There’s no denying that this Jack the Ripper tattoo by Tom Brudvik at Let’s Buzz at Bergen, Norway is great work, but I’ll again ask the question: if it’s “socially acceptable” to get tattoos of serial killers, which very clearly represent humanity gone wrong (not that I’m opposed to sociopathy… just saying that’s what it is), why are people opposed to things like tattoos of Hitler and other subjects that push the boundaries of what we find acceptable behavior? Is it a matter of scale? Is generalized bigotry worse than specific torture and killing of women? I wonder… not that torture porn isn’t pop culture these days.
Comments
94 responses to “Jack the Ripper Portrait”
It’s a great tattoo. Very well done.
It’s a great tattoo. Very well done.
They never caught him, so how do you know what he even looks like. He’s like Jesus and Santa Clause.
They never caught him, so how do you know what he even looks like. He’s like Jesus and Santa Clause.
I think this has to do with the persons ethics really. Just because you don’t believe its right. Doesn’t mean other people won’t. I’m not talking about the killing people part, but more the tattoo part. I know myself plan on getting a Vlad the Impaler tattoo in the near future. For me my fasionation isn’t with the killing, its more what goes on in the persons mind..
I think this has to do with the persons ethics really. Just because you don’t believe its right. Doesn’t mean other people won’t. I’m not talking about the killing people part, but more the tattoo part. I know myself plan on getting a Vlad the Impaler tattoo in the near future. For me my fasionation isn’t with the killing, its more what goes on in the persons mind..
Timescale is an important factor. Having people alive who vividly remember the holocaust tends to influence opinion.
Whereas nobody is alive who remembers (or indeed expects) the Spanish Inquisition so Torquemada remains ok.
Timescale is an important factor. Having people alive who vividly remember the holocaust tends to influence opinion.
Whereas nobody is alive who remembers (or indeed expects) the Spanish Inquisition so Torquemada remains ok.
Hitler had others do his killing for him. Maybe people who do the killing themselves are cool? Of course, Manson had others doing his dirty work for him….and he’s on more t-shirts than El Che.
Hmmm.
Hitler was an authority figure. Maybe that’s why everyone hates him, whereas serial killers usually work on their own or with a partner and are completely anti-establishment. Which, in turn, makes them cool?
Hitler had others do his killing for him. Maybe people who do the killing themselves are cool? Of course, Manson had others doing his dirty work for him….and he’s on more t-shirts than El Che.
Hmmm.
Hitler was an authority figure. Maybe that’s why everyone hates him, whereas serial killers usually work on their own or with a partner and are completely anti-establishment. Which, in turn, makes them cool?
Giles – would a Karla Holmoka/Paul Bernado tattoo be acceptable?
Giles – would a Karla Holmoka/Paul Bernado tattoo be acceptable?
The tattoo as a portrait is amazing. The subject matter is of individual taste. A person would never venture out of the house if he/she were concerned about not offending anyone.
The tattoo as a portrait is amazing. The subject matter is of individual taste. A person would never venture out of the house if he/she were concerned about not offending anyone.
To me ? Perfectly so. I had to Wiki them up. To the family of those they murdered probably not so.
Out of interest why would you want a serial killer tattoo ?
Do you remember the scene in Natural Born Killers where the kids are hailing Mickey & Malory but not quite sure why and end up looking everso sheepish?
I used to find people like Manson, Crowley, Hindley, Dahmer, etc fascinating from a psychological perspective but glorifying their image is an odd sentiment.
To me ? Perfectly so. I had to Wiki them up. To the family of those they murdered probably not so.
Out of interest why would you want a serial killer tattoo ?
Do you remember the scene in Natural Born Killers where the kids are hailing Mickey & Malory but not quite sure why and end up looking everso sheepish?
I used to find people like Manson, Crowley, Hindley, Dahmer, etc fascinating from a psychological perspective but glorifying their image is an odd sentiment.
