I am of the belief that most tattoos are pretty good. Not excellent, not awful. Not outstanding, not terrible. They are middle of the road. Even though I love my ink, at least one of my tattoos falls into that category. Good, but not really memorable.
Some tattoos are memorable because they are truly great. They make are the “hell yeah!” tattoos that make you want to run out and get some new ink yourself. Dan Hazelton’s Spiderman piece comes to mind for the sheer artistic value. Other tattoos are memorable for just the opposite reason: they are so awful that you seriously question the sanity of anyone who would want it. The famous “Mr. Cool Ice“ is the obvious example of the big “WTF” award.
Sometimes, however, a tattoo provokes an entirely different emotion, a confusing emotion: a reaction of “is that cool? Or is that awful?” Can a tattoo be both cool and awful at the same time?
Inked Talk Readers: I present, for your consideration, the Pac Man head tattoo:
Is this awesome? Or is this horrible? I can’t decide.
I love Pac Man. The execution is great – Ms. Pac is appropriately pixelated, and even the cherries bear just the right amount of white-pixel shine to make them look like they came straight out of 1983.
But around the hairline? She shaved her head for this. Readers, I am at a loss. I love Pac Man, I love tattoos, the art is great, but the execution, or the placement…I don’t know. I’d love more information about this tattoo, too – I’d love to see how it looks healed and who the artist is so I can properly credit this.