UNIVERSITY OF LINCOLN

LINCOLN SCHOOL OF FILM AND MEDIA

MED3006M: MEDIA INDEPENDENT STUDY, 2017

WHO DO YOU SEE? REPRESENTATIONS OF THE SELF IN CONTEMPORARY

PHOTOGRAPHIC SELF-PORTRAITURE

AIDAN WAPLES

WAP12453427

BA (HONS) MEDIA PRODUCTION

WORD COUNT: 9346

Contents

List of Contents 1

List of Illustrations 2

Introduction 3

Chapter I: Identity 6

Chapter II: Contemporary Self-Portraiture 14

Chapter III: Selfies 24

Conclusion 35

Reference List 39

Illustrations 44

Acknowledgements 49

1
List of Illustrations

Fig. 1 ‘Marcia Painting Her Self-Portrait’ from a manuscript of

Boccaccio’s On Famous Women, 1402, ink and colour on

parchment 14

Fig. 2 Photographic self-portrait of Robert Cornelius circa 1840 16

Fig. 3 Photographic self-portrait of Charles Wheatstone circa 1840 16

Fig. 4 Cindy Sherman’s Untitled Film Still #3, 1977, a woman poised at a

kitchen sink 18

Fig. 5 A selfie taken during the 2014 Academy Awards, hosted by Ellen

DeGeneres, shared on her Twitter account 24

Fig. 6 Screenshot of Instagram showing number of images tagged

#selfie on 24th January 2017 26

Fig. 7 A selfie taken in Kraków city square, 19th May 2016 29

Fig. 8 Selfie of Amalia Ulman lying on her bed in lingerie, 19th May 2014 33

Fig. 9 Selfie of Amalia Ulman taken in a mirror, sitting in on a windowsill

in a seemingly lavish New York apartment, 7th June 2014 33

2
Introduction

Selfies are a supposed 21st Century phenomenon with millions captured every day. They

have become an inherent part of daily life in various cultures around the world. Their rise in

use has not only prompted its inclusion into the Oxford English Dictionary, but there is a

need for further understanding in relation to their representational elements. Due to their

contemporary nature, academic discussion directly related to this topic is somewhat absent

and so other sources are needed to be drawn upon in order to create argument and

suggestion for further study.

A selfie is proposedly defined as:

“a self-portrait photograph of oneself (or of oneself and other people), taken with a

camera or a camera phone held at arm’s length or pointed at a mirror, that is usually

shared through social media.” (Sorokowski et al., 2015, 124)

Self-portraiture covers a vast genre of art history, ranging from Neanderthal cave paintings

to lavish paintings of the wealthy, through to magazine cover shoots – each of which carries

its own distinct codes and conventions, yet are vastly similar in their general approach

towards expression of individuals, and in further detail, expression of identity of these

individuals.

Practitioners such Cindy Sherman and Amalia Ulman will be analysed in this study. Their

work stands at the forefront of contemporary photographic self-portraiture in the sense that

they make attempts at defying and challenging the pre-conceived conventions within this

3
particular sub-genre. Furthermore, their work provides detail and relevance to the

overarching themes of self and identity within this study.

The disciplines of psychology, sociology, theology, social anthropology and cultural studies

conjoin to create the foundations of debate throughout the study. Each discipline holds its

own characteristics and set of arguments which shall be drawn upon in both complementary

and contrasting discussions throughout the study. Particular focus will arrive when analysing

the movements of modernism and its strict guidelines to postmodernism and its ‘anything

goes’ attitudes, with reference to these various disciplines alongside textual analysis of

practitioner’s work, as mentioned above.

This dissertation will be divided into three sections, each tackling its own debates and

subsequently relating back to the previous to form a grounding for further research and

discussion.

Chapter one discusses identity. Beginning with the overarching identity, it argues the

feasibility of existence of a ‘self’ and its relation to ‘self-identity’ within the theoretical

standpoints of Buddhist philosophy as well as culture. The postmodernist perspective will

also be introduced as a foundation for this dissertation.

Chapter two discusses contemporary self-portraiture, with particular focus on photography.

Studies of practitioners’ work including that of Cindy Sherman will be featured here with a

further focus on identity presence within the work analysed, as well as an exploration into

elements of historical context.

4
Chapter three focuses primarily on the selfie. Building upon the findings of debate from the

previous chapters, the selfie is explored through the use of social media and 21st Century

cultural norms as a universal mode of communication and identity structure. Practitioners

including Amalia Ulman will be analysed whilst notions of identity and self will be reflected

upon.

The dissertation will conclude with answering the question Who do you see? using the

findings from the preceding chapters, as well as give groundings for potential further

academic research and discussion into the topic.

5
Chapter I: Identity

The state of an identity varies dependant on the nature in which it is investigated.

Regardless of its context, the singular ‘identity’ requires defining to allow a

progression in analyses. Oyserman, Elmore and Smith offer a definition of “traits and

characteristics, social relations, roles, and social group memberships that define who

one is” (2012, 69) Moreover, the understanding of the notion of the ‘self’ in relation to

identity is paramount. In the chapter, Oyserman et al (2012) go on to discuss the

basic operationalisation of the self. As with the overarching ‘identity’, a definition is

required. Understandably, the notion of a ‘self’ is a rather complicated presence:

“In common discourse, the term self often refers to a warm sense or a warm

feeling that something is ‘about me’ or ‘about us’. Reflecting oneself is both a

common activity and a mental fact. It requires that there is an ‘I’ that can

consider an object that is ‘me’. The term self includes both the actor who

thinks (“I am thinking”) and the object of thinking (“about me”) Moreover, the

actor is both able to think and is aware of doing so. As the philosopher Jon

Locke famously asserted, “I think, therefore I am.” Awareness of having

thoughts matters.” (71)

Here, the trio discuss the idea of the ‘self’ bisecting into the forms “I” and “me”. Upon

first reading, one would assume the two are symbiotic; without one, the other cannot

and would not ‘exist’. There is a suggestion here that knowledge of one’s own ‘self’ is

compulsory in firstly, thinking and determining our individual identity traits and

characteristics and secondly, giving it the power to exist.

6
“Together, identities make up one’s self-concept – variously described as what

comes to mind when one thinks of oneself (Neisser, 1993), one’s theory of one’s

personality (Markus and Cross, 1990) and what one believes is true of oneself

(Baumeister, 1998)” (Oyserman et al., 2012, 69) There is further detail here that one

must not only know the simple existence of their ‘self’, but be able to think about it,

theorise it and believe in it, from the viewpoint of wider society and external

influences. However, it is these external forces that question the true reality of a ‘self’,

to its simplest form.

Placing the ‘self’ into a postmodern state of mind makes the implication of a broken

structure: “Postmodernism posits a fragmented self that has no essence” (Allan,

1997, 1) Further implications here lead onto the idea of performance and

construction, to be discussed later in the chapter.