Ok, The first thing that comes to mind when everyone is questioning how acceptable this behavior is: Yesterday a picture of a man with his testicle bulging out of his sack was posted….Often we see pictures on here or what most (I’m not saying me, we are talking about whats socially acceptable) people would consdier mutilation. How is this worse? And dont come at me with the whole “Well tattoos are visible to everyone.” People submit photos to Shannon of there gentials all mashed up so that they can be posted for the world to see also. I guess I just dont get how this is so offensive and horrid. I’ve always personally wanted a sleeve of all serial killers (Which will be started in fall) and I collect american based serial killer memoriblia.. I own several Gacy painting and many Mullins works of art as well. I own alot of signatures, art, ect in my home office and couldnt be happier about it. Im a full time mod artist, a nursing and psych major. I’m a normal person… I dont see anything wrong with being fasinated with the under belly of our world.
Ok, The first thing that comes to mind when everyone is questioning how acceptable this behavior is: Yesterday a picture of a man with his testicle bulging out of his sack was posted….Often we see pictures on here or what most (I’m not saying me, we are talking about whats socially acceptable) people would consdier mutilation. How is this worse? And dont come at me with the whole “Well tattoos are visible to everyone.” People submit photos to Shannon of there gentials all mashed up so that they can be posted for the world to see also. I guess I just dont get how this is so offensive and horrid. I’ve always personally wanted a sleeve of all serial killers (Which will be started in fall) and I collect american based serial killer memoriblia.. I own several Gacy painting and many Mullins works of art as well. I own alot of signatures, art, ect in my home office and couldnt be happier about it. Im a full time mod artist, a nursing and psych major. I’m a normal person… I dont see anything wrong with being fasinated with the under belly of our world.
This drawing was from Roberto Hernandez for the 2nd London Tattoo convention
This drawing was from Roberto Hernandez for the 2nd London Tattoo convention
I’m really fascinated with serial killers’ minds and how they work, but I agree with Giles on this one.
I’m really fascinated with serial killers’ minds and how they work, but I agree with Giles on this one.
first look I thought is that Bam Margera…
first look I thought is that Bam Margera…
I guess the difference between “standard” serial killer tattoos and hitler (or everything else of 3rd reich nazi stuff) is the fact that people like jack the ripper didn’t plant the seed for a ideology of pure hatred that still takes lifes and injures people today.
I guess the difference between “standard” serial killer tattoos and hitler (or everything else of 3rd reich nazi stuff) is the fact that people like jack the ripper didn’t plant the seed for a ideology of pure hatred that still takes lifes and injures people today.
Points all taken, and I understand that Jack the Ripper in particular is a source of fascination for many people because of the mystery surrounding him (or them, as some have suggested), but one still has to wonder about a person who chooses to celebrate a figure known for butchering women.
In other words, all those scary clown (and similar) tattoos are still violent images, but they’re not connected with real acts of violence against real people, as are Hitler, Jack the Ripper, and others.
Points all taken, and I understand that Jack the Ripper in particular is a source of fascination for many people because of the mystery surrounding him (or them, as some have suggested), but one still has to wonder about a person who chooses to celebrate a figure known for butchering women.
In other words, all those scary clown (and similar) tattoos are still violent images, but they’re not connected with real acts of violence against real people, as are Hitler, Jack the Ripper, and others.
I say live and let live, each artist makes their own decisions on what they will ink just like the client will decide what they want to get inked. Theres an artist for every taste nowadays. We all know the saying ” one mans meat is another mans poison ” I agree timescale does come into it alot but with time everything is subject to change, maybe in 50 years time Hitler won’t be such a taboo. Having these tattoos doesn’t necessarily mean the client is glorifying these people though, there could be a number of reasons for the designs. We all have our own fascinations of various subjects and we probably wouldn’t all agree on each others tastes but thats what makes life so interesting and precious.
I say live and let live, each artist makes their own decisions on what they will ink just like the client will decide what they want to get inked. Theres an artist for every taste nowadays. We all know the saying ” one mans meat is another mans poison ” I agree timescale does come into it alot but with time everything is subject to change, maybe in 50 years time Hitler won’t be such a taboo. Having these tattoos doesn’t necessarily mean the client is glorifying these people though, there could be a number of reasons for the designs. We all have our own fascinations of various subjects and we probably wouldn’t all agree on each others tastes but thats what makes life so interesting and precious.
