Text by Corinna Heumann and photography by vanderGracht

Artists and their artistic portraits usually respond to the flood of images in the digital present with critical distance and playful irony. Countless inexpensive ways to produce innumerable images online at the press of a button lead to the realization that perception is not a fixed quantity. It depends on perspective, knowledge, and context. In the visual shell game of digital identities, the question arises: who has the power to meaningfully shape images of the Other or of the SELF?

What does it mean today to show oneself or others?

In the digital age, portrait art is experiencing a radical democratization. Influencers, selfies, posts on social media, and avatars generate fleeting images through constant self-staging, oscillating between controlled design of one’s own image on the one hand and alienation and loss of control on the other. Algorithms and users, filters and likes electrify human relationships between self-determination and the pressure to conform, self-perception and totalitarian beauty ideals, hyperactivity and refusal. The optimized digital SELF is unconsciously elevated to a meaning-giving standard and often becomes an ideology.

Portrait Art and Humanism

In art history, the portrait is one of the most enduring forms of expression. It is the search for truth and authenticity within the extraordinarily diverse, often confusing and surprising landscapes of the human soul. The depiction of the individual in their respective era—of their appearance, self-concept, and social position—has developed since antiquity in parallel with the humanist image of humanity in the West. It reflects the transition from idealized types to individual personalities, from timeless expressions of eternal truths to depictions of worldly power, status, life experience, cultural identity, and memory. Since the Renaissance, human beings have been studied anatomically, psychologically, and socially—and have studied themselves. Leonardo, Dürer, and Rembrandt portrayed the personalities of their time and themselves with confidence, striving for the greatest possible fidelity in their many facets. In the 19th century, artists and their patrons began to focus on the bourgeoisie and, subsequently, on all social classes. In the 20th century, the portrait moved away from veristic representation toward the fragmentary, subjective, and abstract. New means of expression described inner states, identity crises, and social ruptures.

Landscapes of the Soul

In the digital age, the classical portrait and its landscapes of the soul are instrumentalized by market forces. Images of people are no longer merely static representations from a clearly defined phase of life within a relatively manageable social context, nor private memories of a specific moment in an individual life story. Today, the portrait is performatively expanded, globally dynamic, multimedia-interactive, edited, fractalized, multiplied, and commented on in virtual spaces. Fluid digital portraits, depictions of group identities, self-presentations, their followers, and users often say more about behavior than about the actual appearance of the portrayed individuals and their social reality. The individual becomes a projection surface. The object of desire is evaluated, monetized, and canceled as soon as new, more exciting and entertaining projection surfaces are invented.

Analog and Digital Self-Experience

Thinking and processes of insight are initially private acts. “I know that I know nothing”—according to Socrates, human beings must recognize their soul and the reason residing within it in order to be truly free. In the digital age, soul and reason become public. Are they still free then? Can human self-experience be replaced by the digital perfectionism of public computational power? Does the constant availability of “smarter” algorithms strengthen “dumber” human thought processes, character development with its detours, insight, and self-knowledge? Do fluid optical illusions of digital super-optimization expand or replace the character traits once conveyed by portrait art? Empowerment and visibility of individuals and marginalized groups are a democratic imperative. Yet permanent digitally optimized self-monitoring leads to deep insecurity, dissatisfaction, and the depressing feeling of not being enough—thus contributing to the erosion of social cohesion in Western democracies.

Who has the power to convincingly shape an image of the Other or of the SELF?

The classical portrait gains new significance as a subject of art. A deeper engagement with fluid digital identities in the tension between artistic reflection and media self-presentation allows artists to negotiate questions of origin, gender, migration, corporeality, or mental health freely and playfully, in such a creative way that an open, authentic, and truthful image of humanity can emerge—often in resistance to stereotypical representations or cultural expectations. Future social scenarios, such as the increasingly dangerous antagonism between humanity and machine reality, are addressed through a humanistic gaze that also draws on tradition. Where artistic reflection and distance are possible, engaging with one’s own image and that of others can lead to a conscious, critically constructive, and curious self-understanding—and help make our world a better place.