Postmodernism as a theoretical standpoint emerged from the rigidity and backlash

against modernity – a break into expression and performance. Associated with

pluralism and an abandonment of conventional ideas of originality and authorship,

postmodernism overhauled the arts; architecture favoured vernacular contexts and

surfaces whilst visual arts embraced appropriation and an ‘anything goes’ attitude.

However, most intriguingly is the description of postmodernism being a critical project

or a culture of quotations. (Palmer, 2014) These descriptors highlight the suggestion

that the driving force behind the change into postmodernism is society and culture;

one’s desire to break into a new realm and unearth cultural constructions that have

been designated to be the truth.

7
The idea of ‘truth’ is poignant – the introduction of postmodernism sought to reveal

what one was told to be true, and either understand it in a new context or completely

rewrite the definition. If one is to continue to believe in the new revealed truths, their

understanding and own position in society and culture would need adjusting, which

can only be done by the individual via a self-initiated want or need.

As Perry (2002) describes: “the most central parts to a person’s self-concept: I am

the person doing this, knowing this, wanting this, and having these sensations and

thoughts” (190) It is these internal sensations that join together and form the concept

of individual ‘selves’ and traits that define one’s sense of individuality. The acts of

“doing”, “knowing” and “wanting” need presence if change is going to occur from an

individual prospect. The conjoining of the belief of a self-concept positioned within a

postmodernist era equates to a rather threatening concept of destruction and

confusion with relation to the simple existence of one’s self and to which contexts it

simply has the power to exist.

“The postmodern self is fragmented and decentered with a kind of emotional

flatness or depthlessness […] whether self is experiences as a core,

transsituational self or as fragmented, situational self tends to depend on the

type of linguistic system one is socialized in and uses and on one’s ritual

density” (Allan, 1997, 1)

Allan further discusses the idea of fragmentation within postmodernism and

introduces the idea of a transsituational self – a notion of ‘self’ that is a by-product of

performance and social context that holds the ability to change subconsciously. From

the outset, these changes could easily be analysed from occurring between various

8
people; however, it is the change within a single person based upon the social

context and situation that they are currently positioned in is where the differentiation

of ‘self’ becomes increasingly difficult.

Aforementioned was performance. Performance is an element present in everyday

life, even with everyone worldwide undertaking the activity at a heavily subconscious

level – there may be no physical knowledge of it happening without partaking in the

study of performativity.

“In everyday life, ‘to perform’ is to show off, to go to extremes, to underline an

action for those who are watching. In the twenty-first century, people as never

before live by means of performance” (Schechner, 2013, 28)

Schechner mentions here two actions at play: performance and spectatorship. Much

like the definition of identity proposed by Oyserman et al (2012), the two are viewed

as symbiotic, in a constant cyclical state: spectators witness the performance, and

the performer performs to the spectators, without whom there would be no necessity

to perform. Schechner also proposes the idea that the performances we, as

individuals play, are simply for clarification purposes of those who are watching, no

other reason given. This reinforces the idea that each performance, which

subsequently builds our identity (or in fact, which elements of our identity we choose

to put on show at any one time), are detailed specifically for the social and cultural

context we are in at any given time, with the endless possibility of changing the

performance given depending on the external factors that are present in that specific

moment. Further reinforcing this ideology is Erving Goffman’s statement: “A

‘performance’ may be defined as all the activity of a given participant on a given

9
occasion which serves to influence in any way any of the other participants” (1959,

26) However, there is a slight shift with further attention being drawn to the influential

nature of individual performances on others, bringing to light the idea that not only

does one choose individual characteristics to perform based on context, but watching

others’ performances has a direct impact on one’s own performative nature and

perhaps even the elements being put on show.

With the notion of performance overhead, there is the suggestion of multiple

identities having feasibility. If one has the innate ability to ‘pick and choose’ elements

of their identity to put show, there is no controlling how many variations are a result of

this. It is though choosing an identity is as difficult as contextualising postmodernism

“because it means one thing to dancers, several other things to cultural critics and

philosophers, and still something else to architects” (Schechner, 2013, 131) Each

individual trait and characteristic self-assigned to one’s own persona is drastically

different to another, even within the same social and cultural context. Alongside

multiplicities of ‘self’, there needs to be an element of fluidity – there is little to no

awareness of an individual changing elements of their ‘self’ from both the individual

themselves and others. In this instance, the ‘self’ is in a constant state of flux, never

fixed to a certain point for too long. Having fluidity is an innate trait, raising the

question as to whether the individual knows how much of a fluid state their ‘self’ is in

at any given time.

With regards to multiple personalities and fluidity, Buddhism and the concept of

Anatta (doctrine of the non-self) comes to the forefront of discussion. Teachings of

the Buddha state the needing of this doctrine is due to evil and the false belief of

Ātman (concept of the self):

10
 “According to the teaching of the Buddha, the idea of self is an imaginary,

false belief which has no corresponding reality, and it produces harmful

thoughts of ‘me’ and ‘mine’, selfish desire, craving, attachment, hatred, ill-will,

conceit, pride, egoism, and other defilements, impurities and problems. It is

the source of all the troubles in the world from personal conflicts to wars

between nations.” (Rahula, 1959, 51)

Although Buddhists and the philosophical nature surrounding the religion go forth

with the denial of an existence of a ‘self’, there is an illusion at force which causes

people to falsely believe in Buddhism to be a belief centred on being able to find

‘yourself’. However, in order to “attain a deep insight into the true nature of life” (BBC,

2009) there is a requirement to be able to see through this illusory nature of the ‘self’

in all of its forms. A prime example of how this is attained is through acts of

meditation. When in a meditative state, an individual is said to be filled with Śūnyatā

(emptiness and voidness). It is this sense of emptiness that allows an analysis into

this illusion, and knowledge into how it is and can be broken.

“While the emptiness that grows out of Buddhist meditation can be difficult to

describe, it is often seen as holding great promise for those afflicted with the

more pathological emptinesses […] At times attributed to Mind, in its larger

sense, and at times to the self” (Epstein, 1988, 62)

“There is just the omni-present voidness of the real self-existent Nature of

everything, and no more” (Blofeld, 1958, 50)

11
Self-affirmation and acceptance of this sense of void is paramount in further

determining which direction the discussion of the ‘self’ will lead. The knowledge of

performativity and its extensive influence within identity allows us to recognise

individuals are placed within an experiential environment of perceived reality. These

environments are a direct result of subjective experience – the identities one would

come in contact with on a daily basis influenced by various social and cultural

contexts. It is the experience of these environments and the breaking down of the

illusory nature that the teaching of the Buddha is attempting to reinforce.

These traits of emptiness and voidness do not relay with as much clarification as do

the senses of “selfish desire”, “craving”, “pride” and “egoism” as discussed by Rahula

(1959) within Anatta when referring to contemporary photographic practices.

Psychological studies surrounding people’s selfie taking and posting behaviour

highlight these tendencies in a manner which is somewhat startling. The findings

from these studies will be discussed further in chapter three, however, its mention

here within defining to what extent a sense of ‘self-identity’ exists is rather critical.

