Thanks for the insights Starfall! You are right... I guess there are many ways to "feel" a painting. I guess a follow up question to Baby-- what do you mean when you say you look at how a painting makes you feel? like what is going through your mind when you assess that?Originally Posted by Starfall
Enneagram: 9w1 6w5 2w3 so/sx
Thanks guys.Thanks, ann! Interesting question. I think we all got along quite well, although we were together only a short time. You're right in that April is probably the sort of person who would get along with just about anyone. I didn't notice any sort of "supervision" going on between her and hkkmr, although hkkmr did seem a little nervous around her. Like he had to be very gentle around her, and was almost over-apologetic. I think that may have been preconceived notions about how supervision was supposed to play out, however, because I saw no reason for him to be so cautious. With glam, she seemed pretty comfortable, but I didn't get to observe their interaction all that much. I think April would probably be the best person to ask about this part, though. I know she doesn't post much on the forum, but maybe she'll make a rare appearance and share her thoughts.You're right that I'm able to get along and have fun with almost anybody if that's what I want to do. I felt the most similar to Auvi, as well, compared to hkkmr and glam. As expected, it was most comfortable and informative to speak with you guys individually, one-on-one, because it's easier to meet one another on a congruent level. With Auvi, I found myself being more open, casual, and focused on fun. With hkkmr and glam, I felt like we were more focused on discussing different topics, both intellectual and personal. When hkkmr, glam, and I went back to the hotel for drinky, I felt like it was easier to get to know them in that type of setting. I tried getting a different type than EII for myself out of hkkmr for juicy drama purposes, so LII as a second option and that I'm weird and hard to type were suggested. I can't really say how they reacted to me vs. Auvi; what say you hkkmr and glam?
What, you mean I'm not open casual and fun when I'm being intellectual and personal...Thanks guys.
I'm not very causal imo, and I'm generally going in my own direction without a lot of consideration for other folks.
It was a short trip but I don't think anyone was very different than what I expected. I was probably more outgoing and decisive then I am normally, but I was the only E in the group.
I watched bits of the videos in the OP, and the person you kinda remind me of is Tereg. I think he self-typed IEE. Anyways, my vague impression of you is XXFp, and Si/Ne > Se/Ni quadra. Your posts are usually heavy on Ni, so I'd favor an iNtuitive typing.
“Whether we fall by ambition, blood, or lust, like diamonds we are cut with our own dust.”
Holy crap, lots of great stuff to respond to! I'm going to reply to them all instead of studying for my final.EDIT: Holy shit, it took me almost two hours to write all this, so most of you people better actually read and reply instead of just "Liking" it.
This will probably sound completely out of left field, but if you were just a random person whose self-typing I didn't know, I actually would have thought some sort of sensing type in a Fi quadra for you... possibly ESI or even SLI. This is just stereotypical mumbo-jumbo, but you have a much more "grounded" presence than I usually associate with Ni types, and you seemed to be more centered in the "real world" of things and people. Also, that "gap" may well have been literal: you spent most of the first day walking several paces behind us taking pictures.(BTW, I kind of want to see some of those pictures! The one you posted was beautiful, but you must have hundreds because every time I looked back, there you were with your camera in front of your face.
But now I think Starfall might be onto something with the different enneagram types. It might also be a subtype difference. Most people seem to be seeing Fe-subtype for me. I know you said you were probably Fe-subtype, but you didn't seem as emotive as I expected. When I think of Fe-IEI, I think of Justin Timberlake (I know he's a dude, but I know girls like this, too): playful, emotive, warm with a somewhat soft disposition. You came across a bit more... serious? Well, less goofy, at any rate. And you had a more forceful presence.
Yeah, sorry about that. The weak microphone on my computer punches up the 6-7kHz frequencies, so everything ends up sounding tinnier and shriller than in person. Thanks for your typing thoughts. It's interesting how some Delta's are seeing EII and others are seeing mostly Fe, lol. I do think E9 works for me, although I secretly want to be a 4.
Aw, thanks eunice!I've always enjoyed your posts as well. I like John Cusack. Also his sister Joan. She's hilarious. This makes two Deltas in a row that are saying Fe > Fi. What you say of INFjs vs. INFps aligns with my impression of these types, which why I've been a bit confused about the EII typings. I think INFjs are much more conscientious and serious than I see myself.
ahah! Well, the painting isn't mine, so I can't take credit for it.
Yay, Starfall!I was hoping to get your opinion, because I identify a lot with your posts as well. Also, when you post pictures/stories about your friends/social group, they always seem like people I could get along with.
