Who gets Pierced
Within the framework of today's society many people feel there is a general emphasis on conformity and normality, as dictated by the society one lives in. Indeed this goes as far as to have prompted people to remark that within our Western culture any non- conformity, but particularly physical non-conformity is regarded as something to be feared - Fakir Musafar (Modern Primitives).
Piercing the body, particularly in a highly visual manner such as on the face, immediately sets one apart from the rest of society. As noted in Van Gennep's Rites Of Passage a stranger in a given society is often treated with superstition and fear, or respect. In today's impersonal society, piercees see much emphasis put on conformity and anonymity. To specifically draw attention to oneself is the goal of an ever increasing number of people who are dissatisfied with 'traditional' Western culture, which many regard as oppressive.
A stranger entering a new social situation will be subjected to various restrictions, this is brought about by a lack of knowledge and understanding. Within the present-day industrialised West such restrictions remain, but are not necessarily as visually spectacular or obvious as those found in less industrialised society. Most piercees regard themselves as subject to such restrictions, most commonly in the form of reduced freedom of movement and interaction within the society being entered. This is particularly true in relation to job opportunities.
In addition there is a feeling amongst the Modern Primitives that by deliberately setting oneself up as a stranger within one's own society such restrictions are not only imposed but often done far more strongly. Such a strong reaction can be seen as a result of fear of change within one's own society. Such reactions are sometimes sought, but far more often they simply go to prove, to the Modern Primitive, the problems which they perceive within society.
This leads to the question of what kind of people wish to deliberately disassociate from mainstream society, in the case of those who have visual piercings, or, in the case of those people whose piercings are not obviously visible, wish to affiliate themselves with the former group?
Piercing Fans International Quarterly (PFIQ) is possibly the largest independent publication on the subject of body piercing. It is published by Gauntlet, America's largest supplier of body jewelry, and as such can be found in most piercing studios in the US. Gauntlet ran a piercing profile in 1985 of its subscribers. Due to the magazines specialist nature it is reasonable to assume that the majority of people who responded were involved in piercing to a greater extent than someone with a casual or passing interest in the subject. Whilst the results are by no means conclusive they do provide an interesting insight into the type of people who become involved in piecing. The most significant result of the survey, in my opinion, was that most, 83 per cent, of the people who responded had attended college, 24 per cent had college degrees and 33 per cent had gone on to postgraduate study. The result also showed that 93 per cent of the people who responded were Caucasians. This survey, then, would seem to suggest that of those people who become deeply involved in piercing a significant number are well educated. Without extrapolating too much it is reasonable to assume that many of these people will hold jobs of some responsibility, this is further supported by the fact that each individual piercing is expensive at œ20 - œ30 in the UK and similarly priced in the US. We see, then, a practice supported by a number of people who make up the 'white middle class' and yet which emulates the practices of many of the non-industrial aborigines in the world.
I would also note that of the many people I have met while not all were particularly well off a significant number were; also of those people I talked to who were deeply involved in piercing most were, if not educated, intelligent. The people I have spoken to were predominantly from the UK. In my experience however the general trend seems to emulate that of the US.
Ted Polhemus, in his book The Customised Body, pointed out the irony of the fact that traditional tattooing styles are being preserved not by their developers but by the West as part of our 'tattoo Renaissance'. As Western influences spread across the globe and invade the more isolated traditional communities we see art forms and ritual practices being abandoned, only to be preserved by people from the very communities which are destroying them.
Aesthetics - Fashion and Beauty
Particularly with the rise of piercing in the fashion world there has to be a distinction made between piercing for reasons of beautification as opposed to piercing to follow a fashion.
The distinction between fashion and personal beautification is an important, but not necessarily an obvious one. The fashion industry determines, for many, what looks good and what is appropriate to be seen wearing. People who follow fashions would argue that if piercing is fashionable it looks good, as such it could be said to be aesthetically pleasing, or beautiful. I would, however, argue that such followers of fashion find the fashion pleasing rather than the actual piercing itself. When piercing becomes unfashionable it may be actively disliked by followers of fashion. The difference I wish to emphasise is that between people who actively follow fashions as opposed to those people who find the effect piercing has on ones visual appearance enhancing. In the former case the value of the piercing is based on its current place in the world of fashion, whilst in the latter case the piercing is regarded as emphasising or increasing the beauty of the wearer, regardless of current popular opinion.