The simple fact that damaging speculations are a result of believing in a ‘self’ is

fascinating in the context that the majority of contemporary photography focuses

around a single moment; whether that moment be of a contextual grounding or a

personal one. Many photographic practitioners would make an attempt to eradicate

this sense in their work, however, with the innate ability to pick and choose which

elements and traits of individual ‘concepts’ within identity to put ‘on show’, there is no

real escape from the subconscious concept.

With the further mention of individual characteristics being performed for others to

see, a selfie is the perfect platform for this to be shared with others. The art form that

12
is the contemporary digital self-portrait allows individuals to portray any moment on

the fluid spectrum of their individual identity traits they so choose. The platform in

which a selfie is promoted also has the ability to be a direct influence on the social

and cultural context in which the selfie is read, by both the photographer / subject

and the audience member. Various gratifications, all focused on the aforementioned

harmful thoughts, are at play and only further the want to produce more content. This

will be analysed in more detail in chapter three with the inclusion of psychological

studies looking into people’s reasoning for taking a self-photograph and their

behaviours with posting images on Social Networking Sites.

In order to further this study, a summary is required with reference to the question:

Does a ‘self’ exist? Although there is no simple answer, the arguments offered have

favoured the doctrine of a non-inner-self. Instead, there is the presentation of a series

of illusory factors that have the power to make an individual believe in a ‘self’. Further

inclusion of performance, even without personal realisation, heighten these illusions

and offer one an alternative view on identity – it is a fluid construct that is not fixated

to any one particular moment. It is this fluidity and sense of false belief that will

become critical when analysing contemporary self-portraiture and selfies in the

succeeding chapters.

13
Chapter II: Contemporary Self-Portraiture

It is a French manuscript dated 1402 that includes Giovanni Boccaccio’s series of

biographies On Famous Women (1374) that the first known depiction of an artist in

the act of painting a self-portrait can be seen [see fig. 1]. It is believed that it is an

ancient Roman artist named ‘Marcia’ “sitting at a table in her luxuriously appointed

workshop gazing at the reflection of her head in a small convex mirror” (Hall, 2014,

32) although the artist of the scene is unfortunately unknown.

In the chapter A Craze for Mirrors in which this example can be found, Hall

introduces the concept of the revolutionary in its many forms from the creation of oil

paint to single-point perspective. It is the inclusion of the mirror in art that is the most

intriguing:

“The story goes that self-portraiture took off around 1500 thanks to the

invention and proliferation of flat, foil-backed glass mirrors […] Self-portraiture

certainly flourished during the Renaissance, and mirrors had a role to play, but

the link with advances in mirror technology is a dubious one” (Hall, 2014, 31)

When referencing the use of the mirror in the 15th and 16th Centuries, it is important

to note the surface was not perfectly flat. Much like the “convex” one Marcia is using

in fig. 1, this would have had the impact of the artist seeing themselves from a

distorted perspective. With this distortion, the artist would not have had the ability to

produce a true replica of themselves on canvas. This, though, would then have led

the artist to go through a curative process in determining how they saw themselves,

to ultimately be presented on the canvas for others to see.

14
This process relates back to the need of fluidity and ease of change in identity traits

as mentioned in chapter one. The artist has the conscious ability to alter their

perceived ‘self’ at many occasions in the painting process. Firstly, there is the view of

the mirror. Due to their innovative nature, mirrors were expensive objects and usually

rather small. This would have hindered the artist in the amount they could replicate at

any one time. Secondly, mirrors were initially masked as a statement rather than

having a true function or purpose. Their inclusion in the artwork could have merely

been an attempt at a power status in their social hierarchy. Even though this may be

the case, this further reiterates the aspect of changing one’s ‘self’ based on

environment and experience as to perform for others to merely watch on. Inclusion of

this wealthy artefact offers the illusion of the subject having wealth, however this

raises the question as to whether there is a possibility of the mirror even being in the

original scene and the painting not being a self-portrait after all.

The art of self-expression through self-portraiture had no choice but to follow the

process of selection and performance that the subject desired, which in some cases

would have taken a matter of months. The changing attitudes towards photography

as an art form helped alter the processes of this displaying this expression:

“The most innovative contribution was the invention by Edwin H. Land in 1947

of the Polaroid-Land process that use a specially designed camera to produce

a finished print (or, if desired, a negative) in a matter of seconds.” (Newhall,

1997, 281)

Going from months to a matter of seconds was an exponential shift. The introduction

and production of polaroid cameras allowed a larger market to access the art of

15
photography, and gave a new sense of creative freedom and expression. It took just

four years for the millionth Polaroid-Land camera to sell, and by 1965 there was a

model available for only $20 (Photographic Resource Center, undated) allowing the

form of photography to be commercially available and accessible by the masses.

With this access came a higher degree of creative output with regards to the final

images produced; some even turning the camera around to become the subject as

well as the photographer: the selfie?

The ‘selfie’ is merely a self-portrait through the medium of photography rather than

through the use of more traditional techniques such as a brush and pot of paint. The

first selfie, as we know it today, was thought to have been taken by amateur

photographer Robert Cornelius circa 1840 (Newhall, 1997, 30) [see fig. 2] It is said

that Cornelius removed the lens cap from his camera, stood for several minutes, then

replaced the cap. It had also been noted that around the same time, a more

sophisticated technique was used by English inventor Charles Wheatstone [see fig.

3]. Wheatstone’s image was a reflection of himself in a mirror, taken by resting his

camera in his lap for a few minutes. (Wade, 2015, 271-272) It is the lack of ability to

control what is depicted in terms of the individual’s self that resonates intrigue here.

“Postmodern culture [attempts to] erase the category of self” (Allan, 1997, 1) thus no

control means a lack of performance, and subsequently eradication of self. The selfie

is discussed further in chapter three.

As mentioned at the beginning of this study, the term contemporary refers to the

beginning of the postmodern era. Frustratingly, there is no finite moment at which this

era began, or even became a part of mainstream ideology. However, Schechner

speculates “defining and theorizing the postmodern began in the turbulent 1960s with

attacks on the “master narratives” of modernism” (2013, 131) The decade was filled

16
with many a social and political movement, advances in science and technology and

it paved new waves for popular culture:

“Alfred Hitchcock’s Psycho released in 1960 […] the first televised United

States presidential debate […] John F. Kennedy gave his ‘man on the moon’

speech […] Andy Warhol exhibited his Campbell’s Soup Can […] Martin

Luther King Jr. made his ‘I Have A Dream’ speech […] the Beatles are

discovered and brought into mainstream music […] the miniskirt first appeared

in popular fashion […] the first African-American United States Supreme Court

Justice was appointed […] Sesame Street first aired in 1969 […] Neil

Armstrong became the first man on the moon.” (Rosenberg, 2017)

The key events of the decade go some way to highlight the transition from modernity

into postmodernity, breaking the authoritative nature and strict ‘guidelines’ of the

modern era. “It challenged the notion that there are universal certainties or truths.”

(Tate, undated) The introduction of the miniskirt and the new sounds of The Beatles

prove popular culture was heavily influenced by the new sense of freedom and was

brought into the mainstream, still resonating in society and culture today.

