When I was much younger, still a teenager—when danger held an allure, and when I thought my outward appearance was the best defense against a vulnerable heart—I wanted a tattoo of an ornate dagger on my arm, up close to the shoulder. And yet, I knew better than to mistake myself for someone ready to make a permanent commitment; I'd have to grow into that mentality. The urge subsided, then returned years later. Older, I became more discriminating, and less defensive. I became a social pacifist. I was intensely relieved I had not inked the image of a violent blade on my body. But I still wanted a tattoo. I began to do what my adult self has nearly always done when confronting a decision: I started researching. I was living in Chicago at the time, and I remember my quest for finding the best (and cleanest) tattoo parlor, though I don't remember the results of the search. I never even got to the point of meeting any tattoo artists, though (the research was by reputation), because I had trouble selecting not only the "what" but the "where" of the matter. A dagger was out, naturally, but so was the upper arm. Something about the arm suddenly seemed too obvious to me. Back? Ankle? Hip? I had pretty much decided on an ankle, but then could not make up my mind what image seemed right. I kept imagining myself as an octogenarian, wondering what would seem interesting but not too far beyond dignity in later years. I remember looking at pattern books, considering something birdlike, remember some attempt to work the Latin words "rara avis" into the design (though I quickly abandoned that; I worried it would come off as pretentious). I fiddled around with the idea of a Greek key image. Nothing stuck. Then, a very good friend revealed the tattoo she'd gotten of wheat shafts on the small of her back. The spot was perfect, and I knew that if I ever got a tattoo (it was now "if" and not "when"), that would be where I'd get mine, too. It took nearly a decade for me to come to the right image, and the right moment, but when I knew, I knew. In 2002, I'd gotten married, gotten pregnant; in 2003, I was thirty-four years old and had a newborn to look after. It had all happened in a bit of a whirlwind—although I'd known the man who's now my husband for some years before we married—and frankly, I was feeling a bit lost. That is, my deepest self felt lost at times, subservient to the new roles of wife and mother—roles that, if I dared personify them in those early months, would oftentimes resemble hijackers who tossed burlap bags over my head and strapped me to a lullaby rocker from Pottery Barn. It was a comfortable rocker, but in it I was very aware of moving without going anywhere. I started thinking a lot about who I had been, who I was becoming, and how to make peace with the differences between these selves. And in the thought of peacemaking came the image: a graceful olive branch. No fruit clinging to it, just the branch with long slender leaves. Of course the olive also worked as a symbol of my Greek ancestry, and I loved it for that reason as well. It was, at last, decided. This is how, a few months into motherhood, I ended up with a babysitter in my apartment, a sketch of an olive branch in my hand, and a wad of twenty dollar bills stuffed in my pocket as I walked, sleep deprived, along West Twenty-Third Street in search of a tattoo artist called Dragonfly. She did a good job. The tat took a little under an hour, felt like persistent scratching, sometimes deep but not too painful, and then it was done: the one Mother's Day gift I gave to myself, a little belated but just right. I still love it, especially if I happen to glimpse it in a mirror, perhaps as I zip the back of a dress. It's a reminder of where I've been, where I come from, and it provides a visual sense of continuity with my pre-parenting persona. It also serves to remind me to keep the peace between my sometimes warring inner factions. None of us is a single self: we all have the "once was-could be-should have been-will I ever" selves inside. The olive branch is my shorthand for treating them all with kindness. A good reason to put ink not only to paper but, finally, to flesh in permanence.
The worst kind of prejudice is the kind that slips under the radar. It's too subtle to cause a stir (and if you point it out, you'll usually get a sideways look: you're the one making too much of nothing), but its corrosive message nevertheless seeps in—subliminally, insidiously—beating down the spirit of the group it belittles or excludes. I am blessed to have been raised by two parents who were sensitive to prejudicial undercurrents; they fought against them in their own distinct ways through the tumultuous 1960s, and into the 70s and 80s as I was growing up. And it seems, thinking about it now, that they never missed a good learning moment with me: we often discussed issues of bias, prejudice, stereotype, and their harmful effects. This week, images in some of my kindergartener's reading books gave me pause. And in wrestling with how to handle these, I remembered something I hadn't thought of in many years: the library at the Brentwood Science Magnet School in ...
Comments
Post a Comment