Tattoos in modern China - a cultural overview

[Tadzio]

Hello everyone. let me introduce myself. My name is Tadzio Goldgewicht, a Sinologist leaving in China. I have been leaving here for the past 12 years, period during which I have conducted research on Chinese classic culture. I am happy to have found this community - seems you have some interesting discussions going on. Below is one of my last articles, in which I utilize tattoos as an entry point to discuss more about modern and classical Chinese culture. Comments are welcome. The article has some illustrative pictures so I recommend reading it on my website.

"“Art” and “China” are two words that can’t be separated. There is art in almost everything the Chinese person does, in cooking, dressing and even in politics. Some of the things that in my opinion define art are the level of skillfulness a person reveals when executing a certain task, how meaningful the task can become in a person’s life and how well can the task serve as a conduit through which the person can..."

http://tadziogold.com/446/tattoos-in-modern-china-a-cultural-overview

[Shelley]

Hi ya, I am guessing english is not your first language. I just wanted to point out that you are" living in China," not leaving China. it is almost the exact opposite of what i think you meant. Good luck with your article.

Shelley

[Tadzio]

That was probably the spell checker kicking in. At times it changes your typing in really strange ways.

Nevertheless, thank you.

[WestTexas]

You might want to make the text on the page darker, it is kind of difficult to read.

Also:

“Art” and “China” are two words that can’t be separated

This is a bad lead-in sentence for many reasons. The sentence suggests that there is no meaningful art which is not Chinese, which is ridiculous. Maybe you could just take that sentence out, the next sentence is okay as a starter.

[jbradfor]

There is art in almost everything the Chinese person does, in cooking, dressing and even in politics.

I really have no idea what to make of that sentence. To me, the implication of that sentence is that there is NOT art in what non-Chinese do, which I think is indefensible, racist, and absurd. So Chinese are the only artistic people in the world?

[fanglu]

To me, the implication of that sentence is that there is NOT art in what non-Chinese do

I don't get that from the sentence at all. Just because Chinese people (supposedly) have art in their daily lives, that doesn't necessarily mean non-Chinese people don't.

For more information.

[jbradfor]

That article may be true for boolean logic, but it's not how people think, and in fact it's not how laws are written, for example. People don't think in boolean logic, and the true fallacy is assuming people do. [Note that I said "implication", not "proof".]

[Tadzio]

Thank you for all your stylistic inputs.

[fanglu]

Getting a little off topic here, but...

but it's not how people think

Actually it's exactly how people think.

If I say "I like cats", does that carry an implication that my friend Bob doesn't like cats? Actually I haven't said anything at all about Bob and it would be silly to make an assumptions about him based on my statement. He could hate cats or love them or be indifferent.

I agree that sometimes (particularly in political speech) this device is used to make a veiled statement about something or someone without actually saying it outright. Example:

"We believe that the best of America is in these small towns that we get to visit, and in these wonderful little pockets of what I call the real America, being here with all of you hard working very patriotic, um, very, um, pro-America areas of this great nation."

Implication: Places other than small towns are anti-America and non-real.

The difference is that real and pro are absolutes that can only be distinguished from their opposites, which is different from my cat example. You can't be a little bit pro-America, but you can like cats a little bit. When you say one thing is 'real', the implication is that other things are fake. When you say you like something, there is no implication that other people like or dislike them.

I think the 'art in daily life' example is much closer to the 'liking cats' example than the 'real america' example. Then again, what you read into something will depend a lot on your cultural background and even personal idiosyncrasies. I personally don't read 'There is art in almost everything the Chinese person does, in cooking, dressing and even in politics' as a criticism of non-Chinese people. Maybe our disagreement can be explained simply by us being different people.

Having said that, I disagree strongly with your statement that laws are interpreted in your way (that a statement about A necessarily implies something about B ). In the common law tradition at least, you can not draw a conclusion that something is allowed simply because one particular rule does not prohibit it. (I think, though am not sure, that civil law systems may be different in this respect in that they frame laws in terms of broad principles.) Take the ten commandments: "You shall not murder" does not carry an implication that it is ok to plant two kinds of crops in your field.

