How the Biology and Anthropology Disciplines Write on the Impact of Tattoos

A tattoo can be an exquisite, physical expression marking a bearer’s experiences of emotional significance permanently. However, tattoos can also come with serious anatomical drawbacks from application. Many scholars have conducted studies on the ever-growing phenomenon of the very nature and impact of tattoos. Biology and Anthropology will be the disciplines decoded here in how both intricately communicate varying aspects of tattoos differently. Islam and the collective of researchers behind “Medical Complications of Tattoos: A Comprehensive Review,” designed their piece as an empirical approach on potential medical issues that could arise from tattoo application varying in severity for the sake of compiling a comprehensive addressal on the danger tattoos can pose for the uninitiated of all parties involved (the tattoo enthusiast, tattoo artist, and physicians in training). Conversely, Sarnecki’s “Trauma and Tattoos” focuses on more persuasive techniques to argue how tattoos can be instrumental in learning to recover from a traumatic event through its own magnitude of pain and indefinite essence. While the Biology paper conducts a deductive argumentative style, provides highly regarded academic sources, and appeals to a discourse community of both the educated and those uninformed to teach cautiousness in regards to receiving tattoos, the Anthropology piece argues more inductively, utilizes popular sources, and speaks for a philosophical discourse community as to advocate getting tattoos for remediating purposes.

Although the primary use of works like this are more directed towards physicians in training with formulaic writing, the compiled format of this huge Biology work along with the proposed narrative has resulted in a more approachable piece for newcomers as well. This Biology piece prioritizes the expansion of scientific knowledge in their endeavors and eventually extrapolates on a more all-encompassing point on utilizing said knowledge for the betterment of mankind, definitively establishing a proper conclusion from their findings. The findings are proposed in a simplified collective manner, communicating the crucial information amalgamated on problems that may occur from tattoo application and how to handle them accordingly to be less intellectually challenging for professional tattoo artists and the average tattoo enthusiast (Islam, et al., 2016). The writing is very straightforward in its organization in consideration of those the piece wants to additionally address. Each medical issue has their own dedicated section to delve into their unique specifics, making it effortless for viewers to pinpoint certain tattoo complications pertaining to their interest and, subsequently, more of a comprehensible read (Islam, et al. 2016). Moreover, jargon is used frequently throughout, but thorough explanations of what would otherwise be indiscernible are present and help those outside of the discipline’s world garner a general sense of the beneficial information they seek. Terminology such as “subepidermal layer,” “erythematous papules,” and every hard to pronounce, related disease mentioned throughout is met with ample explanation for the reader to truly understand the dangers tattoos may pose that was not immediately apparent (Islam, et al. 2016). The plethora of integral insight with accommodating clarifications engaging for public eyes properly pronounces the genuine argumentative efforts of biologists and the discipline to teach awareness.

Sarnecki presents her argument with quite eloquent language all throughout the piece, making her well-reasoned theory all the more appealing to induce her readers to concur. This is not to be mistaken with jargon, her choice words add to the immersive narrative she wants to illustrate for her audience, easing the average reader into becoming engrossed with the picture being painted for them right off the page. To describe receiving a tattoo as an “intimate, transcendental act” in light of an individual’s “personal, harrowing events previously transpired” allows the characters being examined to be fully realized when delving into their course of actions, invoking a sense of relatability for the audience (Sarnecki 2008). Elaborating on this series of accounts in such descriptive detail helps the audience efficiently digest the ideas in an efficient manner through visualizing the big picture illustrated by the colorful writing, making Sarnecki’s narrative all the more compelling. Comparing acquiring a tattoo to being like “vanquishing the hellish demon within” also helps embellish her message on the emotional gratification tattoos evoke to move the reader (Sarnecki 2008). One may not connect to the exact circumstances but explicitly describing the mindset of the individuals and acknowledging their conscious process helps the reader sympathize with the characters’ actions and, in turn, agree with Sarnecki and her assessment in the healing capabilities tattoos can provide for an individual.

The use of many reliable sources related to the topic at hand are expertly incorporated to help further support the validity of the Biology piece’s ambitions. Being only five sources shy from one hundred publications speaks volumes in regard to the sheer credibility this work exudes. Each source serves to contribute to the compilation of tattoo related tests and subsequent reactions recorded, reports being combined together as an organic whole and working well in tandem with one another to formulate a comprehensive conclusion on the specific matter (Islam, et al. 2016). The utilization of concrete findings from a multitude of tests helps to cover all the bases that the writers intend on divulging in their work. Imagery with explicit captions can also play a vital role in helping the reader better grasp the scenario being discussed, especially when depicting that which is not normally observed or even comprehended for some. From inflammation of a fresh tattoo to swelling infections of past applications, describing these visualizations on display from previous studies really enhances the serious nature of tattoo complications (Islam, et al. 2016). Evidence is the very foundation to which science is analyzed and fully understood, and this collective effort proficiently exercises compatible sources to assist in conceptualizing the painful truth of tattoos.

