoo, but you have to wonder if the “conditions” attendant to this purchase include a prohibition against placement of this logo on other specific body parts.
It seems to me that this logo, if placed at the base of the neck as suggested, would in essence be a lifetime billboard for Browne’s products and creations, right? So down the road, will other entities such as Target begin soliciting people to wear its logo on their necks? That would not seem to be a successful marketing plan for Target, but what do I know about the public’s attitude about tattoos? Not much, apparently.
If you sense that I, as an 85 year old senior citizen, am not a fan of tattoos, you are correct. I don’t get it and I suspect that many other folks my age don’t “get it” either. Let me digress for a minute. When I was a young “whippersnapper”, the only people who had tattoos were WW II vets, es-cons, motorcycle guys and high school dropouts—all males, of course. We were told it took guts to get a tattoo because they were so painful and so permanent. There were a few women who had tattoos but these women were generally memorable for the wrong reasons. Maybe neither of those assumptions—that tattoos are painful and permanent– are true any longer, judging from where people are getting those tattoos these days. And maybe, with modern technology, those tattoos today will not become an indiscriminate, blue blob on your chest fifty years from now. I have no clue and I suspect others my age have no clue either because we sense that young people really don’t want to discuss the subject with old people like me.
And maybe they don’t want to discuss it with us old-timers because we start our questions about those tatts on your body by asking, “Why in the world would you…”
–––––––––––––––
■ Bill Hoagland has practiced law in Alton for more than 50 years, but he has spent more than 70 years hunting, fishing and generally being in the great outdoors. His wife, Annie, shares his love of the outdoor life. Much of their spare time is spent on their farm in Calhoun County. Bill can be reached at [email protected].