Yeah, I think you're on to something with the Enneagram difference. I'm not really well-versed in that theory, but from reading the descriptions and taking the tests, I think 9 works. Can enneagram types change? Up until college, I would definitely see myself as an E4, actually. I was very arrogant, introverted, and thought I was this tortured artist, lol. I identified a lot with Kurt Cobain... almost to a morbid level. Nowadays, I still think of myself as an "artist", but I don't take myself nearly as seriously. After years of depression and anxiety where I was socially very isolated, I've kind of been trying to make up for lost time and make friends again. Probably a big fear of mine is being alone, becuase I know if I'm alone too long, I'll sink back into rumination. When I see E4s on those enneagram forums, my reaction to them is: "Get the fuck over yourselves, you pretentious, self-involved wankers. Unless your name is Friedriche Nietzsche, or Rainer Maria Rilke, or John Frusciante, or Pable Picasso, or Maria Callas, or someone with some actual talent, get over yourselves!!" (Apologies if you're a 4, lol. I've seen your art. It's amazing. You have talent and reason to be arrogant!)
Yeah, I actually think IEE would make more sense for me than EII, if it's between those two.
Couldn't think be Ni vs. Ne, though?
Okay, you got me started... God help you.And this is the same as Jazz, which is not imo sophisticated(I think this terms was used in the video). Jazz is underground bars during prohibition, hookers, alchohol, vice and sin(everything I like)
And look at the way Sarah Vaughan, Ella Fitzgerald, and Billie Holiday dressed. Cab Calloway, Duke Ellington, Louis Armstrong... those cats wore TUXEDOS. Jazz has it's own aristocracy: "Lady" Holliday, the "Duke" Ellington, the "Count" Basie, "Lord" Jellyroll Morton, and Nina Simone was the "high priestess of soul." They did not think of themselves as a burlesque, down and dirty entertainment; these are people who understood the link between music and the heart on a very high playing field. It was a culture they took pride in. And, to me, it doesn't look like what Stuart Davis painted. It's darker and subtler. It's more maroon, midnight black, navy blue, and champagne than the colors he used. It's more art deco, more rounded and flowing than cubism.
BUT probably even some actual jazz musicians would disagree with me. That's just how I see the music.
I did consider IEE, actually. See my reply in the big wall of text that is post #2-.
Yeah, I would have typed that guy some Fe-Ip as well.
What I really mean is... does it evoke memories of my past or intimations of my future? Those "primal images" oftentimes are very striking visual memories left in me from childhood, that I often try to recapture in my present life. One of them is this bleak row streetlamps along the riverside in Philadelphia where I grew up, walking back home late at night from the 4th of July fireworks with my dad. It was dark, it was quiet, it was vaguely threatening, almost like something out of a film noir: just the sound of our footsteps and the pallid light of the streetlamps. That image has etched itself in my mind, and almost feels like a part of my identity. Some music takes me back there (a lot of Jeff Buckley's stuff), and visual art, too. I also have visions of a future that are often mirrors/projections of those images of the past. And that is what strikes up the most intense emotions in me: if it feels like it resonates with those aspects of my identity -- like something unvoiced or unvoiceable inside of me is being given articulation. Hope this makes sense.
Yay, April!Thanks guys.
Thanks Parkster!
Last edited by Animal; 05-08-2012 at 05:33 AM.
"How could we forget those ancient myths that stand at the beginning of all races, the myths about dragons that at the last moment are transformed into princesses? Perhaps all the dragons in our lives are princesses who are only waiting to see us act, just once, with beauty and courage. Perhaps everything that frightens us is, in its deepest essence, something helpless that wants our love."
-- Rainer Maria Rilke, Letters to a Young Poet
As far as sophistication, I don't think their music abilities were any lessor, these were probably some of the best musicians of their era. But Jazz music is still music made by people who probably couldn't walk into the parties, clubs and lounges they played as guests or customers. They could put on that Tuxedo but in segregated America, these were still second class citizens. In this world their music was not just geared towards high society but was geared for a democratic, classless, raceless audience.Okay, you got me started... God help you.
I wasn't really talking about the music and I was talking about the sense of improvisation. Let me note, I was being pretty specific, there is a kind of deliberate calculation in artistic spontaneity which leads to this sense of improvisation. I think this way you can keep the core lines and rhythm intact without losing this sense of raw emotional energy. Note that Stuart Davis's art is very similar to this and as you noted, he was influence by jazz.
