This is the second post by Michael Corey in a two-part series on the use of the phrase “skin in the game.” The first part was published on June 2. – Jeff
Many in the military fear that “putting their skin in the game” will be forgotten, and some have taken steps to keep memories of their fallen comrades alive. These may be found in an old form of art, the tattoo, specifically the memorial tattoo.
Mary Beth Heffernan, a photographer and associate professor of sculpture and photography at Occidental College, documented U. S. Marine memorial tattoos on film and incorporated them into a gallery exhibit, “The Soldier’s Skin: An Endless Edition.” The exhibit was shown at the Pasadena City College Art Gallery between October 10 and November 17, 2007, which was organized in conjunction with the citywide Pasadena Festival of Art and Ideas. Marines may be a specialized form of soldier, but most Marines prefer to be thought of as Marines rather than soldiers, as referenced in the exhibit’s title. The endless edition refers to Heffernan displaying her photolithographs arranged in stacks on a floor. To me, it brings tombstones to mind. Heffernan encourages viewers to take home copies from the stack, free of charge and reflect on them.
This image of a tattoo on the back of U. S. Marine, Joshua Hall. was photographed by Heffernan on February 3, 2006. It was reproduced as a 24” x 27” poster in unlimited quantity for the show in 2007. Memorialized on dog tags, along with his grandfather and uncle who died in war, are other fallen Marine brothers in arms.
Other Heffernan images may be found on the following links: http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/news/la-et-1027-heffernan-pg,0,5619148.photogallery?coll=la-tot-entertainment; and http://www.artscenecal.com/ArticlesFile/Archive/Articles2007/Articles1007/MBHeffernanA.html.
The cover of Heffernan’s exhibit catalog features a young girl holding a 19” x 27” poster showing the tattoo on the front of Owen McNamara’s body, taken on February 6, 2006. During his second tour in Iraq, McNamara was twenty years old. While attending a promotion ceremony, ten of his fellow Marines were killed at a booby-trapped patrol base. The tattoo which covers most of his upper torso has inscribed, “In Memory of Our Fallen Brothers,” positioned above a helmet carrying his unit’s identification, sitting on top of a rifle with its bayonet stuck into the ground dated, “Dec. 1, 2005,” flanked by two dog tags bearing “Never” “Forget.” Empty boots are arranged at the base with five shell casings on either side with the last names of his fallen brothers floating above each of the casings. McNamara was wounded on his first tour in Iraq, and he has a tattoo on his arm to capture this memory.
Even though Heffernan focused on the particular, the images tell us much more about war and the current need of Marines to honor the fallen and preserve their memories in a society that prefers to ignore their sacrifices. For some Marines, Heffernan notes, tattoos are rites of passage and much more. Marines are aware of their mortality and some design tattoos in advance that their friends will have inscribed if they are killed.
Heffernan offers some other thoughts on the Marine memorial tattoos. She sees them as a type of ritual wounding. Pain, healing, and inscription are seen as part of the memorial. It allows for a type of communion with fallen brothers through their own suffering, during the creation of the tattoo. Sometimes the pain goes on for hours. As the body heals and the expression is made, Heffernan notes, the trauma associated with them hardens and closes. Summing up, Heffernan states,
Most of all, the memorial is an attempt to assign stable meaning to an event that is beyond representation: death that is random, violent, disorienting, unfathomably gruesome. The active duty marine who memorializes his brother’s death shimmers in an uneasy present between the threat of his own death and his buddy’s past life. By scripting his mourning onto the surface of his body, the marine permanently flags his own trauma and loss; the soldier’s skin becomes a site of mourning the past and warning the future.
Heffernan has been interested in skin as the site that separates the self from the other, and nature from culture. She spent three months in 2006 researching the project in tattoo parlors located in Twentynine Palms, a small town in southeastern California, near a Marine base. Some of the Marines she witnessed have served multiple tours in combat.
Why do many Marines feel the need to memorialize their fallen comrades on their skin? The answer to this question may be found in the essence of the phrase, “skin in the game,” and in a desire to not have these “skins” forgotten. In a sense, the skin of these Marines allows for the preservation of personal, interpersonal and collective memories. The skins capture life and death, the memories of them, and they tell a political story for those who are inclined not to forget.
It seems to me as though we only honor our military on national holidays, after victory, & from the grave; it’s easier not to think about those who serve. as a liberal, I hate the notion of war–the closest I’ve ever been to a gun was while getting a speeding ticket. During the Bush era, once my contemporaries began to serve, I felt uneasy around both vets and anyone in uniform. And it’s very hard to admit that; and it comes from my own ignorance. Our soldiers aren’t perpetrators; they follow orders, and their duty is to “stand on the wall” (to quote ‘A Few Good Men). On the front-lines, there are no politics. But after spending time in Kosovo (of all places) and witnessing the dynamics of a post-conflict society, my uneasiness around soldiers no longer exists. While many argue that they are two sides of the same-coin, so to speak (and I don’t disagree), I truly believe that “humanitarian intervention” is not always code for “imperialism” or democratic imposition.” But Iraq was different than Kosovo. And Libya, though more similar to Kosovo, is still different. Time and place matter. And perhaps the Srebrenica-guilt will plague this generation of policy makers for quite some time. I still don’t like to think about war, and I am guilty of “preferring to ignore the sacrifice.” But no matter what; for both “villains, victors and [victims]/survivors” (pace Atina Grossmann)–we must remember to remember. We must never forget the mere recognition of both our selves the the other.
For me, the most interesting sociological issue is that a military class has emerged which is relatively small compared to our total population, and is disproportionately bearing the burdens and risks involved with serving the United States in the military. The impacts are especially impactful on them, their families, friends and local communities; and the secondary impacts on our society are much larger than most people imagine. I think that the ramifications of this will go on for decades. There have been very few times in U. S. history when periods of armed conflict have lasted as long as the current period; and when the same small group of people have been repeatedly sent back into harms way. The physical, emotional, social and economic strains are tremendous. One of the things that attracted my attention in the Marine memorial tattoos were the concerns about being forgotten, and I believe unappreciated. Most peoples lives go on in a normal fashion without ever considering the sacrifices these people are making. What’s more, while these Marines have their skins in the game figuratively and materially; questions can be raised about whether or not policy makers have their skins in the game; and whether or not the public at large has their skins in the game. Many of us are free riders when it comes to national defense issues. I don’t think that this is likely to change in the near term; and we as a society will have to live with the ongoing impacts caused by this decade of war. Are there ways to mitigate the issues? Perhaps. The first step is to recognize that issues exist.
speaking of “free riders,” apparently, after some youtube exposure, delta finally changed its policy onf charging military personnel $200 for each additional piece of luggage…
“According to a video shot on the plane by Staff Sergeants Fred Hilliker and Robert O’Hair and later posted on YouTube, the soldiers were authorized to check as many as four bags, free of charge. But on their flight from Baltimore to Atlanta, they were hit with a $200 fee per soldier for a fourth bag, with the group paying a total of $2,800.”
http://www.boston.com/business/articles/2011/06/09/delta_changes_baggage_rules_for_military/
and i thought being charged $25/bag as a civilian was an outrage.