Selfie could also call this first impression, a word that led me to get used to under the same conceptual ceiling of some ideas, references and ideas that were being forgotten to me alone and without any commitment. In the end I decided no, because I didn't want to get tangled up, with the worries of the purette beast that I leave out of the cage from time to time (just say it in passing is not to get tangled): Would I have to test myself to find an equivalent in Basque? Too raped? But isn't it the artificial majority? On the other hand, isn't the selfie phenomenon going any further, that people not only so passionately accept selfie, but it also represents what Ellen DeGeneres did in delivering the Oscar, with all these other white teeth? Wasn't it also protoselfies that made cell phones visible in domestic toilets, which we've diaborted so much? And why did the English speakers create a monster like a usfie, betraying the linguistic faith he had in them?

I found the English photographer Jo Spence at the time selfies appeared in my life, it was in the Sant Jordi and a sale (at popular prices) was made in the store of the Macba museum. Last year, I received useful advice from three or four teachers, the most sympathetic teachers, who were driving me around in the hull telling me that we were reading the strangest books we could find on our way. This is how I carried the Spence stuff in my bag. On the front page the same artist appears, with a very difficult look to describe, I would place him between despair and dignity; with hair tied behind him, dressed with a kind of sheet like a towel tied to the body after the shower, around the breasts and with the naked upper part; under the left clavicle an X with black markers.

It is a fairly complete catalog of an exhibition in Macba, with the foreword of curator Jorge Ribalta. Ribalta brought Spence into the movement of post-modern photography from the years 60-780, what I was most interested in is what Ribalta says about the conflict of oppressive representation and, therefore, about the choice for self-representation. That is, (short and folded) Spence felt uncomfortable by the jumps between the retratist (subject) and the portrait (object), for example, the ways of filming documentaries about workers did not reproduce precisely the imbalances they wanted to denounce? Spence decided to be in front and behind the camera, to own its representation.

There are not a few examples (the use of oneself for creation is here the link, after all), among the photographers you can also cite Cindy Sherman, Claude Cahun, or Vivian Maier; among the philosophers there is widespread the fact that some ideas from Sigmund Freud explain the little Sigmund in itself; with the performers you can see in very public. And of course, one of the queens of self-portraits, Frida Kahlo, said it was constantly painted because it was what I knew best.

We speak of ni-ism with negative nuances, which seemed to express the lack of interest for others, but is it not one of the possible alternatives for others not to build (that is, not to build the Other) in an alienating way for themselves?