A Trend in Permanence.

Myspace is an interesting thing. It allows you to keep up on all kinds of useless information about your "Friends" in the digital age. Through Myspace I've noticed quite recently this new trend that is springing up on band pages [1] [2] [3] [4].

Now granted, getting a tattoo of your favorite band is nothing new (See Henry Rollins) but there seems to be a shift in paradigm. In the old days, it was an underground phenomenon reserved (typically) for bands of near legendary status. There was no way to massively announce that your fans were devoted enough to get tattoos, thus encouraging more needy fans to call their devotion into question, with the end result of more and more drones sporting your band's tattoo.

Enter Myspace: A tool for the new century that can drive your hordes of rabid fans (we like rabid fans here) to permanently etch your band's name or logo into their skin, thus immediately immortalizing (well honestly, mortality still comes into play, but it's your fan's and not your band's) your Band, and securing your legacy in the annuls of time.

Okay, so let's be frank - we have more tattoos as a generation than any before. If you live in an urban area chances are pretty good that the majority of people you see who are 18-35 will have at least one tattoo of some sort (sorry I'm counting tramp stamps.) So with increased frequency of tattoos, does that lower the importance and value of the content, thus leading to more band tattoos?

If that's the case, then it stands to reason that Myspace isn't contributing to the phenomenon, merely documenting it.

I just wonder, when a person loves BAND X, get's a tattoo, then BAND X breaks up a year later, will they regret the tattoo? Or will they feel priveleged to document the passion they felt for the band, years later, regardless of how insignificant the band ended up being?

I guess the bottom line is, we should all go out and get KISS tattoos.

No comments: