Tourism Selfies

[MichaelChang]

<p>Counterpoint to Lex's view: <br /><br />The pursuit of aesthetics as a primary objective and an art form is an inherent attribute in many professional and personal endeavors - fashion design, hair and makeup, architectural design, industrial design, photography - and seeking validation through these pursuits does not in itself constitute narcissism. <br /><br />On a personal level, ones pursuit can be be perceived as identifiably narcissistic if it becomes clear that the objective is to "<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcissism">seek gratification from vanity or egotistic admiration of one's own attributes</a>". In such cases, a selfie can indeed be an honest expression of narcissism, but only in a way comparable to porn being an honest expression of ones sexuality. </p>

[aplumpton]

<p>Sarah, don't bother to look any farther for explanations of this dark practice. I have them:</p>

<p>If selfies were a narcissistic activity, then a different term would certainly have been coined: Something like Me-z-ie (Me-ie is a bit awkward).</p>

<p>Secondly, the insidious phenomenon of the tourism selfie has been thrust upon us, almost unconsciously (a national trait...), by our French cousins. In the "The Fabulous Destiny of Amélie Poulain", the travelling garden gnome is seen in front of tourist monuments the world over.</p>

<p>Did it take its own photos? Indisputably, as nobody in their right mind would bother photographing a ceramic garden creature in front of tourist hotspots.</p>

<p>That was in 2001. So, it predates selfie-mania and therefore can claim to be its origin. Thanks to the film director Jean-Pierre Jeunet, who is no doubt compensated handsomely these days by Samsung and Apple.</p>

<p>The selfie arises naturally out of the smoldering cauldron of the infamous Me generation. Generation X has simply made the practice a bit more "risqué."</p>

[sallymack]

Hi, Sarah,

<br>For me, a picture of a person in front of iconic buildings or scenes becomes a picture of the person, locating that person in that space at that time.<br>

<br>I think Lex comes closest to how I think about selfies and tourist selfies:<br>

<i>". . .it speaks to us personally, motivates and drives us personally to fulfill an inner need."</i><br>

<br>It may be just me but I'm always curious about how I appear to others and have been taking selfies for decades. But not "tourist" selfies. I don't want to be the subject of a scene which is more interesting (to me) without me or another person in it. --Sally

[sarah_fox]

<p>Thanks to all for the lively discussion! There does seem to be a consensus of opinion that the purpose of a destination selfie (I'm officially coining the term) is nothing more than to show people that "I was here." Aesthetics don't enter into it, and framing the photo so that the "here" part is not obscured by the "I" part is of no importance -- certainly not enough importance to buy a $10 app or gadget to do it. All that is is important is that the "here" somehow be recognizable.</p>

<p>----------------------------------</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Lex: The only significant difference is that selfies don't have any pretense. They don't pretend it's about some universal aesthetic, or documenting a thing, a subject, a person or a situation because it "needs" to be documented. Nothing "needs" to be documented. We internalize and personalize that need, and express it through our own filters and goggles, while couching it as some selfless act of altruism - rather than admitting that we *choose* to document it because it speaks to us personally, motivates and drives us personally to fulfill an inner need.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Fulfilling some inner need is why we do EVERYTHING in life, Lex. Even having root canal allows us to save a tooth and stop the pain, and that fulfills an inner need to enjoy a better quality of life.</p>

<p>Things do need to be documented, whether we enjoy documenting them or not. I do enjoy documentary photography, but that doesn't mean it's devoid of any larger purpose. The suggestion is illogical.</p>

<p>FAIW, I do think selfies have some very limited documentary value. I'm not talking about destination selfies; rather, I mean any and all selfies as examples of a social craze. (Of course we don't need approx. 1 trillion selfies per year to document the craze.) Ironically, the best documentary photos with regard to the selfie craze seem to be candids of people taking selfies. I think representative selfies and candids of selfie-takers will be important touch-stones for future generations to connect with present-day generations, and there is some social value to that. Maybe it's not a lot of value, but at least some. (I must resolve to take more photos of people taking selfies.)</p>

[James G. Dainis]

... and then you can move on to taking photos of people taking photos of people taking selfies.

[Spearhead]

<p>People taking a group selfie...</p>

<p><img src="http://spirer.com/fsf2012/content/images/large/_57P4094.jpg" alt="" width="900" height="675" /></p>