DearestINFps:AmICrazy?

[AdverbsModify]

Hi guys! I'm AdMo. I'm INFp. 4w3. typical. Archon's sister. He basically forced me to make an account way back when and now I'm using it.

Here's some stuff I think. If you're INFp do you agree? If not, how do you do things? I would love to know if I'm crazy or not.
This is most of an essay I wrote for class on Art in my life. It was a "get to know you as a person" paper, so I took the libertly of being frivolous and abstract.

I bolded some key sentances if you're a lazy reader.


There are many forms of art. Some artists focus only on the physical: form, color, the beauty of objects and scenes. I choose to use the physical to communicate what I most want to explore: ideas. They don’t have to be complex or mind-shattering, but when something is being created there is more than meets the eye. I am interested in visual art, poetry, and art therapy because they provide a way to delve deeper into meaning and the human psyche.

POETRY
I use poetry as a way to organize and confront ideas. My poetry originates from the transient thoughts I can’t yet put into words. So I find a mental image or scene that best represents the idea. Each poem originally starts as a picture. I choose elements in the scene that evoke strong associations to the original idea and try to find words to describe them.

The poetry and lyrics I enjoy most are those that create a sense of dual responsibility for the writer and the audience. The writer must creatively and carefully choose the words that will “nudge” the reader towards an idea. But I also believe it isn’t the writer’s responsibility to spell everything out. At a certain point the reader must use their own understanding, memories, and associations of the poem’s words to bridge the gap between themselves and the writer. In my ideal poem (or any type of art) an exchange of information occurs and connections form in a way you cannot otherwise experience.

Through reading and writing poetry, we can explore the questions: Can two people have such similar mind sets that only 20 words will both lead them to the same conclusions? And if not, what is another way to get there?

VISUAL ART
Drawing in my sketchbook is like organizing a paper. It helps me brainstorm ideas and construct them into more meaningful pictures. I like to plan out possible paintings, sculptures, clothes, photographs, and drawings before I do them to explore the various ways I can present my idea. This process helps me familiarize myself with the subject. I have learned, however, to not become frustrated if a piece can’t be executed as planned. There is beauty in a spontaneous stroke of red or a crooked stitch.

I think visual art is important because we rely so much on verbal communication that we forget there are other ways to be heard. Everyone has a unique perception of reality, and art can show those differences or similarities. Art is a way to explore and communicate your findings, to share truths and compare them to others. The abstract presents an even more concrete idea that a realistic portrayal can. This is because it cuts away distraction and aims to distill a story to its essence. Art in this way questions what we think reality is- the mental or the physical- and who defines it. The challenge to turn ourselves away from how we’ve been taught to think is intriguing and one I’m willing to put effort into.

The title of my paper is “Adverbs Modify”, a phrase I learned while taking Latin I grammar. This is a simple concept that everyone uses but for some reason it stuck with me. After thinking about it (and complicating its meaning) I figured out why. I like this phrase because it describes the importance of the implied meaning of an action over the physical action itself. Does someone smile maliciously or do they smile gratefully? In the end, the smile doesn’t matter, only our perception of it. I use art in my life to reach conclusions about the world and find new perspectives from which to view it.

[CloudCuckooLander]

I fit everything you said above, absolutely perfectly. I'm a fellow INFp 4w3.

[AdverbsModify]

lol i just got so excited by your response.
im glad you agree! do you also do some form of art??

[CloudCuckooLander]

It's not my main focus, but I greatly enjoy writing (as well as reading) poetry, and acting in theater productions. I've considered becoming a stage actor before, too, based solely on my obsessive love of acting. I was a very artistic child, too - I used to make the most elaborate snowmen, little snow-masterpieces that would melt away when the sun shed its light upon them.

[redbaron]

AdMod, I love that you highlighted part of that for lazy readers. That would be me, the lazy reader. I usually try to skip to the important parts, so that was awesome.

[silverchris9]

Welcome to the IEI hivemind. You will find we are all bizarrely the same.

Also I share your views on art, except that for my personal theories, I like to say that it's something about the world, rather than something about the writer her- or himself (although the writer can be part of the world; it's an emphasis thing) that the reader reacts to. That is, when the reader "jumps the gap" as it were (I use the word "jumps"), they're not touching the poet; they're touching the world. The poet is an enzyme catalyzing a reaction between the reader and the world. (The critic, similarly, catalyzes a reaction between the reader and the poet).

[AdverbsModify]

I greatly enjoy writing (as well as reading) poetry, and acting in theater productions.

I used to be big into acting too. I applied for a theatre spot in an art school I went to, but changed it to visual arts at the last minute. I feel like I still hold onto theatre though...I'm obsessed with putting together costumes and settings and characters for my photography. I love making little staged worlds.