The subjectivity that I talked about above is precisely why laws are not interpretted that way. If they were, it would be impossible to know what was legal or not. Going back to the original example, if there was a law that "All Chinese people must have art in their everyday lives", what would that law instruct non-Chinese people to do? Would it mean that non-Chinese people must not have art in their everyday lives or that they must have art, but only in their non-everyday lives? The only safe way to interpret the rule is to only read what is written, that is, it says nothing about what non-Chinese people must do.

Silly example, but the same goes for a law "It is illegal to rob a bank with a gun". It would be foolish to assume, based on that law, that it is legal to rob a supermarket, or to rob a bank with a knife, and neither of those are implied by the original rule.

[sleepy eyes]

Tadzio, tu por aqui também? É o Pedro de Chongqing, haha. Devo ir ao GP do K-1 em Nanjing!

(Sorry, guys, just saying hi briefly)

I also don't see how, either by intuition, formal logic or whatever else, one could deprehend what jbradfor did from that sentence.

Other than that, the definition of art, or in the absence of one the three points made about it, reminds me a lot of Ananda Coomaraswamy and other meat-and-potatoes theorists. I'm not just name-dropping, I liked it.

I only had a couple of run-ins with tattooed people in China. One girl was clearly trying to hide it with a bracelet and whatnot (my friend, more perceptive with those things as girls tend to be, noticed it instead of me), we assumed it was because she was visiting home for the summer break and didn't want her parents to see it. The other girl had a big tattoo on her shoulder and was clearly stigmatized, as I saw some sneers from passers-by. I remember being intrigued and asking my chinese friend, who said she was probably trouble and 三合会-involved. (I think the term used for mafia/triad was something else. Informative read on that account.

[jbradfor]

I personally don't read 'There is art in almost everything the Chinese person does, in cooking, dressing and even in politics' as a criticism of non-Chinese people. Maybe our disagreement can be explained simply by us being different people.

Consider the following two phrasings.

'There is art in almost everything the Chinese person does, in cooking, dressing and even in politics'

vs

'There is art in almost everything a person does, in cooking, dressing and even in politics, and this is certainly true for Chinese as well'

Also, consider the context: the previous sentence is "“Art” and “China” are two words that can’t be separated. " Already, in the very first sentence, the author has set-up the impression that somehow China/Chinese have a special relationship to art that other cultures do not.

As you said, we'll just have to agree to disagree.

Having said that, I disagree strongly with your statement that laws are interpreted in your way (that a statement about A necessarily implies something about B ).

Take for example a law stating that one can not purchase alcohol on Sundays. Such a law would be interpreted as allowing the purchase of alcohol on Monday-Saturday.

Silly example, but the same goes for a law "It is illegal to rob a bank with a gun". It would be foolish to assume, based on that law, that it is legal to rob a supermarket, or to rob a bank with a knife, and neither of those are implied by the original rule.

But that's not how laws are written. Laws are written to make it illegal to rob a bank in general, and then, depending on the situation, additional parts are added to make is an additional/different crime if, say, a gun is used. It's done this way (in part) to avoid this very ambiguity.

[bunny87]

i gotta side with jbradfor on this one. Perhaps it is not the authors intention to smack talk non-Chinese people, but it's how it is. Actually, if i think of Art being attached to anyone, i would think of the French. Everything of theirs is artistic. And it seems to encompass every sense- in sight they present themselves, paintings, and even food beautifully. smell- they make perfumes and delicious breads, soups, everything. touch- well, they got romance down quite well. sound- what's not to love? the language is amazing and the music too. taste- french cafe's, french bistros, french bread, crepes, cheeses, it's all good.

I have never seen a cheap french place. On the contrary, Chinese food is often some of the cheapest available. Clothing and materials are considered low quality. they are a master of copying- technology, materials, etc. none of which is artistic. i mean, that's not to say that they aren't. in fact, there are plenty of artistic qualities that come from China. Calligraphy, qipaos, chopsticks... bonsai trees. well, i don't know how many of those really belong, but anyways. i think it's a bad intro that tadzio has going. i have to agree with using "'There is art in almost everything a person does, in cooking, dressing and even in politics, and this is certainly true for Chinese as well'"