This is absolutely not burlesque, and not amateur. But down and dirty, of course it is, the aristocracy is the dirtiest of them all, nevertheless, this music was formed playing smokey boozy lounges, mob bars and initially in front of mostly black audiences. Duke Ellington was a commercial sign painter, Louis Armstrong hauled coal and helped form his music talents in the deliciously named New Orleans Home for Colored Waifs, many of these people worked menial jobs and did bar gigs and dance halls, this music wasn't made in the middle of a symphony hall. They would have brushed shoulders with the pushers, pimps, hookers, booze, drugs and vice of their day.
I would say if anything Jazz is not, it's Art Deco, which imo is based in symmetry, repetition and rationality and Jazz if anything is asymmetric. Ayn Rand not Nina Simone, who is all magic, voodoo and soul.
I am not really thinking of swing, because to me swing as we know it is more commercialized endeavor which basically took Black music and made it mass market for white audience. What I'm talking about is the sense of improvisation rather then real improvisation, which is a rational event choreographed. It's not like Stuart Davis's compositions change either.
I'm more talking about Bebop and it's use of of syncopation and dissonance. Charlie Parker was also a heroin addict.I think a lot of music theory get caught up in the sterile analysis of music and lose sight of the messy dirty business that is music and musicians.
Okay, I don't disagree with this. That's exactly what makes jazz so exciting and gripping. It's like a falconer releasing a falcon into the air where it soars feverishly and freely, but then returns back to the falconer's arm. Jazz, to me, is music, as I explain below.
I'm definitely not going to deny that African-Americans did not live in poverty, that there wasn't pervasive drug use, prostitution, crime, etc. But, I guess where I would take issue with what you're saying is that all of that is the result of racism. That was stuff that was inflicted on them from the outside and, as a result, that they found themselves inside of. They didn't see it that way from the inside out, though. Although racism and segregation may have relegated these people to second class (or third class) status, the music they were making was not any less sophisticated and subtle. I don't really see that subtlety in Davis' work. It looks very static to me. Jazz is anything but static. And if jazz has it's "Minnie the Moocher" with references to drug use and prostitution, in Europe, Puccini was writing an opera about a courtesan (La Traviata), Bizet about a sexpot gypsy (Carmen), Stravinsky composed a ballet about pagan sacrifice (Rite of Spring)... jazz -- like opera -- was a language they used. And it's a poetic, extremely flexible, but not plainspoken language. The plainspoken musical language was the blues, or maybe Tin Pan Alley. Jazz was something more articulate. (And, FWIW, I see music theory as just linguistics -- a way to study the language of music.)This is absolutely not burlesque, and not amateur. But down and dirty, of course it is, the aristocracy is the dirtiest of them all, nevertheless, this music was formed playing smokey boozy lounges, mob bars and initially in front of mostly black audiences. Duke Ellington was a commercial sign painter, Louis Armstrong hauled coal and helped form his music talents in the deliciously named New Orleans Home for Colored Waifs, many of these people worked menial jobs and did bar gigs and dance halls, this music wasn't made in the middle of a symphony hall. They would have brushed shoulders with the pushers, pimps, hookers, booze, drugs and vice of their day.
I would say if anything Jazz is not, it's Art Deco, which imo is based in symmetry, repetition and rationality and Jazz if anything is asymmetric. Ayn Rand not Nina Simone, who is all magic, voodoo and soul.
I am not really thinking of swing, because to me swing as we know it is more commercialized endeavor which basically took Black music and made it mass market for white audience. What I'm talking about is the sense of improvisation rather then real improvisation, which is a rational event choreographed. It's not like Stuart Davis's compositions change either.
I'm more talking about Bebop and it's use of of syncopation and dissonance. Charlie Parker was also a heroin addict.
The best modern-day (or close to modern) analog I can think of is probably the "ball" culture that developed in the urban gay community in the 80s. Like in Paris Is Burning. These were the most marginalized of the marginalized -- black, Hispanic, Asian gay and transgendered men during the rise of AIDS. Yet they formed their own "Aristocracy" -- in some ways a parody of the privileged world around them, but in other ways, a way of attaining for themselves some measure of dignity and pride in their community. I think jazz was the same way. In D.C. U Street was once known as "Black Broadway" -- with rare exceptions, blacks were barred from the "legitimate" stages, so they adopted their own: the Lincoln Theatre on that street is a thing of beauty and dignity. Those musicians may have been poor and working menial jobs, but that doesn't make their music menial. They may have rubbed shoulders with the hookers and pushers, but they did so out of necessity. Drug use and prostitution were prevalent in the upper classes as well -- it's just that they afford to hide it, keeping it clandestine and behind closed doors, and dressing it up behind velvet curtains. Black people didn't have that privilege. Jazz was informed by all of this, but it has a dignity about it.
