Thoughts on words as tattoos

Hey,

I have a tattoo idea that keeps coming into mind and just want some
general thoughts. I'm looking to have some words tattooed and just want
to know peoples general thoughts. Plus I was wondering your thoughts on
how to best make it come out because I find that words can be very
finicky when it comes to coming out well.

Thanks,

TC

On Jun 3, 9:42 pm, TC <travelclar...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hey,
>
> I have a tattoo idea that keeps coming into mind and just want some
> general thoughts. I'm looking to have some words tattooed and just want
> to know peoples general thoughts.

The words should want to be tattooed . . .

Kavin

TC wrote:

> <snip> I'm looking to have some words
> tattooed and just want to know peoples
> general thoughts. Plus I was <snip>

Have you visited any of the big box booksellers recently?

Body Type: Intimate Messages Etched in Flesh
by Ina Saltz, Wendy Koontz (Illustrator)

http://search.barnesandnoble.com/boo...10970502&itm=3
aka http://tinyurl.com/2bhbts

--
Curt

I own that book.Its good.


"Curt" <curtjames@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1180987266.471925.93910@q66g2000hsg.googlegro ups.com...
> TC wrote:
>
>> <snip> I'm looking to have some words
>> tattooed and just want to know peoples
>> general thoughts. Plus I was <snip>
>
> Have you visited any of the big box booksellers recently?
>
> Body Type: Intimate Messages Etched in Flesh
> by Ina Saltz, Wendy Koontz (Illustrator)
>
> http://search.barnesandnoble.com/boo...10970502&itm=3
> aka http://tinyurl.com/2bhbts
>
> --
> Curt
>

Norm³ wrote:

re Body Type: Intimate Messages Etched in Flesh
by Ina Saltz, Wendy Koontz (Illustrator)

http://tinyurl.com/2bhbts

> I own that book.

Cool.

> Its good.

Agreed.

I've browsed it a number of times, but haven't bought it yet. There's
a new one (for me anyway) that I saw tonight at Barnes & Noble. It's
titled Tattoo Art & Design.

Paperback
ISBN: 0789315289
Pub. Date: April 2007

>From the Publisher
Tattoos are sexy, fashionable, and creative. This compendium features
over 480 designs by the world's leading young graphic artists for
tattoos that are new, different, and edgy. Little has appeared that
explores fresh designs for tattoos by contemporary graphic artists and
designers. Tattoo Art & Design corrects this with designs by over 60
of today's up-and-coming designers. They draw inspiration from diverse
cultures and media, and bridge the highly graphic world of skin art
and the exploding creativity in graphic design communities worldwide.
Among the featured designers are Kinpro, Klaus Haapaniemi, Marcus
Oakley, Rex Koo, Rinzen, Musa Collective, and Stapelberg & Fritz. The
designs featured here shatter the conventional notion of the tattoo.
Gone are hearts inscribed with names, anchors, Celtic harps, or tribal
bands. Instead, the tattoo designs are based on Japanese animé
characters, abstract art, hip-hop culture, and Day-Glo pop art in a
palette of vibrant colors and elaborate shapes. These fun and playful
designs will inspire a new breed of tattoo artist as well as the next
generation of graphic designers. /copy and paste from
http://search.barnesandnoble.com/boo...89315281&itm=6

Some really fun designs and creative applications.

--
Curt

On Jun 4, 9:51 pm, Curt <curtja...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Norm³ wrote:

NM> > Its good.
>
PIG> Agreed.

What, don't want to piss him off? Not even a little helpful "By the
way, you probably meant to use 'It's' and not 'Its'?"

So with the rest of us, it's just whining on your part.

By the way, if the pig dies, who would my partner be?

Why don't we find out?

Kavin

Kavin Taylor wrote:
[...]
> > <snip> wrote:
>
> <snip>> > Its good.
>
> PIG> Agreed.
>
> What, don't want to piss him off?
> Not even a little helpful "By the
> way, you probably meant to use
> 'It's' and not 'Its'?"

You're critical and so I'm critical. See the connection? Don't like
your error being pointed out? Make fewer errors, 'kay?

> So with the rest of

Here it comes...

> us,

The comforting cocoon of usweour. Never speak for yourself?

> it's just whining on your part.

Whatever.

> By the way, if the pig dies,

Careful, Kavvy. I believe there's been something of a reversal of
late.

> who would my partner be?

Well, you wouldn't be dancing at all then. ;o)

> Why don't we find out?

No, no, no. Wishing you a long and happy, Kav.

For you.

I mean I might've had a second of doubt or the idea that I was making
you unhappy, but, no. You make you unhappy, right?

(Did I speel all that rihgt?)

--
Curt

On Jun 5, 6:26 am, Curt <curtja...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Kavin Taylor wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > > <snip> wrote:
>
> > <snip>> > Its good.
>
> > PIG> Agreed.
>
> > What, don't want to piss him off?
> > Not even a little helpful "By the
> > way, you probably meant to use
> > 'It's' and not 'Its'?"
>
> You're critical and so I'm critical. See the connection?

Classic. I hurt you because you hurt me is what YOU are saying.

Tell me now you aren't the classic case of abandonment and rejection.

Kavin

Kavin Taylor wrote:
> Curt wrote:
[...]

> > You're critical and so I'm critical.
> > See the connection?
>
> Classic. I hurt you because you
> hurt me is what YOU are saying.

Telling that you would interpret it that way, Kavin.

"You're critical and so I'm critical," is what I am saying. Nothing
you've said or done has hurt me.