With regards to the creative arts, postmodern art “advocated that individual

experience and interpretation of our experience was more concrete than abstract

principles.” (Tate, undated) This meant there was more of a focus placed on

individuality and personal experience rather than the conceptualisation of a particular

art form or style. There was a sense of acknowledgement to the fact that individuals

have their own reading of an art piece rather than a generalised speculation; and this

17
still resonates today. Many artists play on this in their work and often take it a step

further.

Cindy Sherman: An American photographer whose career “has been celebrated for

her remarkable ability to transform herself into a wide array of characters.” (Steiner,

2003, 7) Her most noted work Untitled Film Stills are simply that, a series of stills

from movies that have never existed and were never given a name or an individual

identifier, only a sequential number. In the series, spanning a decade, it is the subject

that is most unique; Sherman herself appears in every image, yet she is almost

unrecognisable. “Because Sherman takes on different personas for her photographs,

she cannot be identified in them” (Steiner, 2003, 7) It is this essence of disguise and

transformation into someone or something other than herself that paves the

discussion for identity and matter of truth within her work.

“Sherman’s works have been considered self-portraits in that they are,

technically, photographs in which she appears. Yet they are not images of her

[…] and do not answer key questions about who the subject is, which is the

basis of self-portraiture” (Steiner, 2003, 7)

Arguing that her work is first and foremost not a self-portrait in a contextual sense

asks for debate. In each image produced in the series, Sherman goes through a

curative process in both what elements the spectator sees in the costumes she

designs and the potential position they will take when viewing the image. Untitled

Film Still #3 [see fig. 4] is one of the most reproduced images from the series. The

image shows Sherman – for purposes of argument – poised at a kitchen sink. The

focus is all placed on a single side of her upper body, with only slight reference to the

18
surrounding context and environment. There is minimal to almost no connection with

the spectator with her averted eyes, pushing for a want of further knowledge and

context of outside the frame. Sherman’s almost non-expressiveness make an

attempt at eradicating levels of emotion within the image:

“What I didn’t want were pictures showing strong emotion. In a lot of movie

photos the actors look cute, impish, alluring, distraught, frightened, tough, etc.,

but what I was interested in was when they were almost expressionless”

(Sherman, 2003, 8)

There is reinforcement of the picking and choosing of certain elements of expression,

or in this case, the choice to not show any. Sherman is conducting a performance, in

both the sense as stated by Schechner in chapter one, and in the more common

theatrical sense with “hair colour and style, facial features, body type, and clothing

style [changing] dramatically from one image to the next” (Steiner, 2003, 7) It is

this performative style in each image that posits a high level of uncertainty.

Uncertainty that questions the spectator in reconsidering whether it is Sherman or a

fictitious character being represented; what elements of Sherman’s self are on

display; what elements of the character are on display. In each individual image, the

combination of these elements differ, offering a unique representation and

performance. The amalgamation of these elements leads onto a further debate which

requires discussion: Sherman makes a conscious statement in her work that nothing

is real – the movie stills and characters are both products of her imagination – so is

there always a display and representation of ‘truth’ in photographic self-portraiture?

From an informal interview, a journalist noted:

19
 “She took photos of herself that were anything but self-portraits; photos that

stuck two fingers at the then received wisdom that the camera never lies – her

camera always lied. And, through her deceits, she looked for truths about

identity, vulnerability and power.” (Hattenstone, 2001)

There is a contradiction here that in order to prove there is no association of truth

from a camera, another truth has to be found. In this instance, this element of ‘truth’

comes from the context and subconscious meanings of each image within the series;

rather than the physical attributes, these come from personal readings.

Saying this, the truth from this would subsequently become disregarded from the

knowledge that regardless of element, it is a by-product of a camera and therefore

has no ability to hold no resonation of truth. These truths regarding identity,

vulnerability and power are in their own right a by-product of the performance

Sherman is undertaking.

Using Michel Foucault’s theory of a ‘regime of truth’ as an underlying theme here, it

can be noted:

“it is within this ‘regime of truth’ that we must situate the photograph if we are to

understand not how photographic truth may be emancipated from every system of

power, but how we may construct a new politics of truth by detaching its power from

the specific forms of hegemony in the economic, social and cultural domains within

which it operates at the present time.” (Tagg, 1988, 189)

The theory states there must be an individual – whether a person or cultural ideology

– that has the power to decide what representations have the ability and are

20
associated with truth. There is further argument that without this individual,

everything, and nothing, would be regarded as the truth; however, it is only

photography, and more specifically photographic self-portraiture, that brings to light

this nonconforming categorisation.

It is not just the automatic impression that there is association of truth from a camera

but the realisation that subject matter plays a large role in this dictation. As

mentioned, and further using Sherman as an example, personas are invented,

constructed and then represented. This invention and construction go some way to

suggest that nothing within the frame can be taken as real, no element is as is first

seen:

“The meaning of the photographic image is built up by an interaction of such

schemas or codes, which vary greatly in their degree of schematisation. The

image is therefore to be seen as a composite of signs, more to be compared

with a complex sentence than a single word. Its meanings are multiple,

concrete and, most important, constructed.” (Tagg, 1988, 187)

This plethora of codes and signs within everyday life feeding into the photographic

works of practitioners like Sherman that build a presentation all play on what they

choose for the spectator to see. The statement that there is concrete within this is

arguable – a reading is unique for each individual so therefore there can be no

generic foundation; one has the ability to pick and choose which elements to read

much like the practitioner has the ability to select which elements to portray.

“It is the underestimation of the degree to which the photographic image

already needs to be read as a rhetorical construction which gives rise to the

21
 idea that the meaning of the photograph is too imprecise itself and needs to be

anchored by a caption, if it is not to drift in ambiguity” (Tagg, 1988, 188)

And yet, Sherman does not do so. It is within this sense of ambiguity that lies this

element of ‘truth’, the truth that is conceived by both her and the spectator. Once this

is understood, then comes the realisation that yes, Sherman may be in the

photograph, but she is not in the photograph. This breaking of the concrete and the

fixed is what pulls work such as that created by Sherman into a postmodernist state

of mind. Furthermore, it is the allowance of an individual to determine truth that truly

defines postmodernism within contemporary photographic self-portraiture.

Even so, there is a defiance:

“Photographs really are an experience captured, and the camera is the ideal

arm of consciousness in its acquisitive mood. To photograph is to appropriate

the thing photographed. It means putting oneself into a certain relation to the

world that feels like knowledge – and, therefore, like power […] What is written

about a person or an event is frankly an interpretation, as are handmade

visual statements, like paintings and drawings. Photographed images do not

seem to be statements about the world so much as pieces of it, miniatures of

reality that anyone can make and acquire […] Photographs furnish evidence.

Something we hear about, but doubt, seems proven when we’re shown a

photograph of it.” (Sontag, 1977, 3-5)

Sontag here makes note of appropriation and this can be implied that doing so within

photography reflects the notion of no truth. However, with the clear

22
acknowledgement that every photograph is the source of some form of appropriation,

it could be argued that there is a degree of flaw within the postmodernist perspective

when it comes to discussion surrounding the element of ‘truth’. It is this ambiguity

that poses the question: does the selfie travel further than postmodernity in its

elements of truth association and art stylings?