And I didn't mean to associate jazz with the Ayn Rand school of art deco (that bitch misappropriated art deco), but rather the colors and the litheness of the figures.
Last edited by Animal; 05-08-2012 at 05:19 PM.
"How could we forget those ancient myths that stand at the beginning of all races, the myths about dragons that at the last moment are transformed into princesses? Perhaps all the dragons in our lives are princesses who are only waiting to see us act, just once, with beauty and courage. Perhaps everything that frightens us is, in its deepest essence, something helpless that wants our love."
-- Rainer Maria Rilke, Letters to a Young Poet
As I said, this is not menial, their music certainly is not menial. It's subtle, nuanced, of high technique. But I simply do not care about sophistication, I don't think the people who did Jazz cared about sophistication, they cared about music a lot more then sophistication.
It is only in this sense, Jazz is not sophisticated, it is anti-sophisticated and in a sense a rebellion against these ideas. The way Jazz was viewed by some of the sophisticated set was that it was vulgar, stupid and crude as I noted earlier the commentary by Henry van Dyke.
These individuals did not make their music for high society initially and their music was made for the people around them to enjoy.
don't really see what is static about Stuart Davis, I would say he's one of the less static artist that we saw but this is subjective and I'm not really going to go in to it. Suffice it to say, I think his art is subtle and nuanced, going through the changes he went thru in his career, he is very much at the forefront of pop art. I don't think he's one of the great artists however, but good. It's a bit funny actually because he uses words/symbols and such in his works but his later works he had morphed these so they were not easily recognizable yet still able to subconsciously influence you. I'm generally against this, especially when it's overt. In Rapt at Rappaport's there are letters and lettering, as well as a cross or plus sign and and symbol, he does it in a way that it defies expectations but still conveys the meaning at a subconscious level. It is Impressionism and Expressionism which uses clever illusions and abstract techniques to create a gestalt in the mind rather then just pain on canvas, it is a tease as I said. It's the same as say, Nina Simone use of silence to convey drama in a musical performance.
I don't know about doing that out of necessity, people rub shoulders with hookers and pushers sometimes because they like it.
I agree that Jazz was a form of identity seeking by a oppressed culture, as is rap, hip hop, rock, etc. In the same way, it's often viewed as unsophisticated, vulgar, crude.
As far as La traviata, this is based off of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lady_of_the_Camellias which is writen by Alexander Dumas fils, who's a bastard son to Alexander Dumas pere.
Dumas pere was a mulatto and a person well known for his interaction with both the upper and lower class, being fully accepted in neither. But there was a great deal of influence from father to son. The subject of class, color, and social injustice is deeply personal to Dumas fils.
However, he did the opera for the money.
Okay, well that's not the definition of sophistication I'm using. I'm using in the sense of "to make more complex." I'm not talking about external delineations of class, defined from the outside-in. I'm talking sophistication from the inside-out. Just because you don't care about it doesn't mean it isn't there or that the musicians don't care about it.
In fact, I think maybe this comes from my own perspective as a singer: when I approach jazz, I see it's complexity -- I see how fucking difficult it is to do what jazz musicians do. It's easy enough to sing the melody of "Send in the Clowns" straight. But to take that melody on wild adventures, into soaring heights and poignant depths, like what Sarah Vaughan did with that song... is really. fucking. hard! And it takes a really refined ear and a lot of skill and practice. Nina Simone was a classically trained pianist who auditioned for the Curtis Institute. If they didn't care about sophistication (which, again, I'm using as a synonym for complexity), they would have just sung the melody straight. They would have gone the Tin Pan Alley route, or just sung it simply like the blues balladier. They wouldn't have dressed it up with melisma, and blue notes, and arpeggios, and scatting, and rubato, and syncopation. As a musician, I can't help but see jazz as the Baroque of American music: that same propensity towards ornamentation, elevating the melody.