And so you're perhaps no longer confused, Kavvy, I'm not trying to
hurt you by pointing out your typos, contradictions, and - what some
might call idiotic - behavior, but rather just shining a spotlight on
those examples of your own humanity. We all make mistakes. Some more
than others. Regardless and to repeat, you're critical and so I'm
critical. Can't handle a bit of criticism then don't reply to my
posts. Hth.

> Tell me now you aren't the classic case
> of abandonment and rejection.

Go get 'em, Freud. ;o)

--
Curt

On Jun 5, 3:42 pm, Curt <curtja...@gmail.com> wrote:

> "You're critical and so I'm critical," is what I am saying.

So it's not about being helpful?

Thank you, Curt. I'm glad you can admit it. Tit for tat (notice the
correct use of "tat")

What you are saying is that as long as no one says anything critical
of you, you won't say anything critical of them.

So your criticism is based solely on a need to "get even." Not on
facts. Just on the basis of you criticised me, so I must criticise
you.

Let's re-cap:

-- Curt argues anything simply for the argument

-- there is no bad tattoo according to Curt, because 'bad' is
subjective. He ignores that 'good' then is subjective as well. And
good cannot exist without bad.

-- Criticism should only be used if someone has criticised you.

Kavin

Kavin Taylor wrote:
> Curt wrote:
>
> > "You're critical and so I'm critical,"
> > is what I am saying.
>
> So it's not about being helpful?

Oh, yeeeeaaaaah, that too, of course. I mean, I suspect you're much
more careful when replying to me than when you're replying to other
RABbits. So, so far as helping you to pay attention? Sure.

> Thank you, Curt.

Don't mention it, Kav.

[...]

> there is no bad tattoo according
> to Curt, because 'bad' is subjective.
> He ignores that 'good' then is
> subjective as well. And good
> cannot exist without bad.

They're both subjective, yes? Both relative to your perspective.
There's no fixed point so far as opinion goes especially wrt art.
Tattoos are art, imo, so there's that.

> <snip> criticised <snip>

Okay, chap! ;o)

--
Curt

On Jun 5, 8:55 pm, Curt <curtja...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Kavin Taylor wrote:

C> I suspect you're much
C> more careful when replying to me than when you're replying to other
C> RABbits.

Now I can add delusional to your list of problems.

>
KT> > there is no bad tattoo according
KT> > to Curt, because 'bad' is subjective.
KT > > He ignores that 'good' then is
KT > > subjective as well. And good
KT > > cannot exist without bad.
>
C> They're both subjective, yes?

But that means they both exist. Your words. They are both, BOTH,
subjective.


Kavin

Kavin Taylor wrote:
> Curt wrote:
> > Kavin Taylor wrote:
>
> C> I suspect you're much
> C> more careful when replying
> C> to me than when you're
> C> replying to other RABbits.
>
> Now I can add delusional to
> your list of problems.

heh :o)

I wouldn't be surprised to learn that you actually have a little list
of problems written out somewhere.

> KT> > there is no bad tattoo according
> KT> > to Curt, because 'bad' is subjective.
> KT > > He ignores that 'good' then is
> KT > > subjective as well. And good
> KT > > cannot exist without bad.
>
> C> They're both subjective, yes?

I love your sometimethereandsometimesnot attribution device, Kavvy.
Anyway.

> But that means they both exist.

And?

I wrote:

"They're both subjective, yes?"

Yes? Yes. You included it in your reply. But I also wrote:

"Both relative to your perspective.
There's no fixed point so far as opinion goes especially wrt art.
Tattoos are art, imo, so there's that."

Perspective and opinion.

"There are no bad tattoos" is your semantics problem. Get over it. Or,
hey, not.

> Your words.

Yes.

My words and ones you seem to obsess over. Hey, what was that you said
about delusional?

> They are both, BOTH, subjective.

Google groups our previous exchanges.

You're crying about *semantics*. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder,
Kav. Find someone who complains about what they consider a bad tattoo
and I suspect there's another person who likes that very same tattoo.
So, to them, yeah, it's not a bad tattoo.

--
Curt

On Jun 6, 6:46 am, Curt <curtja...@gmail.com> wrote:

> "There are no bad tattoos" is your semantics problem.

No, it's your problem because it was your statement.

By the way, just how ARE you using 'semantics'?

Kavin

Kavin Taylor wrote:
> Curt wrote:
>
> > "There are no bad tattoos" is your semantics problem.
>
> No, it's your problem

Not my problem.

> because it was your statement.

A statement you have an issue with as you repeatedly choose to
contradict it. Hence your problem.

> By the way, just how ARE you using 'semantics'?

Well, let's take a look see, shall we, Kavvy?

Main Entry: se·man·tics
Pronunciation: si-'man-tiks
Function: noun plural but singular or plural in construction
1 : the study of meanings: a : the historical and psychological study
and the classification of changes in the signification of words or
forms viewed as factors in linguistic development b (1) : SEMIOTIC
(2) : a branch of semiotic dealing with the relations between signs
and what they refer to and including theories of denotation,
extension, naming, and truth
2 : GENERAL SEMANTICS
3 a : the meaning or relationship of meanings of a sign or set of
signs; especially : connotative meaning b : the language used (as in
advertising or political propaganda) to achieve a desired effect on an
audience especially through the use of words with novel or dual
meanings /copy and paste from http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?va=semantics

I'll go with 3 a.

"There are no bad tattoos" is the statement you're hung up on. I
Googled and found "Art is subjective. Imo, there are no bad tattoos.
There are, however, tattoos that you like or that you don't like for
personal reasons."

Apparently there are some statements that you like or that you don't
like for personal reasons as well. Best wishes to you, pal!

--
Curt