The Emergence of the Narcissistic, Egomaniac Photographers

Part of the deal with selfies is that if you can double as a model, it's quite convenient, especially if you're shy.

I don't double as a model. I use family members for models and bribe them with ice cream.

ME Super said:

Make photos because it's something you enjoy doing, even if nobody else likes your work. You've created something.

Click to expand...

To make photos because you enjoy it, in the first instance, is a given - we don't do things because we don't enjoy them. And I completely understand and respect the creativity as self-help thing, when it's needed (everyone in the States has a therapist, I know), but creativity as meaningful communication with others - isn't this historically more valuable? After all, the reason you probably started photography was because the work of others spoke to you. Why not at least try to pass the torch?

MattKrull said:

So my question to you is: When you look at the photos of the younger generation: are you looking at their art, or their journals?

Click to expand...

Agree with much of your post, but this especially, which is what I was saying in my first post. While I agree that we're reaching critical mass with the amount of outlets we now have for narcissism, I'm sure many people making the photographic narcissism claims are simply looking at the visual scrap books of teenagers a little too much.

You need some kind of combination of one or the other. Making money is about business sense. You might be a horrible photographer but a
hardworking con man and succeed. Or you might be a brilliant photographer, plugging along, and just get lucky (not statistically likely, but it
sometimes happens). Or like me, you apply your business skill to something else entirely and then do whatever you enjoy in the darkroom, and from time to time let a little luck trickle in.

SNIP

batwister said:

To make photos because you enjoy it, in the first instance, is a given - we don't do things because we don't enjoy them.

Click to expand...

some people do things they dislike.

ntenny said:

[1] I follow someone on Flickr who I think is a rather talented photographer with a good eye. She posts a really nice photo of an urban landscape or the light from her window or whatever, and the world goes "meh". She posts a mirror selfie in black and white with a bra strap showing, and the world falls all over itself to tell her how wonderful her art is. What do you suppose she's going to be led to concentrate on? I think that effect is rather tragic, but I suppose I'm not her and I'm not entitled to tell her what she wants to achieve with a camera, right? Sigh.

Click to expand...

This, I think, has far less to do with aspirations of art and far more to do with the viewer's inherent difficulties with trying to ignore the last five million years of evolution. The phenomenon is not limited to young people, or to Flickr, or even to online in general. All one needs to do to see that is take another look at the submissions to the APUG galleries.

You know all of those forum polls we have that ask about member's age and gender distributions? They're really not necessary. All that's needed is a quick look at the subjects and corresponding view counts in the our own galleries to definitively answer those two questions as 50s and M, with the side benefit of a probable psychological diagnosis of Lonely...

Ken

jnanian said:

SNIP



some people do things they dislike.

Click to expand...

... and some people dislike things they do; while others dislike things some people do. It takes all kinds.

BrianShaw said:

... and some people dislike things they do; while others dislike things some people do. It takes all kinds.

Click to expand...

exactly !

Ken Nadvornick said:

You know all of those forum polls we have that ask about member's age and gender distributions? They're really not necessary. All that's needed is a quick look at the subjects and corresponding view counts in the our own galleries to definitively answer those two questions as 50s and M...

Click to expand...

Are you referring to the nudes?

eddie said:

Are you referring to the nudes?

Click to expand...

Only as one part of the more general subset of all female gallery subjects.

Ken

Hopefully i can say something relevant.

While the internet has helped spread this 'narcissism' it stems from the fact that 'doing things for others' (or 'what you can do for your country') mentality, has left many unsatisfied in their later years. Perhaps this has always been the case, since feudalism (did we even live a tranquil enough life to think on our lives and their value) gave little way to happy living. Nonetheless, the 19th century gave rise to a notion that has capitulated into what it is today. To broad to mention in a photography forum, i think there was a turning point with Hegel's Phenomenology of Spirit (i forget the german name) which led to a slow revolution in schools of thought. This led to the German Idealism which became widespread. Even though these philosophies vary there was clear deviation from previous philosophies in that they gave Individuals the Right of Reason, and to an extent their Reality. In the 20th century we see the more questioning of the church and a definite centralization in the individual.

If you've ever had the opportunity to read any Joseph Campbell books (i've only read the Hero With a Thousand Faces), myths/stories clearly become pathways for individuals to follow. While these paths are ritualistic in nature, and many cultures/tribes have their rules to follow, it becomes clear that it is there for us, to help us, find our 'life path' per se. So in essence it's become overtly clear that we live our lives not for others, or through others, but for ourselves. Yes, we can do things for others, but satisfaction comes from within, and this has clearly been know for as long as we have lived, regardless of whether we have negated it at some point or other.

The problem arises, when we relegate ourselves only to look within, and fail to 'find ourselves' and return to the world/reality. Many may feel this is silly, but i have to say, that seeing older people with many regrets is not something i want to grow into or up to in my later years.