23
Chapter III: Selfies

The photographic art from that is the selfie is used millions of times a day

internationally. As previously mentioned, a proposed definition by Sorokowski et al.

states a ‘selfie’ is:

“a self-portrait photograph of oneself (or of oneself and other people), taken

with a camera or a camera phone held at arm’s length or pointed at a mirror,

that is usually shared through social media.” (2015, 124)

Using this definition as a basis for research, it is important to dictate that a “selfie

includes not only self-portraits taken alone, but also photographs taken of oneself

with a partner or a group of people” (Sorokowski et al., 2015, 124) (otherwise

referred to as a ‘groupie’).

A supposed 21st Century phenomenon, the selfie has been made ever more

accessible by the introduction of higher quality front facing cameras in smartphones,

innovations such as the selfie stick and designated social media platforms such as

Instagram. Even for those individuals who believe they have not partaken or been the

subject of a selfie can easily understand the characteristics of one and the forms that

go into its construction. Celebrities such as Ellen DeGeneres and her 2014 ‘Oscar

selfie’ [see fig. 5] and the countless postings of Kim Kardashian are paramount to the

increased use of the technique.

There is the common misconception that a selfie harnesses your self-identity.

However, as established in chapter one, one’s self-identity does not exist, and is

24
nothing but a social and cultural construct. The notion of an ‘identity project’ arises,

and is intrinsically linked to one’s self-concept:

“Not only do people use consumption for acquiring or maintaining an aspect of

self-concept, they also use it to facilitate other kinds of identity change […]

Identity projects continually evolve over time […] At each of these stages, a

person’s cognitive representations of “self” may change” (Kleine and Kleine,

2000, 279)

Link this to the selfie, and it can be determined that the selfie offers a direct platform

for an identity project to take place. The use of the selfie in modern society is

fundamentally built on the ideals of an identity project – individuals alter their identity

from the images they see of others and in turn replicate these in their own selfies, of

course evolving with each new viewing. These alterations can occur from the

environment, objects, expression or even the outreach of the particular selfie. It is

these factors that offer the basis of the argument that the selfie has to contain

elements of a self, whether that is in the context of an identity, concept or simply an

individual, in order for it to have any use or gratification. Themes of uses and

gratification will be further explored later on in the chapter.

Within the identity project model there is said to be six basic steps: “pre-socialization,

identity (re)discovery, identity (re)construction, identity maintenance, identity latency,

and identity disposal” (Kleine and Kleine, 2000, 279) with three sub-phases: “the

rookie start, identity disengagement and identity renewal” (Kleine and Kleine, 2000,

279).

25
In order to begin analysis of identity projects within the selfie culture, one must first

look to social media. It is reported that “in 2013, 184 million pictures were tagged as

selfies on Instagram alone” (Mirzoeff, 2015, 31) 24th January; 287,063,413: the

number of pictures using the hashtag ‘#selfie’ on the image sharing platform [see fig.

6] (Problematically, there is no way of determining which selfies are included in the

search, i.e. solely photos posted since the beginning of the year) Link this to the

increased use in the term itself, reportedly “used 17,000 percent more often between

October 2012 and October 2013 than the previous year” (Mirzoeff, 2015, 31) there is

no wonder why social media platforms have an abundance of selfies posted to them

daily, arguably too many, with the majority never having been uploaded in the first

instance. The term, supposedly coined by an Australian man after posting a

photograph of a drunken mishap in 2002 (Pearlman, 2013) is now an inclusion in

everyday vocabulary, as well as everyday practices.

Social media offers an all-inclusive platform in which identity projects can take place.

From its conception, through development, to continuous reconstruction, social

media not only allows an individual to project their project, there is a reliance on

social media for its feasibility of existence. Although there is an argument that all

elements of an identity project are found within the art form of the selfie, pre-

socialization, discovery and construction are perhaps the most prominent, particularly

when discussing the possible existence of an identity. Combine this with social

media, there is substantially more prominence, and it becomes apparent as to how

each element subconsciously becomes a part in an intrinsic cycle in each individual

who uses social media.

26
During pre-socialization, the process of enculturation occurs. This process is

experienced “by members of a particular cultural group” (Kleine and Kleine, 2000,

281) When analysing this from a social media standpoint, the members of a

particular cultural group refer to the users of the social media sites. These

experiences are the viewing of others’ identity projects through a selfie. It is this

showcase and reading of another’s project where “individuals learn the role schemas

for the social roles common in a society” (Kleine and Kleine, 2000, 281) Witnessing

others’ projects in turn causes a process of learning and self-questioning – at this

stage an individual is truly able to make the judgment as to whether or not they either

are, or wish to be, associated with the particular identity that is on show. Only once

this conscious decision has been made, can the processes of discovery occur.

During discovery, “a person evaluates a social role to explore the question ‘is this a

type of person I’d like to become?’” (Kleine and Kleine, 2000, 281) Here, an

individual makes an association with the project and perhaps particular elements

within a selfie, for example after seeing an individual with a camera, one could ask

‘do I want to become a photographer?’ and it is this discovery from others attributes

and performances that make one truly acknowledge their want for this element within

their own self-concept. “Discovery ends when the person makes an implicit or explicit

decision/commitment to pursue developing the identity” (Kleine and Kleine, 2000,

281) Only once the question has been answered will the individual associate and

incorporate this element into their own ‘self’ or not. If, using the same example of the

photographer, one makes the decision that they want to become a photographer,

they would go ahead and purchase a camera, perhaps even the one they became

witness to in the selfie, and consequently adopt the ‘role schemas’ from pre-

socialization into their perceived identity.

27
Only once this affirmation has been established can the individual go through the

cycle of construction. “Identity construction occurs in the context of a social network

which provides identity confirming or disconfirming feedback” (Kleine and Kleine,

2000. 281) Once again using the same example, if the individual places their camera

into the selfie, they have begun the process of constructing their identity. Highlighting

this element in their selfie, the individual is hinting at others to which aspect they

should be taking note of, and what they should perhaps contemplate in their own

processes of pre-socialization and discovery. Communication with others within

social media is critical with the maintenance of this construction; it is ultimately the

deciding factor as to whether or not keep this new element within their identity.

However, this adoption of a new constructed element can place a hindrance on

others: “as the importance of the identity in acquisition rises, existing identities and

their associated consumption patterns, may be altered” (Kleine and Kleine, 2000,

282) This is to say that the cycle starts yet again and can never truly end. The notion

of performance, as mentioned in chapter one, is constant, a performance is never

truly over due to individuals constantly evolving their wanted perceptions from others.

The same notion applies here, only through a more focused narrative.

These processes of an identity project are very closely linked to the uses and

gratifications models found from analysing, through psychological studies, the

behaviours of selfie posting and sharing on social networking sites. In one particular

study, there is the revelation of “four motivations for posting selfies on SNSs [Social

Network Sites]; attention seeking, communication, archiving, and entertainment.”

