We often talk about an t indentity, especially for pop singers. They want to be iconic. But ego and iconic are different. Because art progress is often “a continual self-sacrifice, a continual extinction of personality” (Elliot). More concretely
When the two gases previously mentioned are mixed in the presence of a filament of platinum, they form sulphurous acid. This combination takes place only if the platinum is present; nevertheless the newly formed acid contains no trace of platinum, and the platinum itself is apparently unaffected; has remained inert, neutral, and unchanged. The mind of the poet is the shred of platinum. (Eliot)
In fairness, powerful art comes from the spontaneous overflow of powerful feelings (Wordsworth). So it’s not saying that swaggering, foregrounded ego is a failed art. But when the ego/self is not interesting or transformed, it’s boring. What probably matters isn’t self vs. no-self, but whether the ego is being transcended into something or just advertised. Otherwise, they’re not an artist but just a brand.