While there is a clear distinction between this (finding oneself) and Narcissism/Egomaniacs, the 'arts' have always been seen as a cultures way of communication (sometimes abstract for en masse dissemination). While photography holds a reality, it also shows a perspective, therefore, it becomes a 'truth' but not just a simple 'truth' but a 'truth told by someone'. while a sculpture, painting, etc. might be based on truth, it's a given (or partially) that the artist has creative license to give it a twist, his twist. Photography for the most part, doesn't let you do this (Jerry ueslmann being our great exception), and so it becomes about the 'photogrpaher's eye'. Some still believe photography is not an art, i volunteer at a museum and was told this to my face.
Before i continue rambling

So to say that narcissism is emerging in photography, perhaps it is, but it's been doing so all around us (as in other fields of art, and in our culture in general) and has been doing so for centuries. Moreover, it's inherent to our life, because it's how we live our lives to an extent. I can see where you have a problem with egocentrism, but that's a psychological problem perpetuated by people with cameras.

We also have to be able to discern the difference between narcissism and marketing.

By marketing it can appear to be narcissistic when in fact it's not.

But marketing any individual in any field is has to be focused and narcissistic looking.

That's why we often come to hate overly marketed singers and movie stars so much. "oh they're so full of themselves"....

But sadly the more narcissistic one is, or becomes, very often the more financially successful or powerful (see politician) they become. Because they have a drive to be noticed. An overpowering need to be praised or loved (??).

This world ain't no meritocracy baby.

OP, just how things developed. In 2018 a man with a penis is a woman. So got to got to adapt, times change.

People that want some attention for their work need to advertise. The internet makes it easy to get the work out. Some like more attention than others. In the old days not that many people were photogs. Now anyone with a cell phone and a $29 inkjet printer from Walmart is a photog. Zillions of wannabees out there, so hard to get attention sometimes.

As far as ego? A big ego helps with street work. You have to violate societal convention many times, so you need to be on a different wavelength than the general population.

Most photography commercial or otherwise, is a branch of entertainment. Ergo, the entertainers get most of the traction. YouTube is the best evidence that entertainment outsells journalism.

Gerald C Koch said:

The world is not filled with undiscovered Adams or Westons or Cartier-Bressons.

Click to expand...

How would you know until they are discovered?

blockend said:

Most photography commercial or otherwise, is a branch of entertainment. Ergo, the entertainers get most of the traction. YouTube is the best evidence that entertainment outsells journalism.

Click to expand...

I use YouTube to look for answers to questions. I wouldn't have any idea whether the persons answering those questions are stars or not.

As far as the original question, my experience says it was before 1981 because I assisted for one. When I tired of the abuse, poor pay and the fact I wasn't learning anything of value I took a job in a custom color lab.

The internet merely took every over bearing person with a camera, who had only been stuck making life miserable for friends, relatives, and neighbors. and Gave them a medium that let them inflict the misery onto the entire world.

Most famous/prominent photographers in the last decade ONLY seem to be prominent or famous BECAUSE they have hit a specific number of likes/fans on instagram or other social sites.

pocketshaver said:

The internet merely took every over bearing person with a camera, who had only been stuck making life miserable for friends, relatives, and neighbors. and Gave them a medium that let them inflict the misery onto the entire world.

Most famous/prominent photographers in the last decade ONLY seem to be prominent or famous BECAUSE they have hit a specific number of likes/fans on instagram or other social sites.

Click to expand...

been to many brick and mortar galleries lately ? there are plenty of people who in the last decade who do not fit into your pigeonhole. not sure where you are at, but if you get to nyc, providence, boston, la, chicago, london, paris, berlin or tokyo visit some photography galleries, you might be surprised that there are people who are or have made a pretty nice splash who are doing as you suggest . not saying the social media types don't exist im just saying that there are exceptions to every rule including your harsh critique.

jnantz said:

been to many brick and mortar galleries lately ? there are plenty of people who in the last decade who do not fit into your pigeonhole. not sure where you are at, but if you get to nyc, providence, boston, la, chicago, london, paris, berlin or tokyo visit some photography galleries, you might be surprised that there are people who are or have made a pretty nice splash who are doing as you suggest . not saying the social media types don't exist im just saying that there are exceptions to every rule including your harsh critique.

Click to expand...

The only referenced photographers who have appeared in the last decade, as referenced on OTHER photo forum sites, all seem to have gotten their claim to fame and success from a quick start on instagram or reddit. Thing is, some of the ones that get hyped, only EXIST on instagram. But for me, as a human being, if the ONLY existence to your fame is an instagram feed.....

Why is anyone calling you famous, or important? Sure you have 200 photos of random things that each have at least 1,000 likes.. but have you actually done anything to become famous?

But then again there are many famous people, including photographers, who are famous for only one photo, or in the case of Amelia earhart and Sean Flynn, famous ONLY for how they died or simply disappeared..

The whole "influencer" thing is a massive moneymaker so it could be driving a lot of photographers to play this Instagram game. If you have enough followers you can command 10,000s of dollars for a "sponsored post". I once thought it might be a good way to advertise Photrio so I contacted some photography "influencers", and I got quotes in the 5-15,000 USD range just for a shout out. Unless I give up a kidney, no chance..