(Sung et al., 2015, 263) Of particular interest in this study is the motivation of

attention seeking, in which is it highlighted,

28
 “selfies in particular emphasize key features of one’s self by displaying

optimized, desirable self-image with the intention of seeking admiration from

others […] social validation central to one’s self-worth, that is, self-affirmation.”

(Sung et al., 2015, 263)

One would initially believe that by partaking in the culture of the selfie they are merely

portraying themselves, in whichever way is seen as most relevant; however, there is

no differentiation between the individual taking the selfie, the reason for doing so, the

image itself, the sharing of the image and the desired reward incoming; rather an

amalgamation of all procedural steps into a united front. Dissecting these elements is

where the notions of the identity project and the egotistical nature of social media can

truly be noted.

In order to analyse this, it is best to look at a selfie [see fig. 7] This particular selfie is

one of my own, it features three friends and I when we were on the last day of our trip

to Kraków, Poland, in May 2016. The reason for choosing a personal selfie was due

to the true understanding of each element which are to be discussed, without having

to make any assumptions or possible judgments. Beginning with pre-socialization, it

could be suggested that the art of selfie taking and posting practices within social

spheres is learning – after viewing others’ selfies I am able to see the role schemas

considered correct for social media sites such as Instagram. Moreover, with the selfie

being from a trip to a foreign country, others would have done this previously and so

there is an element of mimicry alongside following the conventions of foreign travel.

29
Results from the aforementioned psychological studies go further than just to

mention four motivations, these are simply umbrella categories with more detailed

reasons:

“To attract attention […] To show off […] To keep in touch with friends […] To

record a specific moment […] To record my life in general […] To be

entertained hen I’m bored […] To refresh myself” (Sung et al., 2015, 262)

Out of these the following can be applied to the particular selfie: to show off, to record

a specific moment and to record my life in general. The recording of this moment is

more for my personal memory than it is to spread to the world, however, the sharing

of it on a social networking site has the ability to do both. Image sharing sites such as

Instagram were created for that simple reason, to share images, and so the inclusion

of this selfie on there has the ability to show off my escapades to others, which in

turn gives me seventeen likes and appraisal from others for doing so, offering an

increase in my social capital and confirmation of attracting attention.

Influenced by Marxist ideology, Pierre Bourdieu stated:

“social capital is the aggregate of the actual or the potential resources which

are linked to the possession of a durable network of more or less

institutionalised relationships of mutual acquaintance and recognition – in

other words, to membership in a group – which provides each of its members

with the backing of a collectively-owned capital, a ‘credential’ which entitles

them to credit, in the various senses of the word. These relationships may

30
 exist only in the practical state, in material and/or symbolic exchanges which

help to maintain them” (1986, 247)

Selfies are intrinsically linked to social capital. It is as though each selfie taken, and

subsequent posts, revolve around the concept. Focusing solely on the

photographing, it makes the suggestion that one’s position within the network of

relationships has an impact on what selfie behaviours will be present, from the

subject, to the artistic styles through to the simple reason. The showing of friendship

within the selfie highlights the relationships within my social sphere, and an

opportunity to expand quite greatly using the connections with their relationships in

their individual social spheres. There are elements of discovery and construction in

terms of my identity project here also. Prominently showcasing these relationships

firmly make a part of my self-concept that friendship and relationships are key, and

there is a want, somewhat a need, to prove this to others. Furthermore, there are

‘hidden’ elements which upon first viewing a spectator would not see that also make

up my self-concepts and reinforce my identity construction with a need for proof –

designer clothing, designer accessories, wealth.

In chapter two, association of truth is discussed. Although it is highlighted there is

ambiguity within the notion of truth and photography, there is a suggestion that a

selfie breaks through this and allows a direct channel to the truth; there is some

sense of perception that the selfie has not gone through a process of appropriation

due to the almost instantaneous sharing available to users. However, it is common

knowledge that within today’s society and the culture of celebrity, there are vast

amounts of lies through editing and the use of Photoshop before an image is

uploaded to be viewed by the masses.

31
Sharing the image on social media, and the attainment of the seventeen likes

enhanced uses and gratifications that I subconsciously desired. “The basic premise

of uses and gratifications theory is that individuals seek out media that fulfil their

needs and leads to ultimate gratification” (Whiting and Williams, 2013, 362) Every

active selfie taker and subsequent poster seeks a use and gratification from their

participation. Whiting and Williams’ study focused on ten uses and gratification

themes, three of which are of key interest to this study:

“Convenience Utility […] the convenience of being able to communicate with a

lot of people at one time.

Information Sharing […] defined as using social media to share information

about you with others […] respondents mentioned that they like to post

updated and share pictures.

Surveillance/knowledge about others […] Some of the respondents stated that

they are “nosey”, they “spy on people” […] they want to know what others are

doing and they try and keep up with others.” (2013, 366-367)

With regards to the selfie depicted in fig. 7, there is the inclusion of all three stated

uses and gratifications above. The one posting allowed me to share the selfie with

my two hundred plus followers, as well as communicate a substantial amount of

information through a single image (alongside a small caption and tags). Secondly, I

had a desire to share this information with the people who actively look at my feed; if

they were not there, and did not interact with my other postings, there would be no

desire to share this information. Finally, I was able to make it easier for others to be

‘nosey’ about this aspect of my life and subsequently enable them to reach their

desired gratifications. When analysing uses and gratifications theory within selfie and

32
posting behaviour, a cycle can quickly appear – in order to attain a gratification, one

is symbiotically offering a gratification to another individual. This cycle is very similar

to that of an identity project, it is something that will continue to evolve and shape

based on feedback received from other people within various social situations.

This gratification of surveillance is rather prominent in the work of practitioners who

use the selfie as an innovative art form. Amalia Ulman produced a series entitled

Excellences & Perfections in which she used her Instagram and Facebook accounts

to relay a scripted performance to seemingly unknowing followers. “Using popular

hashtags from micro-celebrities on social media, Ulman created a three-part

performance work that explored how women present themselves online” (Kinsey,

2016) The selfies included pictures of Ulman in lingerie [see fig. 8] to selfies in a

mirror of Ulman in a seemingly lavish apartment [see fig. 9].

“Arranging them into an order that could make sense as a narrative, Instagram

Amalia moved to the big city, broke up with her long-term boyfriend, did drugs,

had plastic surgery, self-destructed, apologised, recovered and found a new

boyfriend […] It was only then she revealed the whole thing had been a

performance, a work of art, rather than a record of her real life” (Kinsey, 2016)

By the end of her project, 88,906 people were following and watching her

performances, waiting in anticipation for her next post in her trials and tribulations in

her attempts to become an ‘it girl’ in New York City. These performances follow

Schechner’s theoretical standpoints, as laid out in chapter one, as well as the key

concepts of an identity project, debated in chapter two. Instagram and Facebook are

33
a stage in which Ulman has the capacity to share these performances with a large

audience.

