Now the daily ‘habit’ of a self-portrait drawing is reasonably well established, I find my thoughts moving towards serious underlying critical theory issues raised by the project.
A recent article in Art Monthly by Dean Kenning (June 10/No 337, p.7) has caused me to start reflecting much more on what these self-presentations mean in terms of me as artist.
Kenning draws on a discussion by Hannah Arendt, who warns that appearance in the public realm in modern society may be just a means of satisfying a private. narcissistic need for public admiration. I read these words and take a sharp breath, because this cuts to the heart of the psychological challenge I face in trying to publicise my ‘self’ as widely as possible on a daily basis. Kenning acknowledges that exposure is neccessary in order to have a voice, but -and here’s the painful nub- “…it often seems to operate for the sole purpose of personal affirmation rather than, and against, any transforming influence on the wider field of art.”
Within the broader context of his article, Kenning does go on to consider ways in which the appearance of the artist can, paradoxically, be an expression of modesty, and raise important public awareness of questions of what the role of an artist is. I’m not sure I can avail myself-yet- of this convenient loophole, but I now can’t avoid these questions of who I am portraying and why.
I find I want to immerse myself now in the whole question of what self-portraiture has meant through the ages. I also need to reflect on how, and to what extent, it has changed, particularly in late 20th century culture and the more immediate recent past with the massive impact of social media culture. I find it odd that I started the whole project without consciously thinking about all of this, because it now seems a blindingly obvious line of enquiry. But then I suppose I always knew that the project would be a gradually revealing one in more ways than one.