And, yes, I know about Dumas. But you seem to be taking the perspective the privileged thumbing their noses down at the African, the bastard, the prostitute and the drug dealer/user, et al. as if being such were inherently "down and dirty" -- like there is something inherently scandalous about these things. (And I know you don't really believe that, but that's the perspective that comes across in your wording. And you seem to acknowledge this in some places, where you say it was viewed as vulgar, etc. by others. But then, I think you deny the elevated language of jazz from the inside-out perspective. I don't get this.) But there isn't anything inherently "dirty" about those things from the inside-out. They're just circumstantial manifestations of the human condition: sex, euphoria, escapism, sensuality, beauty, suffering, cruelty, etc. It's stuff that's in all of us, and it extends across class and race, and across time. It's like what you said about New York: "there's beauty in that mess." Well there was beauty in the so-called "mess" of abolition-era Harlem. Even prostitutes have souls. And the soul is what comes out in the music.
I would agree that jazz is anti-sophistication by your definition. But I guess the main semantic departure we're taking is, I'm wasn't talking about a spectrum of "high" vs. "low" when I said "sophistication", but rather "simple" vs. "ornate." Jazz is definitely ornate. As for the paintings... yeah, it's entirely subjective. I just don't see what you're seeing, and I don't really understand the language Davis is using.
Last edited by Animal; 05-08-2012 at 07:23 PM.
"How could we forget those ancient myths that stand at the beginning of all races, the myths about dragons that at the last moment are transformed into princesses? Perhaps all the dragons in our lives are princesses who are only waiting to see us act, just once, with beauty and courage. Perhaps everything that frightens us is, in its deepest essence, something helpless that wants our love."
-- Rainer Maria Rilke, Letters to a Young Poet
Because you seem composed, more down to earth, and slightly less abstract/mystical than how most Ni IPs appear (See video #1). And from what I can gather, your emotionality seems more subdued than that of Se-seeking types (See video #2).
1) Ni-INFp (Note how he talks about life, seeing it as a journey, etc)
2) Fe-INFp (I couldn't find the interview I was looking for, but I think it will serve the purpose)
Last edited by Park; 05-08-2012 at 07:46 PM.
“Whether we fall by ambition, blood, or lust, like diamonds we are cut with our own dust.”
Oh, and everyone who likes jazz is in my qaudra.
“Whether we fall by ambition, blood, or lust, like diamonds we are cut with our own dust.”
The illusion of simplicity is the hardest thing in art, design, engineering, any number of disciplines. At once, one wants to comment on all that can be comment on, but in another one wants to be accessible and comprehensible to non-technicians and layman. I tend to see complexity and ornateness as something that is easier to achieve than the illusion of simplicity. I do not appreciate Jazz for it's complexity any more then I appreciate other music for it's complexity. I'm just a layman. Ultimately I appreciate music with pop undertones, but not pop music as I find it' to be too commercialized. Jazz imo was this, simple accessible music but refined, complex and with depth of flavor. It's really no different than the quality of a fast food sandwich vs a finely crafted sandwich. And it matters very little how much one pays for it, how complicated it is, how simple it is and where one gets it.
I think using the word in a way it can be misconstrued is easy to confuse others, I personally feel sophistication is a more loaded word than ornate/complex which would have not cause this confusion. Of course I can sort of guess what you meant by sophistication, but not really, but I have a few definitions for sophistication and this is included in it. I can only interpret it thru my lense and I took a more ambigious definition of the word that was inclusive of what people think of it beyond myself.
I think in the world, there are people who have these concepts of high and low, but I'm not really speaking of my personal beliefs. As I've noted I like things that are often considered vulgar, crude and unsophisticated. I'm quite open about it as well. There are people that will thumb their nose and I thumb my own nose but for different reasons, there are people who see these things as down and dirty, but these may not necessarily reflect my own opinion, just what I see other people saying about it. I don't deny the inside out perspective of Jazz any more then I avoid the external circumstances which characterize the movement. It's all there.
I knew from the beginning this was going to be a semantic battle as are most philosophical discussions but imo it's important these differences are clarified because otherwise, there would be confusion.
When I say, "down and dirty", why do I say it, is it a judgement or is it for effect? When you said sophistication, what was your meaning, did you wish to elevate Jazz and lower Stuart Davis or was it something else? A lot of what I say is for effect, and I am often a mercurial in the way I conduct discussions. I think you're a bit different and what you say is more fixed and personal and as a way to expresses yourself.
A huge part of socionics is about communication and these communications and miscommunications are at the core of intertype relations. From our interaction, I am pretty sure you'revaluing, EII/IEE are both ok. I think EII is better because although you do try to acquire a universal perspective and faceted perception on topics, when I use words in a non-specific and ambiguous way, your definitions remain personal and fixed. I'm not sure how your life is IP vs IJ but imo your verbalization is often rational and personal.