'Each time I get a piercing my boyfriend accuses me of gilding the lily, but I think my jewellery magically transforms a piece of flesh into a work of art,' (Myers 1992 p 293).
Piercing for fashion reasons is well established, indeed professional piercers acknowledge the fact that the vast majority of all piercings they do are for fashion reasons. There are a number of books which discuss piercing as a fashion, particularly by Ted Polhemus. Within this discussion I am intending to ignore the vast majority of people who have had a piercing. Instead I will be looking at the few for whom piercing has become an important part of their lives. In the rest of this paper unless specifically noted all references to 'piercees' will exclude those people who pierce for fashion reasons.
Reasons for Piercing the Body
It should also be noted that while this paper is concerned with the practice of body piercing, parallels can be drawn between piercing and all other forms of permanent body art. Permanent body art marks the skin in ways which most would consider painful. Such experiences, while not producing identical effects, will produce related experiences and be inspired by a similar range of motivations.
In order to understand the motivations behind people's decisions to adopt body piercing it is important to have a cursory understanding of some of the views of other authors in whose works on related topics similar themes can been seen mirrored and analogies can be drawn.
James Myers, in his work on non-mainstream body modifications, divided the motivations behind 'severe' body art and manipulation into a number of distinct categories. The categories, listed as motivations and rationales, include sexual enhancement, pain, affiliation, aesthetics, trust or loyalty, religion or mysticism and shock value. His paper goes into great depth as to how each category influences people to get involved in such forms of body art. According to Myers an individual may indulge in body art for any combinations of these reasons, particularly, however, he emphasises the similarities between contemporary body modifications and traditional non-Western rites of passage (Myers 1992).
Thomas, in his work on Oceanic art, noted the important role tattooing played in Oceanic societies. Here tattooing was regarded as ".an important reinforcement of the body, a stage as vital as other moments in the life cycle, such as birth and death (Thomas 1995).
Gell goes further remarking that tattoos and 'mutilations' are used as signs to show involvement in the life cycle, they serve to show a body is lived in. He also points out that by using such permanent methods of self beautification the body itself can become regarded as a possession which is at once uniquely desirable and vulnerable (Gell 1993).
Sanders emphasises the ways in which body alterations are connected to status, social connections or concepts of beauty which span from generation to generation. She also recognises the dichotomy between the way a stigmatising condition, which all forms of body alteration can produce, causes affiliation juxtaposed with the effect to which extreme or extensive body modifications are often put, that is to try to disaffiliate oneself from society (Sanders 1988).
Self Presentation and Identification
Piercing is a profoundly personal experience. It changes not only the way in which others perceive a person but also the way that person perceives himself or herself. This change in both ones own self identification and other peoples perception of a person is, for many, an integral part of the decision to become pierced.
Ones appearance has been linked, often through dress, to an affiliation with a particular cultural, or sub- cultural group (Polhemus 1996). The aim, however, is often the renunciation of the accepted norm rather than affiliation with rebellious sub-cultural sections of society. It is particularly difficult to express ones rejection of, or objection to, a culture if the culture in question already has a labelled stereotype to which any aspiring rebel conforms. This system of categorisation and labelling everyone and everything is a defence mechanism to resist cultural change, which is often perceived as damaging.
The wish, in many, to stand apart from contemporary Western society is well documented (Clarke 1994, Myers 1992, Polhemus 1996, Turner 1984). Polhemus raises an interesting issue in connection with bodily 'mutilation' and martyrdom. What, he argues, would have society cared had the martyrs, and most particularly Jesus, not possessed human bodies. By doing to the body that which no-one in a given society would do, one stands against the society.
Many of the people I spoke to stated that they felt that who they are is decided, not by themselves, but by the way they choose to present themselves to society. Society dictates what is correct, it also dictates what is needed and this results in a move towards social conformity. Piercing, then, is seen by many practitioners as an attack on what is seen as forced social conformity (Turner 1984).