Perhaps I am playing the devils advocate here, But I ask is the person that willing filets there balls any less ‘sick’ than a person who tattoos a serial killer on themselves? I think most people would assume someone willingly mutilating themselves (much less there genitals) would need help (a doctor, a psychologist, ect). I personally certainly don’t glorify what gacy, the ripper, mullins have done by collect their art or memorabilla. Not talking about, or looking at what history presents us with doesnt change what happen or prevent what is going to happen.
Perhaps I am playing the devils advocate here, But I ask is the person that willing filets there balls any less ‘sick’ than a person who tattoos a serial killer on themselves? I think most people would assume someone willingly mutilating themselves (much less there genitals) would need help (a doctor, a psychologist, ect). I personally certainly don’t glorify what gacy, the ripper, mullins have done by collect their art or memorabilla. Not talking about, or looking at what history presents us with doesnt change what happen or prevent what is going to happen.
that is rather cool
that is rather cool
Even though Jack the ripper probably isn’t responsible for instigating violence today, one could argue that the same ‘ideology’ he adhered to still lives on in different forms through different killers in modern times. The ‘serial killer’ is not a legendary figure that ceased to be after the time of Jack the ripper. Obviously, the impact that Hitler had was far more terrible and pervasive than the acts of one serial killer, and Hitler is more easily recognizable than most serial killers.
But I think Shannon brought up an excellent point, as did exploding boy, since the same sort of violence has continued:
“but one still has to wonder about a person who chooses to celebrate a figure known for butchering women.”
I wonder that myself, as much as I wondered why my ex had Womans Hater’s Club tattooed on his arm. Everyone should have the right to do what they please with their bodies, and denying them this right is not going to change the worldview that moved them to modify themselves in the first place. He could have treated me worse, but he certainly didn’t treat me very well either. I never minded the tattoo, but after how he treated me I think I’ll be avoiding anyone else with the same tattoo from now on.
-That being said- I don’t disapprove of any of the tattoos mentioned above; no one is going to force me to get one or associate with the people that have them.
-Also, subject matter aside, its an intersting tattoo, and I like the details on his knuckles.
Even though Jack the ripper probably isn’t responsible for instigating violence today, one could argue that the same ‘ideology’ he adhered to still lives on in different forms through different killers in modern times. The ‘serial killer’ is not a legendary figure that ceased to be after the time of Jack the ripper. Obviously, the impact that Hitler had was far more terrible and pervasive than the acts of one serial killer, and Hitler is more easily recognizable than most serial killers.
But I think Shannon brought up an excellent point, as did exploding boy, since the same sort of violence has continued:
“but one still has to wonder about a person who chooses to celebrate a figure known for butchering women.”
I wonder that myself, as much as I wondered why my ex had Womans Hater’s Club tattooed on his arm. Everyone should have the right to do what they please with their bodies, and denying them this right is not going to change the worldview that moved them to modify themselves in the first place. He could have treated me worse, but he certainly didn’t treat me very well either. I never minded the tattoo, but after how he treated me I think I’ll be avoiding anyone else with the same tattoo from now on.
-That being said- I don’t disapprove of any of the tattoos mentioned above; no one is going to force me to get one or associate with the people that have them.
-Also, subject matter aside, its an intersting tattoo, and I like the details on his knuckles.
Maybe you can’t really apply this argument to Jack the Ripper so much, with there being no definate conviction it just seems to be more illustrations of him than an actual portrait which sometimes seems less.. immoral. If you get my point?
Moral debates aside, it is an amazing tattoo. Really, really impressive. Maybe it’s meant as a reference to the Smiths song rather than the serial killer..? 😉 Just a guess?
x
Maybe you can’t really apply this argument to Jack the Ripper so much, with there being no definate conviction it just seems to be more illustrations of him than an actual portrait which sometimes seems less.. immoral. If you get my point?
