 Narcissism The term Narcissism is derived from the Greek mythology of Narcissus. Narcissus was a handsome Greek youth who rejected the desperate advances of the nymph Echo (Greek mythological symbols). As punishment, he was doomed to fall in love with his own reflection in a pool of water. Unable to consummate his love, Narcissus pined away (grieved) and changed into the flower that bears his name, the Narcissus. The term narcissism means love of oneself, and refers to the set of character traits concerned with self-admiration, self-centeredness, self-regard, and grandiosity. The name was chosen by Sigmund Freud. The definition of narcissism that I present in this blog is based on the work of Alexander Lowen M.D. (1985). Lowen (1985) sees both psychological as well as cultural aspects to narcissism. Narcissism, on a psychological level, denotes an exaggerated investment in one’s image at the expense of the self. Narcissists are more concerned about how they appear than what they feel. On a cultural level Lowen sees narcissism as a loss of human values, a lack of concern for the environment, for quality of life, and for one’s fellow human beings. The narcissism of the individual parallels that of the culture, in that we shape our culture according to our image, and the culture in turn shapes us. Lowen further states that in his forty years of practice (prior to publication of his book on narcissism in 1985), he has seen a marked change in the personality problems of people consulting him. The neuroses of earlier times represented by guilts, anxieties, phobias, or obsessions are not commonly seen today. Instead, he states, he sees people who complain of depression, lack of feelings, an inner emptiness, a deep sense of frustration and unfulfillment. This absence of guilt and anxiety coupled with lack of feelings give one a sense of unreality about these people. Their performance – socially, sexually, work seems to be too efficient, too mechanical, and too perfect to be human. They function more like robots than human beings (Lowen, 1985). Postmodernism Postmodernism emerged from critique of modernism. Thus the best way to understand postmodernism is by first explaining modernism. The modern era began in late 17th century, with the appearance of artisans and entrepreneurs in the cities. This period coincided with the beginning of capitalism. Modernism ended sometime in 1960s. Postmodern era essentially started in 1960s, although elements of it can be traced back to earlier in the 20th century. Many argue that the main difference between the two eras has to do with question of unity, wholeness and totality. People in modern era were searching for some kind of totality, a unified way of describing the world, a unified set of values, culture, and life style. According to most postmodern theorists not only have we lost the possibility of totality in our lives, but we no longer care about it. Today totality has disappeared so completely that we don’t even remember that it was ever possible! Most of the ideas that we study in schools were created during the modern era. So we are still taught that we ought to have a feeling of wholeness in our lives, or that we have to have an image of the world in which all the pieces fit together. Most postmodern theorists however, believe that the loss of totality (grand narrative) is a good thing. Quest for wholeness or totality will no longer result in fascism or other dictatorial forms of governance, as wholeness and totality no longer exist. For example the grand narrative (totality) for Hitler was the supremacy of the Germans and the Aryan race and their destiny to rule the world. The notion of postmodernism put forward in this blog is that which is presented by Fredric Jameson (1991). Jameson still finds value in talking about totality. His point of view is that totality is still a good idea, because we should try to understand how all the pieces of our world and our experience fit together. During the modern era production lagged behind consumption. Factories struggled hard to produce what consumers demanded. There was a need for more educated people to streamline production, and make factories more efficient. Modern culture had respect for universities, science, and scientists. There was a relentless search for totality in modern times, a totality that could solve modern problems, and can make sense of the world. Modern art also reflected this search for meaning and totality. However, starting in 1960s, due to tremendous advances in forces of production (more modern factories, better tools, etc), consumption began to lag production. Thanks to advances in the forces of production there was in increase in surplus value, or simply profit. This increase in profit then was partially spent in advertisements to increase consumption to further increase profit. The culture of postmodern capitalism transformed from valuing scientific research and endeavors to a culture of consumption. Madison Avenue turned into a force that shaped our lives while it encouraged consumption. Thus was created a culture around consumption (postmodern culture), which now shapes our lives and behavior to a great extent. This is the essence of Jameson’s perspective. Jameson (1991) contends that modernity believed that it could represent reality in simple literal signs (ways of describing real world objects, in which signifier is the form of the sign and signified is the content of the sign.) and was troubled by the possibility that these signs might not have actually represented any reality beyond themselves. Postmodernity no longer worries about this, as it assumes that signs exist by themselves, detached from any external reality. Today’s most images and objects are “simulacra” or copies of the past originals. Thus we observe cars that look like those of 50’s, but totally unrelated, clothes that look like those of several decades ago, but unrelated. Within each postmodern cultural artifact (buildings, songs, films, etc), signs are thrown together in random ways. They come and go for no apparent reason. The best way to understand these ideas is to turn the TV on, and the cutting edge of postmodernism can be clearly seen in “infotainment”, and “infomercials” in that we are not sure if we are watching news or an entertainment show or a commercial. An important perspective of postmodernism can be observed by studying postmodern art, which is a term used to describe an art movement which was thought to be in contradiction to some aspect of modernism, or to have emerged or developed in its aftermath. The following pictures of shoes of Van Gogh and the shoes of Andy Warhol depict the differences between modern and postmodern art very clearly. The first and most evident in Warhol's shoes is a new kind of flatness or depthlessness, a new kind of superficiality in the most literal sense, perhaps the most important formal feature of all the postmodernisms. One can also observe certain lack of feelings in the Warhol’s shoes, albeit it might be aesthetically pleasing. While Van Gogh’s shoes tells a story. His painting conveys certain feelings. Van Gogh's painting conveys a life style, and history behind the shoes as they are depicted. It notifies us of the possible pain the owner endured, given how worn out the shoes are.