The way one presents oneself to society and indeed regards oneself is, however, rarely limited to aspects of social conformity. In the past such issues were of far greater concern, but as can be seen documented in the works of Scott and Morgan (Scott and Morgan 1993) there has been a general shift in attitudes resulting in increased study, and acceptance, of the human body. As such if one is not happy with the image one holds of oneself, or that which one believes' others hold, there is often far less personal stigma attached to altering one's appearance than there was in the past. It seems that our views on the body, and its importance, are changing and coming more in line with those of people from less industrialised societies. A traditional Western viewpoint, according to Gell, holds that the skin is on the outside, and the outside is less true an interpretation of what is on the inside. The skin, therefore, cannot reflect the true nature of a person. This is an interesting point of view because the impression given by Western media and fashion industries is that the way one looks is of the utmost importance. This is, I feel, a discrepancy between the west's theoretical point of view and that which it practices. Whilst it is indeed true that ones appearance will often dictate peoples initial impressions of an individual or group it may be argued that what is on the inside is reflected on the outside, but to a lesser degree. As such if body modifications were still viewed as Lombroso viewed them they would merely indicate far greater internal turmoil.
A non-Western view of the body as proposed by Turner and Strathern (Gell 1993)argues that indeed the skin is on the outside, but it is the outside which is public and interacts with others. People are the sum total of their relations with others and as such any person can be effectively regarded as their skin alone. This is a point of view which many in the West partially adopt and which is, in many cases, true. The problems associated with this point of view occur when one section of society is unable to interpret the skin of a different section of society. The way one presents oneself differs depending on which part of a society one is interacting with at any given time.
Identity is important to all members of a given culture. However, for Modern Primitives it is their own sense of identity, rather than how mainstream society views them which is of paramount importance. As such, for the Modern Primitive, the way one perceives oneself, and the way in which one is perceived by the people who one wishes to affiliate with, becomes an issue which must be clearly defined. This is particularly difficult because as members of a group starts to define themselves by culture as opposed to social structure the group boundaries become potentially highly fluid. This is due to the enormous amount of personal variation each member of the group possesses as to whom and what they think they are. In such cases cultural groups can often be seen to define themselves by way of typifying objects. Piercing is highly visual and even when the piercings are not facial they will often be displayed when circumstances permit. Such an obviously distinct marker is regarded as an easy way to show ones cultural identity and opposition towards what can be regarded as the culturally eroding effect of capitalism. Similarly the link between piercing and the modern primitive or neo- tribalist movement exemplifies a wish to dissociate with Western capitalism and associate with the tribal people whose cultures are being destroyed by the West.
All extensively thought out body modifications will have deep underlying motivations which profoundly affect the way in which a person perceives not only their physical body, but also fundamentally who they are. Within a social group which accepts piercing, and this does not mean a group which practices piercing, the motivations and often the meanings of the piercings will be understood and accepted, this in turn reinforces ones own views as to what the piercings signify which in turn acts to confirm others opinions. Because of this self perpetuating cycle there are numerous similarities between the effect piercing has on ones self identification and the ways in which people in related sub-cultural groups regard each other. Most piercees will be aware of people outside the piercing sub-cultures misinterpretation of the signals they wish to convey, often in the form of intolerance, indeed some state that the seemingly in-built intolerance present in contemporary society was a major factor in wishing to be disassociated from it. In some cases this merely increases the motivation and in others it leads to secrecy or alternatively attempts to change peoples opinions.
Self identification is built up through numerous life experiences. As such piercing is used, by many, as a way of celebrating particular 'life crises'. The piercings, as with Sanders tattoos, become part of ones identity kit. Sanders states how tattoos are seen as symbolic of change. In particular she emphasises separation from individuals or groups who control the way one lives ones life such as parents, spouses or employers. She also notes that by gaining a tattoo an individual from any social background becomes able to affiliate with a much larger, diverse group, that of all tattooed people. It is very easy to draw similar parallels when looking at the effects piercing can have on an individual. Indeed the use of piercing as a symbol of change, or more exactly self imposed change, is the single most common reason I have come across for wishing to alter the body in such a fashion.
I have come across numerous explanations of how or why piercing has changed peoples lives, the most common include that after piercing, there is an enormous increase in self confidence. Even if the piercing is not normally visible the knowledge that it is there, and of what had been gone through to get it, made people feel more confident about themselves and therefore their lives.
