Under-dressed in San Francisco

The other night, I went down to a small punk concert with my room-mate. It was located in a small gallery, a couple of connected rooms and a tiny claustrophobic performance room. The concert consisted of a small number of punk bands, ranging from as far as Boston, the other side of the continent.

Everyone had a tatoo, and a piercing.

Certainly, this was fringe material, which attracted a fringe crowd. The crowd was a kaleidoscope of anti-fashion fashion and exaggerated individuality. In many cases, the audience appeared to have considerably more time in dressing up than the performers themselves. Velvet jackets were prominent, throwback school uniform looks. Lots of latex. And tatoos and piercings.

Except me. I was shamed. Both my room-mates have tatoos. Why didn't I have one? Was it enough of an excuse that I had only just moved here? Since then, I've kept my eyes peeled and have noticed the near ubiquity of indelible body decoration in this city. Just why is it that tatoos, formerly the domain of Hell's Angels and ex-convicts have crossed over to the fashion conscious.

It may have something to do with authenticity, an idea that one of the few non-tatooed American friends of mine had suggested. San Francisco is a city where one is pressured to be non-conformist and individual. But then it becomes ridiculously easy to be wild and crazy when it is expected of you. No one bats an eye-lid if you roar down the street with a pink mohawk in a nun's habit. Yet, this permissiveness takes away from the effort involved in being an individual. If one is expected to be wild and crazy, then one is immediately a little tame. As such, other methods are needed to show the world that you really mean it. Hence direct bodily mutilation.