DEBATE: Body art: Self-expression or self-mutilation?

My body, my choices Who remembers singer Justin Bieber when he appeared on our screens and radio stations for the very first time? He was a young, fresh faced boy whom most people jokingly used to say could have very easily passed for a girl. At the time, he was only 14. Today, Bieber is a wealthy and influential 21-year-old and to the disappointment of some, his innocence has been covered with over 50 tattoos that are spread on most of his body, especially his arms. But that is not all he is known for; he is also a philanthropist; donating time and huge sums of money to organisations like ‘Pencils of Promise’, a charity organisation that builds schools in developing countries. He also takes part in the charity’s fund-raising galas and donates part of the proceeds from his concerts and ‘Someday’ line of fragrances to the charity. But this debate is not about Bieber, what I am trying to do is to show you that contrary to popular belief, experimenting with body art does not make one a lesser person. People always seem to frown at tattoos; some even associate them to wayward behaviour. But the fact is that people who have done the worst things in this world are not necessarily the ones drowning in body art. It is actually the opposite. Body art is of course self-expression; I can’t even begin to imagine why anyone would call it mutilation. Some people will argue that you don’t need to ‘make drawings’ on your body to express yourself and maybe they have a point there but what they forget is that people are different and they most definitely use different channels when they want to say something. Some take to social media to celebrate or lament, others write in their journals, others give themselves a spa or holiday treat and others just go to a tattoo parlour and have whatever is on their minds stamped on their bodies. Is it mutilating the body? I don’t think so. We happen to live in a world where recognition and the ability to be heard are becoming more and more difficult. If using body art makes one feel like they are communicating something, then so be it. Most of us do not understand art in the first place, we therefore cannot interpret it. Let us not pretend to think that we know what is better for someone else. As long as one is not harming someone else or oneself, let us not stand there and judge. People like David Beckham are literally art pieces; they have dates of their children birthdays, and even the dates when they scored their best goal on their bodies. Those are monumental things to them. It is not our place to say what one does with their own body. As long as he is not cutting off body parts, let us learn how to let people be. editorial@newtimes.co.rw It is regrettable in later years We have grown to pathetic standards where everything is about freedom of this…..freedom of that, and it’s this same freedom that we have so much abused and now, it sounds like another bucket full of trash. Has anyone looked at Chris Brown’s “Battered Woman” tattoo on the neck? Or Miley Cyrus’ “Sad Cat” tattoo on the lower lip or Matthew Whelan, now known as “Body art”? If you have, then you’ll agree with me that there’s nothing like expression there. Why in the first place would anyone want to use body art to express themselves? Is it that people don’t understand them or they have low self-esteem and would rather let body art do the talking? Putting a tattoo on a body is similar to putting a bumper sticker on an Aston Martin or Bugatti car. I don’t get it when I see stains of crappy ink on a woman’s leg or a man shaving his head to have the map of Rwanda plastered on. Never have I seen anyone successful because they have a tattoo, but I know people who have failed to land their dream job because of a weird tattoo they have simply because as human beings, we judge appearance first. Truth be told, there’s nothing good with tattoos - on any level - that we might want to look at it. Some people get tattoos, apparently for memories, whether good or bad, but unless you have a memory span akin to that of an Emu, I don’t understand why you need body art to remind you of those things. They should be inked in the memory, not on the body. Society has led us to believe that we can do anything with our bodies as long as we don’t kill ourselves, and tattoos have therefore become a custom for people who want to be seen as cool and exposed yet many do it to fit into social groups they are not part of. Besides, people no longer care what the means are; they just look at the ink and move on. For all intents and purposes, why use a body as a work for artistic value yet there are other things in the world the artwork can go on. Why not put that art work on a portrait or t-shirt where it’s easy to read and can be easily discarded when you get tired of it or when the memory no longer holds value? Besides risking health hazards such as skin cancer, tattoos were used by gangs to identify each other but we no longer live in the era when being a gangster was just another way of life. Unlike many fashion trends, like bell-bottoms and platform shoes that can be left behind, most tattoos are permanent. Imagine an 80-year-old with tattoos? I would never hate anyone who combines bad judgment with a stunning lack of intelligence, but I must confess that I consider tattoos a crude stain on one’s appearance from which the consequences are often ill thought of. dean.karemera@newtimes.co.rw

Lifestyle

DEBATE: Body art: Self-expression or self-mutilation?