Similarly, many people profess to a feeling of greater acceptance of their bodies. Today's society puts enormous pressures, especially on women, to conform to an accepted norm of what is beautiful. This occurs to such a degree that our society now suffers from previously uncommon eating disorders, such as bulimia and anorexia. Piercing often creates a feeling of being more 'at home' in ones own body and regarding it as beautiful, whatever public opinion may be.
Finally, I was given an explanation for piercing by a friend who works with homosexual men who were abused when they were young. He stated that piercing allowed such people to come to terms with their emotional pain by re- experiencing physical pain in an environment which they controlled and in such a way reclaim their bodies. Raelyn Gallina, a well known figure in the San Francisco body art scene, stated a similar observation whilst at a workshop attended by Myers. "Piercing is really a rite of passage. Maybe a woman is an incest victim and wants to reclaim her body" (Myers 1992).
Piercing as a Self Imposed Rite of Passage
As can be seen there are distinct similarities between some peoples' view of piercing and the rites of passage which can be witnessed in some pre-industrialised societies. Van Gennep described the steps which characterised such a rite, and piercing fulfils these requirements, as is discussed in the next section. However in many cases, particularly amongst those piercees for whom piercing is an important part of their lives, there is a deliberate attempt to ameliorate the ritual aspects of contemporary Western piercing. Such similarities have been commented upon in numerous works on body piercing or other contemporary permanent body art styles (Clarke1994, Myers1992, Polhemus 1996, Sanders 1988, Vale and Juno 1989). Myers makes particular reference to 'the individual and group dynamics of rites of passage in traditional non-Western cultures' compared with events observed at body modification workshops (Myers 1992). It is hard to deny this link in certain sub-cultural groups, the question therefore is why such members of society are driven to what in our society are seen as such extremes.
Fakir Musafar has argued that in some people there is an 'instinctive' drive towards undergoing a rite of passage to the extent that if society denies them one they will create one for themselves. In any rite of passage the most important function is arguably to affiliate, whether it be to an age sect, secret society or to society as a whole. Any rite of passage, however, will often involve a number of other factors, such as trust, pain and magico-religious connotations. A rite of passage marks the transition from one life crisis to the next, birth to maturity to marriage to eldership to death. In all such cases if a rite of passage is to be self imposed there must be trust not only between the people involved in carrying out the rite but also between the individual undergoing the rite and the group to which he or she will become affiliated. The pain and magico- religious aspects will be looked into in more detail later, it is the drive to affiliation and relationship built on trust which is the focus of this section.
Capitalist ideals have insinuated their way into almost all cultures and this 'erodes the socio-cultural distinction' (McClancy 1997). Whilst this quote was related to the use of art as a way to show cultural identity it applies equally well to body piercing. Piercing is indeed an art form but while in most cultures art products can be used to express cultural identity the body arts produce living embodiments of sub-cultural identity. The Western ideal, which many people living under it view it to be the epitome of social conformity and constraint, is by no means new. The writings of Freud explore the dichotomy between biological human drives and rules imposed by social life. The cost of behaving as humans is, inevitably, frustration and repression (Keesing1971). In the West, however, the outlets for such tension have been cauterised. Pain and danger are to be avoided at all costs and human life is to be preserved above all else. This has given rise to new ways to escape the pressures of social life, adrenaline sports and thrill seekers, recreational drugs, the rise in the practise of sadomasochistic practices and amongst these the wish to test oneself against societies fears of pain and bloodletting. Increases in such practices can be witnessed in the availability of related literature, retail outlets for such pursuits and even in journalists labelling of today's youth as the chemical generation.
Fakir Musafar states that the modern world seems intent on conformity or, more exactly, the eradication of difference. He further states his personal belief, to which many I have talked to ascribe without ever having heard of him, as being that such homogenisation is an oppressive force which runs counter to life and as such must be resisted at all costs. Within this discussion he also raises the interesting, though probably ultimately trivial point, that evil, as he sees such conformity to be, is simply live spelt backwards. This point may seem irrelevant to most but it is the kind of thing which people who regard themselves as part of the modern primitive movement are likely to pick up on and assign importance to.
