The notion that narcs are responsible for bribing coaches in pursuit of personality aggrandizement is the latest fallout from the “scam” bomb. J’accuse television personality Dr. Drew Pinsky of this generalization.
Is the old fight between individualism and collectivism behind this diagnosis? After all, Dr. Pinsky (who has appeared on the Greg Gutfeld show on Fox) should be an avatar of individual distinction, for Pinsky is flawlessly bourgeois. Since time out of mind, discourses were tribal (collectivist). Enter bourgeois revolution in the late 18th century (the American and French Revolutions) that highlighted individual rights and talents.
The recoil against such “individualism” came quickly from “traditionalists,” who emphasized collectivism. Although Sigmund Freud (who both attacked and defended the family), I don’t remember any reference to “narcissism” in Freud’s writings. Indeed, he was frequently condemned as pan-sexual.
So I am wondering what prompted Dr. Drew (who has written about the turn toward narcissism in his latest book) to nail the narcs in this latest instance of corruption among the bourgeoisie, most notably female actresses.
(It should be clear that I am criticizing the diagnosis of narcissism and not defending the conduct of those arrivistes (?):the wealthy scammers who bribed their way into the colleges that would supposedly enhance their class positions.
The Clare Spark Blog 
On only a tangential note — I’ve only seen the right half of that famous painting you posted at the top of your blog, Echo and Narcissus. I guess people thought that only seeing the half with seeing Narcissus staring into the water at his reflection was all we needed to understand the message.But I must say, having now seen the beautiful female on the left side staring back at Narcissus as if to say, “What’s the matter with you? Can’t you see I’m here and looking at you?” really helps give the entire painting its full emotional wallop. Her expression is so much more sophisticated and relatable than his. It isn’t merely just a look of being forlorn — it’s also got a strong hint of perplexity in it — and for me, that tells us that, yes, indeed, there *is* something “wrong” — something very wrong with that guy!
Comment by Daniel L Remler — March 16, 2019 @ 11:17 pm |
Am not commenting on narcissism as such, but at its wrong-headed application! I suspect anti-Freudians.
Comment by clarelspark — March 16, 2019 @ 11:24 pm |
I understand Clare — I merely was making a completely tangential / offhand comment on the picture, that’s all. I agree with your analysis (s usual). The anti-Freudians drive me nuts as well. They don’t understand that he effectively invented / developed the entire world of of psychological terms and viewpoints in which the tner Western world now lives. It’s like criticizing Einstein for his “G-d does not play dice” comment” — right or wrong, the point is both men single-handedly changed the entire vocabulary win which we discuss their respective subjects. Like Newton, one cannot invent / create / develop / discover / explain an entire worldview / Geshtalt which is some 90+% correct some minor corrections being made to said system at some points in the future.
Comment by Daniel L Remler — March 17, 2019 @ 2:02 am