An article just appeared in Dance Magazine titled "Indelible Expressions," which touches on the topic and meaning of tattoos. A soloist with American Ballet Theatre, Sascha Radetsky has his fair share of large, dark tattoos. While he understands when he is asked to cover his tattoos for contemporary or classical ballets in most cases, he expresses his belief that ballet and ink can coexist. They even have some similarities: dance and tattoos are both artistic forms of self-expression, "only the latter doesn't require a theater, peculiar female footwear, or unfortunate male undergarments to function." (I like this guy.)
I'm still torn, because even though tattoos are becoming more and more widely accepted, Radetsky notes that many dancers lose out on job opportunities because of their tattoos. Even though there is now makeup or flesh-colored tape that can cover almost any tattoo, some choreographers (especially in classical ballet) do not approve or like to hire dancers that have any tattoos, regardless of whether they are seen in the costume or not. Modern dance and contemporary ballet are becoming more accepting of tattoos, but you'll probably forever have to cover tattoos for a music video or the Nutcracker.
Despite the hassle and potential job loss, it's still attractive. What do you think?
only
the latter medium doesn’t require a theater, peculiar female footwear,
or unfortunate male undergarments to function. - See more at:
http://www.dancemagazine.com/issues/October-2013/Indelible-Expressions#sthash.7hlxkx2W.dpuf