The surveillance of Ulman’s work is paramount – the amassed 89,906 followers

‘spied’ on what was thought to be her life, and had a want to keep up-to-date with the

unravelling events. Surveillance within performance is key – to perform is to make a

display of certain elements to an audience, and it is here where the audience looks

on, in a surveillance mode. Individuals can then read, decode and interpret each

performance, which in turn allows their own self-concepts and schemas to be altered,

even if only at a heavily subconscious level. Associating themselves with Ulman’s

selfies through the use of ‘likes’ and ‘comments’, the element of surveillance crosses

over into pre-socialization, as mentioned in identity projects in chapter two, in which

the spectator begins to question their relationship with Ulman and begins an innate

want to connect and question their own identities to the ones that are being

portrayed.

Using the selfie rather than another means of photography, Ulman, along with the

millions of other individuals who take selfies, often as part of their everyday rituals

“post them to a stage on which they perform […] that establishes an aesthetic

presentation of that person” (Çadirci and Güngör, 2016, 3) that goes some way to

suggest that regardless of context and pre-conceived knowledge, every selfie taken

and shared has no other feasibility than to be of performance, rather than a

fluctuating mass of identities.

34
Conclusion

As mentioned in chapter two, there is an argument surrounding association of truth

with a camera that can be summarised using Sontag’s statement regarding

appropriation:

“To photograph is to appropriate the thing photographed […] Photographs

furnish evidence. Something we hear about, but doubt, seems proven when

we’re shown a photograph of it” (1977. 3-5)

This appropriation within a self-portrait offers the belief to individuals that there is

feasibility of a self to exist. This self can appear in any form that the photographer

may see fit through the picking and choosing of individual elements that combine to

build their self-concept. It is these concepts that are then packaged into the

photograph for the world to see. Individuals proceed to display and perform their self-

concepts, on platforms such as social media or in everyday life, that help to reinforce

the belief that there is feasibility of a self’s existence.

As debated in chapter one, and for purposes of this study, it can be concluded that

the ‘self’ has no feasibility of existence, but is a fluid social and cultural context; it is

only thought to be through readings of self-portraiture that it can exist. The use of

performance, as mentioned in chapter one by Schechner, states that entire lives are

a performance piece, with the same being true for self-portraiture. When analysing a

self-portrait, it can be said that one’s self-identity is being portrayed, however, these

elements of identity are in fact a result of performance from the subject and therefore

cannot necessarily be deemed truthful. It can also be argued that one’s self as an

35
entire entity is a performance for oneself, a trial run if you will, not just the elements

one would wish to be shown to others.

Identity projects once again reinforce this false lead. Viewing self-portraiture in the

form of a selfie on platforms such as Instagram and Facebook can rather easily

mislead a spectator into thinking a project-in-progress is a fully completed identity.

However, as has been discussed, one’s ‘identity’ can never truly come to a complete

standstill, there is a constant state of evolution:

Identity projects continually evolve over time […] At each of these stages, a

person’s cognitive representations of “self” may change” (Kleine and Kleine,

2000, 279)

Further influenced and represented by practitioners of contemporary photographic

self-portraiture, one’s identity project reinforces the state of flux one’s identity would

revolve, and the considerations it takes to make an attempt at pinpointing a specific

moment to represent.

Throughout this study there appears to be a subliminal message that postmodernity,

although frequent in its appearance within contemporary photographic self-

portraiture, cannot be fully applied with reference to the selfie and representation of

identity. The ‘anything goes’ attitude of postmodernism seems distant when

analysing the requirements of a selfie, when both being taken and shared. These

‘hidden’ innate rules, known only to those who often partake in selfie culture, begin to

cause a shift from postmodernism into a new wave; a new wave that requires a new

logic of thinking with relation to the 21st Century.

36
Post-postmodernism is a theory suggested by Tom Turner. He states: “Post-

postmodern planning is a sign of returning self-confidence. Traditions are being

rediscovered” (1996, 8) There is reference to both modernism and postmodernism in

a sense that is required for further study. These rediscovered traditions are

recognition and appreciation of the traits laid out in modernity. Throughout this study

there has been focus on postmodernism and the shift from regiment into a free will

state of mind, however, it is this reflection of modernity that supports this new found

discussion:

“As post-postmodernism is a prosperous term, we must hope for something

better. The Age of Synthesis is a possibility. Coherent, beautiful and functional

environments are wonderful things, which can be produced in different ways.

The modernist age, of ‘one way, one truth, one city’, is dead and gone. The

postmodernist age of ‘anything goes’ is on the way out. Reason can take us a

long way, but it has limits. Let us embrace post-postmodernism – and pray for

a better name.” (Turner, 1996, 10)

Using themes of modernity, it can be concluded that the art form of a selfie, as a

particular of photographic self-identity, only entrenches the illusion of the self brought

to the forefront of discussion. Rather than having the ability to move forward in

approach, there is an essence of a never-ending cycle – with the recognition of

evolution comes the recognition of beginning and ending in a state of modernity (or

whichever name is given to the current phase).

In order to further discussion and debate surrounding representation of the self in

contemporary photographic self-portraiture, one must look towards a new approach;

37
develop and research the understandings of post-postmodernism within the 21st

Century and how these elements can be adopted into the arguments of identity.

The question posed at the beginning, Who do you see? cannot truly be answered

based on this study alone and so there is a recommendation for further study: In the

beginning you are told it is you; you then believe that it is you; and if somebody says

otherwise, they are said to be wrong; so the question turns to: Who is right?

38
Reference List

Aidan (2016) Selfie of friends in Kraków city square [image]. Available from

https://www.instagram.com/p/BFlg01-F3Lz/?taken-by=aidanwpls [accessed 22 April

2017].

Allan, K. (1997) The Postmodern Self: A Theoretical Consideration. Quarterly Journal

of Ideology, 20(1&2) 3-24. Available from

https://libres.uncg.edu/ir/uncg/f/K_Allan_Postmodern_1997.pdf [accessed 5 April

2017].

Amalia’s Instagram (2014a) Selfie of Amalia on bed in lingerie [image]. Available

from https://www.instagram.com/p/oMfcCcFV9n/?hl=en [accessed 22 April 2017].

Amalia’s Instagram (2014b) Selfie of Amalia taken in mirror in apartment [image].

Available from https://www.instagram.com/p/qGUMyRlVxL/?taken-

by=amaliaulman&hl=en [accessed 22 April 2017].

BBC (2009) Buddhism at a glance. London: BBC. Available from

http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/buddhism/ataglance/glance.shtml [accessed

19 Jan 2017].

Blofeld, J. (1958) The Zen Teaching of Huang Po. New York, USA: Grove

Weidenfeld.

39
Bourdieu, P. (1986) the Forms of Capital. In: J.G. Richardson (ed.) Handbook of

Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education. London: Greenwood, 241-258.

Çadirci, T. and Güngör, A. (2016) Love my selfie: selfies in managing impressions on

social networks [in press]. Journal of Marketing Communications. Available from

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13527266.2016.1249390 [accessed 21 Feb 2017].