In an effort to effectively substantiate her argument, Sarnecki opts to showcase personal experiences, memoirs, and interviews as a means to highlight relevant cases regarding the psychological benefits behind tattoos. These accounts provide valuable insight in support of individuals turning to tattoos as a means of solace and written in such a way for the viewer to intrinsically perform a provocative thought experiment. For Sky's interview, Sarnecki plainly reports the prisoner’s assortment of tattoos across his body one by one accompanied by the affiliated memory held dear despite the negative connotation (Sarnecki 2008). Sarnecki breaks down these situations to a fundamental level, making it simple for the viewer to keep up with ease when trying to rationalize the more complex theory of these tattoos acting as self imposed scars to never forget the tragedy they represent. Of course, firsthand accounts do not necessarily equate to the reality for most cases of human behavior, which is why Sarnecki also includes the writings of other well-established anthropologists alongside her own on the same topic. Sarnecki not only introduces these figures formally but also speaks well of their accomplishments and how their fascinating findings are what inspired her to make her own piece on the topic, this wordplay cementing their expertise, and thus, the audience too views them as a reliable source (Sarnecki 2008). This incorporation of fellow anthropologists and their takes on the topic at hand assists in affirming the position on the correlation between trauma and tattoos in their collective compliance in the face of other anthropologists or even parts of the audience unaware of their presence in the field. Sarnecki’s reliance on primary accounts and professionals’ stances brilliantly stands to back up her bold claims on the therapeutic value of tattoos.

The Biology paper caters well towards its respective discourse community of scientific method ambassadors in ambitious search for collective agreeance on a particular matter, the case here being the possible detrimental effects derived from tattoo application. Writing in Biology follows a rather religious format following the scientific method, and this paper does not stray away too far from this design. Extensively delving into the quintessential concepts in a brief manner in the form of an abstract, divulging a step-by-step course of action for the methods section, and concluding on the direct findings is all really par for the course in the case of this paper (Islam, et al. 2016). Where this piece diverges from a typical scientific article is in the addition of topics usually absent from other research of the discipline, but these only add to the comprehensive nature and make the piece more definitive amongst other related material. Historical perspectives, cultural attitudes, and even the basics to tattoo artistry all help to essentially finalize this collection of all things tattoos (Islam, et al. 2016). By incorporating this extra background information, the piece feels all the more complete for physicians to study as well for those who carry the same dying interest on the topic of tattoos but may not understand all the fine details, creating a genuine connection between scientist and tattoo enthusiast in awareness of all the encompassing aspects of tattoos. All research is inevitably combined in a compendium of understanding, this piece being the culmination of the work tirelessly completed through scientific method and collective group think for the sake of society’s well-being.

The discourse community associated with the Anthropology discipline is one dedicated towards observing the development of human societies and investigating the best path toward success, and Sarnecki’s work perfectly acknowledges this through rationalizing the importance of tattoos for an individual’s sake. The inclusion of real-world instances and accounts in her writing is key to the analysis of the human psyche and what makes it tick, establishing a strong connection between a person and their personal possessions is on point with what Anthropologists continue to seek after. Sarnecki does not just generalize her evidence, she actively considers the possibility that all her efforts cannot “in good conscience account for definitive proof of concept” that tattoos can heal one’s mental scars (Sarnecki 2008). This is not too dissimilar to other Anthropology works, the contents of this presentation will need to undergo review and require further testing before any solid conclusion can be drawn; to acknowledge this only boosts credibility for what would otherwise feel like niche pickings to prove a potentially mute observation in its absence. Sarnecki’s writing is a significant contribution to the Anthropology discipline as it addresses her findings on tattoos acting as a psychotherapeutic method to relieve past trauma to be further explored by field.

Despite both touching on the same topic of tattoos, the Biology and Anthropology disciplines take drastically different approaches to tackling tattoos on a fundamental level in terms of how their arguments are conveyed, the choice of evidence presented in support of their argument, and the specifically chosen phraseology in accordance with their respective followings. While the Biology piece was methodical and official in its writing prose to deliberate critical information on the awareness of safe tattooing practices, the Anthropology work opted to be narrative and compelling when asserting the importance of expressing one’s trauma through tattoos. These unique interpretations and executions brought forth by these two disciplines are just as equally important to the academic whole as any other discipline, continuously provoking the collective with newfound perspectives and insight on a centralized idea.

Bibliography

Islam, P.S., Chang, C., Selmi, C. et al. “Medical Complications of Tattoos: A Comprehensive Review.” Clinic Rev Allerg Immunol 50, 273–286 (2016). DOI: 10.1007. https://doi-org.proxy.library.ucsb.edu:9443/10.1007

Sarnecki, Judith Holland. “Trauma and Tattoos.” Lawrence University, Anthropology Dept. American Anthropological Association. Jan 08, 2008. DOI: 10.1525 https://doi- org.proxy.library.ucsb.edu:9443/10.1525