Modern people felt “feelings”. Their experiences were connected to their inner states, even if their inner states were confused and problematic. They struggled to connect their experiences to each other. Postmodern people are not concerned or disturbed by such issues. Rather than having “feelings”, they merely register disconnected “intensities”. Everyday life itself has its own psychedelic intensity. The more intense the rush, the more “cool” it is. There is something erotically satisfying about the images that play around us. The intense rushes climax quickly, yet the process seems to be eternal. We crave for more, like addicts. It is my belief that the postmodern man who, for the most part instead of having feelings and emotions has sensations of various intensities and through commodity fetishism increases these sensations. He is the agent of reproduction of this stage of capitalism. Postmodern man is a perfect consumer of ideas and commodities in the vast and ever changing spatial postmodern plane, in which past, present, and future all coexist together (fashion of yesterday becomes that of today, etc). This is how late capitalism reproduces itself (cycle of capital through consumption). Postmodern man rejects history and lives on a flat (spatial) ever changing plane. Postmodern man must become empty internally needing constant excitement to feel some aliveness. This excitement may come through consumption of aesthetically pleasing objects. But the excitement wears out and emptiness sets in again, requiring more excitement, and the process repeats.
Based on the way Lowen (1985) defines narcissism, it is easy to conclude that the postmodern man is the narcissist, devoid of feelings, with a sense of emptiness, and heavily invested in, and identifying with an image. The mode of production of late capitalism has created the postmodern culture which shapes the behavior of the individuals in our culture (narcissism), and in turn the individuals reproduce the culture which reproduces the mode of production. In summary, narcissist is what late capitalism needs in order to reproduce itself, and thus to survive, and in turn narcissist is reproduced by late capitalism through its postmodern culture. We conclude this section by paraphrasing Marx who says: Our lives are shaped, above all, by the mode of production that exists in our society. The mode of production means the various tools available to produce goods and services (human labor, natural resources, technologies, investment capital, etc.) and the way we organize those tools. This includes the way we organize ourselves when we use the tools, the way we relate to each other as producers and consumers of goods and services. The situation however, is getting more dire as we are beginning to enter the post-postmodern era. Postmodernism deconstructed all rules, regulations, ideologies, belief system, "religious morality", etc (Jacques Derrida). The psychological correlate of post-postmodernity is autistic existence. Thus we enter an autistic age (not related to autism spectrum disorder). This is the age of isolation and disconnection. Art and architecture (according to Jameson, and Jean Baudrillard and other postmodern theorists) is at the forefront of the change. While places in Vegas that are simulacra of the past bring people together - Venetian, Paris, Flower garden of Belagio, the Forum shops, the new post-post modern architecture of Chrystal Shops or City Center are designed to pull people apart. One hardly runs into anyone in Chrystal Shopping Center, while there are many people there. In Mandarin Oriental hotel the lobby is on the 20th floor. The new hotel lobbies contain essentially nothing, in contradistinction to the postmodern architectures. The entertainment has instead shifted to the rooms. We should expect many more psychological disorders stemming from this stage of development of capital. Instead of creating simulacra for people to adopt and buy, or for people to congregate around, post-postmodern capitalism allows each individual to select his own unique style which may or may not be a copy of the past (simulacra), thus tailoring the production directly to the individual, resulting in ever more consumption of useless goods. References Derrida, J. (1980). Writing and difference. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Jameson, F. (1991). Postmodernism, or, the cultural logic of late capitalism. North Carolina: Duke University Press. Lowen, A. (1985). Narcissism denial of true self. New York: Simon & Schuster. Comments are closed.
|
AuthorHomayoun Shahri Archives
May 2016
Categories
All
|
RSS Feed