Ellen DeGeneres (2014) Ellen DeGeneres’ Oscar selfie [Twitter]. 3 March. Available

from https://twitter.com/theellenshow/status/440322224407314432?lang=en-gb

[accessed 18 April 2017].

Epstein, M. (1988) Forms Of Emptiness: Psychodynamic, Meditative And Clinical

Perspectives. The Journal of Transpersonal Psychology, 21(1) 61-71.

Goffman, E. (1959) The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. New York, USA:

Penguin.

Hall, J. (2014) The Self-Portrait: A Cultural History. New York, USA: The Museum of

Modern Art.

Hattenstone, S. (2001) Cindy Sherman: Me, myself and I. London: The Guardian.

Available from https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2011/jan/15/cindy-

sherman-interview [accessed 12 February 2017].

Instagram. (2017) #selfie. Los Angeles, USA: Instagram. Available from

https://www.instagram.com/explore/tags/selfie/ [accessed 24 January 2017]

40
Kinsey, C. (2016) The Instagram artist who fooled thousands. London: BBC.

Available from http://www.bbc.co.uk/culture/story/20160307-the-instagram-artist-who-

fooled-thousands [accessed 27 April 2017].

Kleine, R. and Kleine, S. (2000) Consumption and Self-Schema Changes

Throughout the Identity Project Life Cycle. Advances in Consumer Research, 27(1)

279-286. Available from

http://content.ebscohost.com/ContentServer.asp?EbscoContent=dGJyMNXb4kSeprE

4y9f3OLCmr0%2Bep69SsK64SbeWxWXS&ContentCustomer=dGJyMPGqtlGzrbFM

uePfgeyx43zx1%2B6B&T=P&P=AN&S=R&D=bth&K=6688116 [accessed 4 May

2017].

Mirzoeff, N. (2015) How to See the World. London: Pelican Books.

Newhall, B. (1997) The History of Photography: From 1839 to the Present Day, 5th

edition revised. London: Secker & Warburg.

Oyserman, D., Elmore, K. and Smith, G. (2012) Self, Self-Concept and Identity. In:

M.R. Leary and J.P. Tangney (eds.) Handbook of Self and Identity. New York, USA:

The Guildford Press, 69-104.

Palmer, D. (2014) Explainer: what is postmodernism? London: The Conversation

Trust. Available from http://theconversation.com/explainer-what-is-postmodernism-

20791 [accessed 5 April 2017].

41
Pearlman, J. (2013) Australian man ‘invented the selfie after drunken night out’.

Sydney, Australia: The Telegraph. Available from

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/australiaandthepacific/australia/1045911

5/Australian-man-invented-the-selfie-after-drunken-night-out.html [accessed 25 Jan

2017].

Perry, J. (2002) Identity, Personal Identity and the Self. Indianapolis, USA: Hackett.

Photographic Resource Center (undated) A Brief Timeline of Polaroid. Boston, USA:

Boston University. Available from https://www.bu.edu/prc/forms/polatimeline.pdf

[accessed 27 April 2017].

Rahula, W. (1959) What the Buddha Taught. London: Gordon Frazer.

Rosenburg, J. (2017) 1960s Timeline: Timeline of the 20th Century. New York, USA:

ThoughtCo. Available from https://www.thoughtco.com/1960s-timeline-1779953

[accessed 6 April 2017].

Schechner, R. (2013) Performance Studies: An Introduction, 3rd edition. Abingdon:

Routledge.

Sherman, C. (2003) The Complete Untitled Film Stills. New York, USA: Museum of

Modern Art.

Steiner, R. (2003) Cast of Characters [essay]. In: C. Sherman Cindy Sherman.

London: Serpentine Gallery.

42
Sung, Y., Lee, J., Kim, E. and Choi, S. (2015) Why we post selfies: Understanding

motivations for posting pictures of oneself. Personality and Individual Differences, 97,

260-265.

Tate (undated) Art Term: Postmodernism. London: Tate. Available from

http://www.tate.org.uk/art/art-terms/p/postmodernism [accessed 6 April 2017].

Turner, T. (1996) City As Landscape: A post-postmodern view of design and

planning. London: E & FN Spon.

Wade, N. (2015) Art and Illusionists. Cham, Switzerland: Springer.

Whiting, A. and Williams, D. (2013) Why people use social media: a uses and

gratifications approach. Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal, 16(4),

362-369

43
Illustrations

Fig. 1 – ‘Marcia Painting Her Self-Portrait’ from a manuscript of Boccaccio’s On

Famous Women, 1402, ink and colour on parchment (Hall, 2014, 33)

Fig. 2 – Photographic self-portrait of Robert Cornelius circa 1840 (Newhall, 1997, 30)

44
Fig. 3 – Photographic self-portrait of Charles Wheatstone, circa 1840 (Wade, 2015,

272)

Fig. 4 – Cindy Sherman’s Untitled Film Still #3, 1977, a woman poised at a kitchen

sink (Sherman, 2003, 74-75)

45
Fig. 5 – A selfie taken during the 2014 Academy Awards, hosted by Ellen

DeGeneres, shared on her Twitter account (Ellen DeGeneres, 2014)

Fig. 6 – Screenshot of Instagram showing number of images tagged #selfie on 24th

January 2017 (Instagram, 2017)

46
Fig. 7 – A selfie taken in Kraków city square, 19th May 2016 (Aidan, 2016)

Fig. 8 – Selfie of Amalia Ulman lying on her bed in lingerie, 19th May 2014 (Amalia’s

Instagram, 2014a)

47
Fig. 9 – Selfie of Amalia Ulman taken in a mirror, sitting on a windowsill in a

seemingly lavish New York apartment, 7th June 2014 (Amalia’s Instagram, 2014b)

48
Acknowledgements

I would firstly like to thank the entirety of Lincoln School of Film and Media for making

my time here at University a truly enjoyable and knowledgeable experience.

Richard Vickers. Your support and guidance throughout this study has been

paramount. Despite the number of restarts, you maintained a cool, calm and

collected head which in turn enabled me to see light at the end of the tunnel. Your

determination in getting me into further study pushed me to complete this dissertation

to my highest ability and offered new aims and goals for the future. Thank You.

Michelle Walsh. Words cannot describe how much I have valued your support

throughout my studies. It was your lecture in the second year that inspired me to

write a dissertation on this topic, so without that, I would not be where I am. Your

constant push for perfection has resonated in every piece of work I have done, and I

am sure it shall continue to do so. Many times you have been more than just a tutor /

member of staff to me; always offering a cup of tea and a chat should it be required,

regardless of the situation, and for that alone I thank you.

Bronwyn Hawkins; JiaMin Ong; Kayleigh Stone; Lucy Fisher; Lucy Granger; Montana

Greenwood; Rebecca Fallon and Selina Gallacher – when I am old and attempting to

recall my days at University, you are the people I shall remember dearly. You are the

ones who have truly defined my University experience. It definitely would not have

been the same without you and I could not have asked to meet a nicer bunch of

people.

49
To everyone else I have met along the way, it’s been real.

50