Welcome to the IEI hivemind. You will find we are all bizarrely the same.

it's something about the world, rather than something about the writer her- or himself that the reader reacts to. That is, when the reader "jumps the gap" as it were (I use the word "jumps"), they're not touching the poet; they're touching the world. The poet is an enzyme catalyzing a reaction between the reader and the world. (The critic, similarly, catalyzes a reaction between the reader and the poet).

lol. you, sir, love the extended metaphores!
for me, ideas "surface" from the world. *intuitionnnn* . the writer's job is to collect all those ideas, roll them up into more manageble forms, and spit them back out to the reader in a way that's accessible to different types of people, with the subtle lead into what the writer is trying to explain. leading the horse to water. sometimes they see it, sometimes they don't.
I agree with you, if you are describing the writer as channeling the truths they find around them. Of course, I'm not sure that parts of the world vs. parts of the reader are so separate...that one come before or after the other. instead of touching the world, the reader is merely touching the writer's world and all it's truths.
because what else exists?

also, i am pumped for this hive mind. the only infp's i know are...less abstract? not as... out-there? and it's becoming a drag to have to explain ev.er.y. sin.gle. thing. out to my estp boyfriend. love him, but jesus. not enough words to explain what goes on up here.

[redbaron]

also, i am pumped for this hive mind. the only infp's i know are...less abstract? not as... out-there? and it's becoming a drag to have to explain ev.er.y. sin.gle. thing. out to my estp boyfriend. love him, but jesus. not enough words to explain what goes on up here.

[silverchris9]

also, i am pumped for this hive mind. the only infp's i know are...less abstract? not as... out-there? and it's becoming a drag to have to explain ev.er.y. sin.gle. thing. out to my estp boyfriend. love him, but jesus. not enough words to explain what goes on up here.

My good SLE friends tend to be unusually good at guessing where I'm going with things and vice versa. But then again I only really hang out with academic types. On the other hand, that could be augmented by a male-male talking about shared interests (and having the same conversation a million different ways, which is all academic-ness comes down to anyway) vs. male-female "guys are clueless about feelings/girls' internal world" difference.

lol. you, sir, love the extended metaphores!
for me, ideas "surface" from the world.

"From this the poem springs: that we live in a world
That is not our own, and, much more, not ourselves."
(Wallace Stevens)

*intuitionnnn* . the writer's job is to collect all those ideas, roll them up into more manageble forms, and spit them back out to the reader in a way that's accessible to different types of people, with the subtle lead into what the writer is trying to explain. leading the horse to water. sometimes they see it, sometimes they don't.

I can see that. I think writers do put things in more manageable forms, but then I'm scared to say that 'cause then I feel like I'm not telling people the whole truth or something? But then I do completely agree that writers make things easier to understand. It's magical how you make things easier to understand without dumbing them down.

I agree with you, if you are describing the writer as channeling the truths they find around them. Of course, I'm not sure that parts of the world vs. parts of the reader are so separate...that one come before or after the other. instead of touching the world, the reader is merely touching the writer's world and all it's truths.
because what else exists?

Yeah. That's like, a philosophical thing. I definitely believe in the like... objective existence of subjective truths. That doesn't make any sense. I guess what I think is that generally the most complicated (i.e., interesting) truths are so paradoxical and difficult that they become subjective because no one person can really understand it, so different people emphasize different aspects, which leads to this situation where people are equally right and equally wrong but not agreeing, which is where I think IEIs are like "no, but really, they're both right; just because they disagree, doesn't mean that one is completely wrong and one is completely right!" But whatever. I do think that when we know things, we know things about the world. But then again, in the best poems, we do sort of "know what the writer knew" in the moment that he/she composed the poem, or something like that.

[AdverbsModify]

silverchris9:

lol well if Wallace Stevens says so!...
i do like that quote though.

the amount of explaining does depend on how well you know someone. and most times it's not that my boyfriend won't understand, it's just that he wants to know ALL the details. especially in steps. when it's all so obvious to me, details fade in the greater theme. which is why i am a fan of "show, don't tell" approach. and i love to listen to other's interpretations before giving mine.

and i'm not sure about other infps, but i have next to no emotions. i'm not the "girl" in the relationship. i tend to hold emotional monopoly.

objective existence of subjective truths = yay. paradox= life. i'm obsessed with contrast. which is why i can't stand rigid systems. as humans, we are not strait lines and ninety degree angles. we are warped and inconsistent. but for some reason people *COUGHESTJCOUGH* insist on standardizing humans to pretty, full-circle systems that work in theory. but i always feel they aren't rooted in the reality of human nature. why do we apply humans to systems instead of applying systems to humans?
i understand this argument goes deeper than that, but that's the way it feels.

i think a reader can percieve the feeling the writer was in...i mean, even if they're not on the same "page". does that make sense? tone is tone i guess and all readers will pick up on that.