The act of using piercing as a rite of passage is one practised by the currently small, but growing, group of people who find themselves in some way at odds with contemporary Western society. The fact that we, in the West, only experience physical pain through accidents, excepting pregnancy, makes the possibility to deliberately suffer pain an obstacle, one which many feel if surmounted will change them for the better. Indeed the act of undergoing a potentially painful and invasive experience cannot help but change one's perspective on life to some extent. This can in some ways be equated to the feeling people who go through operations say they experience, their view on life changes due to their being forced to face their own mortality. Whilst piercing can hardly be said to be dangerous the feelings evoked can be similar due to its voluntary nature. This feeling is diminished as the practise becomes more widespread. It is this change, the step from the known safe environment into which we are born, and since many 'ritual piercees' are from relatively well off backgrounds they are indeed born in relative safety and comfort, to the unknown, unexperienced realm of intense sensation which attracts and draws initiates. By entering into such practices a number of ends are hoped for. Rites of passage symbolically mark an event as important. Piercing is used to permanently mark the body, the piercing and often its placement and the jewellery used will become highly symbolic of the event for which they were done. Piercings also act as an outwards sign, to those who can interpret them, of the passage of one's life. Coupled with the sense of achievement which is marked by any rite of passage the other main reason people ascribe to their need to become pierced is an active, even if secretive, wish to remove themselves from the oppression created by modern social values. In this sense the rite of passage becomes just that, a way of moving from one life style to another. However, in order to mark the occasion, to make the transition permanent and express its importance the use of a rite of passage allows total dissociation, mentally if not physically, from the old life style. Rites of passage are typified by the symbolic death and subsequent rebirth of an individual into a different way of life.
In this way the modern primitive expresses deep felt convictions about society and reveals to others important aspects of who they are and what they believe in a permanent and symbolically manner.
Under such circumstances there are numerous examples of symbolism and meaning behind peoples piercings. It is not always possible, however, to express clearly the motivations and effects of these body modifications if related second hand. As such I will make use of my own experiences as examples and while it should be noted that such experiences are unique they are mirrored in many other examples.
The Ritual Piercing
Piercing in a contemporary setting can be equated to a rite of passage in any given society. Van Gennep established the phases of a ritual process which marked it as a rite of passage. The phases are; a pre-liminal phase where the initiate is seen to ritually die so as to leave their old life, a liminal phase equated to limbo where the initiate is neither a part of the social group they came from nor a part of the group to which they are being initiated. The final phase is a post-liminal one where the individual celebrates their membership of the new social group and all that it entails.
A prospective piercee will, in most cases, go through similar steps. Before being pierced they will try to find out something about the process, through watching television or reading on the subject or, more often, asking someone who is pierced about the process. I am now in the situation where I literally cannot go to a night club without being asked by at least one person about my piercings.
Such background research is expected, especially concerning something seen as potentially dangerous and painful. In cultures which have rites of passage the young are brought up knowing much about the rituals or at least accepting them as part of life. As such, such investigations are part of the initial introduction into the piercing subculture required before someone will put themselves through the actual process of obtaining a piercing.
Once the decision to be pierced has been made the pre-liminal phase of the piercing rite of passage can be observed. Most professional piercers only pierce by appointment. The prospective piercee, therefore enters the studio, talks to the piercer and makes the appointment. From personal experience and numerous conversations with others I am aware that for most this is a time of agitation and excitement. I regard this whole period of time, from a day to over a week, as the pre-liminal phase of the rite. The prospective piercee is aware that they will soon be a part of a new social group and as such cannot fully include themselves in their old social group, also if people know someone is going to be pierced they may, and often do, treat the person differently depending on their view of piercing.
The liminal phase is entered once the piercing studio is entered for ones appointment. At this point the piercee is removed from external society and enters the artificially sterile studio. Everything initially is alien and, due to our medical system, impersonal. It is during this time that the greatest amount of visual ritual occurs, the language used is specific to piercing and, as such, often unknown; also the whole process of the laying out of materials, the preparation and marketing of the piercing all seem, and indeed often specifically are, ritualised. During this time the piercer will talk and try to reduce the fear of the initiate until the actual piercing occurs. The piercing of the flesh marks the transition from the liminal to post-liminal phase. The uncontrolled rush of endorphins and realisation that the process is complete heralds a change in the piercee. Relief that it is over and humour at the fear that had been felt, even pride that one is now pierced.