Moral debates aside, it is an amazing tattoo. Really, really impressive. Maybe it’s meant as a reference to the Smiths song rather than the serial killer..? 😉 Just a guess?
x
Sarah has a good point. I agree with that statement. People like Hitler, and Osama bin Laden represent more then just heinous acts against humanity. They created and popularized an idealogy of hatred and violence. Although Jack the Ripper did murder women, he didn’t rally and manipulate people to follow and believe his cause.
To me, it also seems like Jack the Ripper is a cartoon character. And it even looks as though the tattoo depicts him in a somewhat comic book style.
Now, if this were to be, as you mentioned, a detailed portrait of Hitler, or even someone like Ted Kaczynski, the message is totally different.
Sarah has a good point. I agree with that statement. People like Hitler, and Osama bin Laden represent more then just heinous acts against humanity. They created and popularized an idealogy of hatred and violence. Although Jack the Ripper did murder women, he didn’t rally and manipulate people to follow and believe his cause.
To me, it also seems like Jack the Ripper is a cartoon character. And it even looks as though the tattoo depicts him in a somewhat comic book style.
Now, if this were to be, as you mentioned, a detailed portrait of Hitler, or even someone like Ted Kaczynski, the message is totally different.
I know someone with a Barney tattoo. I think that’s a lot more evil then having Hitler on your belly…
I know someone with a Barney tattoo. I think that’s a lot more evil then having Hitler on your belly…
Is having a serial killer portrait tattoo really socially acceptable?
Might have something to do with recognition. I’d say most people don’t know what the well-known serial killers even looks like. I mean, that doesn’t even look like William Gull! ;)…
Is having a serial killer portrait tattoo really socially acceptable?
Might have something to do with recognition. I’d say most people don’t know what the well-known serial killers even looks like. I mean, that doesn’t even look like William Gull! ;)…
Honestly, I don’t see a difference in tattooing the portrait of a real life serial killer, and a horror movie character. Would it raise so much controversy if Shannon posted a pic of my sleeve that features Michael Myers, Jason Voorhees, Leatherface, etc? These character slaughter endless people in VERY violent ways on the big screen, for impressionable children to see. Is that socially acceptable? I’ve never had an ugly word said abouth those, so what makes Jack the Ripper any different?
Honestly, I don’t see a difference in tattooing the portrait of a real life serial killer, and a horror movie character. Would it raise so much controversy if Shannon posted a pic of my sleeve that features Michael Myers, Jason Voorhees, Leatherface, etc? These character slaughter endless people in VERY violent ways on the big screen, for impressionable children to see. Is that socially acceptable? I’ve never had an ugly word said abouth those, so what makes Jack the Ripper any different?
I think it’s the difference between supporting an individual vs. and ideal. A tattoo of Hitler can (and usually does) indicate a belief in a certain ideology, namely heinous and violent racism.
A tattoo of Jack the Ripper, otoh, could stand for any number of things up to and including the support of slaughtering women. But it could also be an artistic statement or any number of other things.
So a portrait of a serial killer at least contains the *option* of different readings, where a portrait of Hitler pretty much only means one thing.
I think it’s the difference between supporting an individual vs. and ideal. A tattoo of Hitler can (and usually does) indicate a belief in a certain ideology, namely heinous and violent racism.
A tattoo of Jack the Ripper, otoh, could stand for any number of things up to and including the support of slaughtering women. But it could also be an artistic statement or any number of other things.
So a portrait of a serial killer at least contains the *option* of different readings, where a portrait of Hitler pretty much only means one thing.
I don’t think either should be socially acceptable to be honest. Hitler killed millions that he never saw. Jack the Ripper knew each of his victims. Both ended lives and cause a great deal of suffering for those that new the victims. Both to me are disgusting and I wouldn’t want to associate with anyone who chose to wear their images. It’s all cool and hardcore right now. I wonder how this person would feel if someone he knew was killed.
I don’t think either should be socially acceptable to be honest. Hitler killed millions that he never saw. Jack the Ripper knew each of his victims. Both ended lives and cause a great deal of suffering for those that new the victims. Both to me are disgusting and I wouldn’t want to associate with anyone who chose to wear their images. It’s all cool and hardcore right now. I wonder how this person would feel if someone he knew was killed.