The leaving of the piercing studio heralds three distinct changes in the life of the piercee. The first, and most obvious, is that the caring for of a wound which is kept open artificially becomes important. This in itself may seem of little consequence, and indeed for most is little more than a necessary chore. However, I have found that for some the need to cope with the bodies reaction creates a greater empathy with their own body. This in turn can be very important for some people in learning acceptance of their own bodies. I must stress that though this is rarely a concern or driving factor for most people, in those people who have mentioned that piercing has had an effect on their reaction to their own bodies it has always been described as profoundly important to them.
The second post-liminal effect of being pierced is that it has on a persons immediate acquaintances. Reaction will generally be divided into those who accept the new acquisition and view it positively or even with an amount of jealousy or awe. Alternatively there will be a reaction from simple prejudice or a more basic lack of understanding. Either reaction cannot but help but affect and change, in some way at least, the life of the subject.
Thirdly the reaction of others to the new piercing will affect the subject, this is far more obvious in highly visual piercings such as facial ones. The reactions will be broadly the same as those of close friends. Some unpierced people will react negatively which, depending on the situation, may cause anguish to a greater or lesser degree. Heavily pierced people may react in either a positive or negative way. The piercing may provide a common area of interest which is able to be built on or ,alternatively, a negative reaction for numerous reasons including contempt or arrogance on the part of the other party.
These three changes to one's life cannot help but have some effect on anyone who is pierced and often, when extreme reactions are experienced, seem to have prompted people to move to one of two extremes, that is removing all piercings or becoming heavily pierced. Interestingly I have encountered a few people whose obsession with piercing has been fuelled by other piercees negative reactions. In all cases this reaction occurred when someone with very few piercings was accused of only being interested in piercing for fashion reasons, and reacted by getting more in order to prove their dedication.
The history of contemporary body piercing
Before any attempt can be made to discuss the origins of contemporary body piercing it is important to understand the global origins of piercing. It is from these roots that this art form has evolved and they reflect the attitudes many people hold towards the practise. Body piercing is ancient and, I feel rightly, according to Ted Polhemus "arguably the most widespread of all the permanent (semi-permanent) body arts" (Polhemus 1996). The names and origins of all the types of piercings now practised is a subject covered in more depth in other publications such as Eye of the Needle or Modern Primitives. However, it is worth noting some facts to provide background.
Piercing is known to have been practised by the Romans, who used nipple piercings as a sign of bravery and functionally as a means of attaching cloaks.
There seem to be two main schools of thought as to how modern body piercing arose, one based in America and the other in the United Kingdom. Most books attribute modern body piercing to three men, Doug Malloy and Jim Ward, in the US, and Mr Sebastian, in the UK. Their contributions to body piercing are documented in both Eye of the Needle and Modern Primitives, and document piercing's development and expansion from the gay and sadomasochistic communities in the US. In this explanation the rise of piercing in the UK is attributed to Mr Sebastian and his connections with Malloy and Ward. The other account of body piercing's development, within the UK, was given to me by Dave of Cold Steel, a professional piercer who has been involved with piercing since he was fourteen. According to Dave body piercing had always existed to some degree amongst members of certain sub-cultural groups. The major factor in launching body piercing from being rare in such groups, and as a consequence becoming more common throughout the UK, was the opening of the first shop which produced jewellery specifically for body piercing. This shop, called Wildcat, is based in Brighton and is one of, if not the, largest supplier of medical grade stainless steel body jewellery in the UK. It was the availability of purpose made, hypoallergenic jewellery available cheaply and easily that contributed to piercings rise in popularity.
Piercing in the UK was, as noted above, originally limited to a variety of fringe groups, most notably the punks, 'travellers' and members of the sadomasochistic scene. These groups are by no means the only ones which practised body piercing, nor are the names assigned to them meant to be especially descriptive, they are meant purely to give a general indication of the fringe position which body piercing held.
The sudden and marked change in the nature of body piercing occurred about three to four years ago. This change was brought about by a number of factors but most notably the uptake of navel and eyebrow piercings by the fashion world, the piercing of the eyebrow of a member of the 'boy band' Take That and the increased amount of exposure given to the fetish scene on British television. These factors had three main effects. Firstly they made piercing fashionable to the general public, secondly they opened up the realm of extreme, as opposed to fashion, body piercing to people who had never realised it was possible and thirdly, people who had been piercing their own bodies for years were made aware of the extent to which the practise was widespread.
http://www.bmezine.com/pierce/articles/p&mp/history.html