As far as Glam, I'm as sure of her IEI-ness as I am of my own type or any other member's type. I think she's a contact subtype.
But don't you see how I could say the same exact thing about you? Your definitions seem to me very personal and fixed, and they seem to stem from pre-existing conclusions that you've come to that you don't voice (or don't come across) in your writing. I don't see the ambiguity you're intended to make room for in what you write. I'm curious now, actually... have you had this sort of discussion with EIIs or IEIs before in this format (on a forum, through text)? Did it play out this way? Because I don't really see how you are seeingA huge part of socionics is about communication and these communications and miscommunications are at the core of intertype relations. From our interaction, I am pretty sure you'reor
or whatnot, when I feel like it's just miscommunication or talking past each other, or you're being contrarian for its own sake.
I kind of feel like no matter what I say, you already have a pre-packaged answer ready. Like with the above about complexity: I can appreciate your answer. But you've already made your mind up about what you can appreciate in music and seem to want to see nothing else. I understand that you don't have to know all the tricks and terminology to appreciate good music. You can certainly appreciate it as a layman. But aren't you open you maybe experiencing what I mean by complexity? When I listen to jazz, I get swept along with its ups and downs. When you say "refined, complex, with depth of flavor", that's what I meant by sophistication -- you don't have to consciously think of all the complexity, but you can't just ignore that this dude just played 67 notes in one second, or simply that it takes you on a ride. Even before I studied music, it was like that. Kind of like sex: moments of building and anticipation, moments of easing off, maybe release at some point, maybe something is unresolved... A straight-sung melody is like a train-ride. Complexity turns that into a roller coaster.
I thought it was clear from my first response to you that I was talking about the complexity of the music primarily, with an aside about the culture that developed out of it. And you acknowledged that. And I knew you were talking about the social conditions surrounding it. I thought, from there, we were just trying to clarify our positions. I can understand wanting to be mercurial and say things for effect but... I kind of expect some consistency and flexibility in discussion. As I said in the video, you obviously have very strong opinions about many things. But how do you ever learn anything about how anyone see the world if you just present yourself as a big wall of
This always seems to happen with ILEs actually, lol. I got into a big thing with Blaze the last time I had a type thread. Maybe that's saying something. But it still doesn't explain why I can get along so well with SLEs. I don't seem to hit their Fi-PoLR or anything. And FWIW, I'm sure glam is probably IEI as well. I was just trying to give some idea of my simplistic/stereotypical approach to Socionics. Again, I'm rusty and not very good at it. I go be subjective impressions and past associations in typing people.
"How could we forget those ancient myths that stand at the beginning of all races, the myths about dragons that at the last moment are transformed into princesses? Perhaps all the dragons in our lives are princesses who are only waiting to see us act, just once, with beauty and courage. Perhaps everything that frightens us is, in its deepest essence, something helpless that wants our love."
-- Rainer Maria Rilke, Letters to a Young Poet
Very interesting. I see what you mean. I never thought of Usher as IEI, but I can see it.
Who can argue with this logic?
"How could we forget those ancient myths that stand at the beginning of all races, the myths about dragons that at the last moment are transformed into princesses? Perhaps all the dragons in our lives are princesses who are only waiting to see us act, just once, with beauty and courage. Perhaps everything that frightens us is, in its deepest essence, something helpless that wants our love."
-- Rainer Maria Rilke, Letters to a Young Poet
You would be absolutely right except it's not a very personal viewpoint, just a viewpoint I know that can possibly exist. I don't have a very personal viewpoint on Jazz except that I have listened to it before and don't listen to it on a day to day basis. I have some general information on the history/development and individuals who participated in the movement and what I have heard about it from other people.
The ambiguity is there, because I never really disagreed with your viewpoint, except to say it is incomplete and that sophistication is not a word I would use to describe Jazz and that there are parts of Jazz that would contradict various interpretations of sophistication. I'm not contrarian for it's own sake, there is a point to all of this. But the point is very simple.I don't see the ambiguity you're intended to make room for in what you write. I'm curious now, actually... have you had this sort of discussion with EIIs or IEIs before in this format (on a forum, through text)? Did it play out this way? Because I don't really see how you are seeing
You seem to think I'm investing in my personal viewpoint, when I'm not I'm more invested in the philosophical debate and creating a complete perspective. I'm invested enough in these endeavors to pick one word out of all that you said as a point of contention. You assumes jazz doesn't move me when it does, and I can get swept up in a good song/tune just like anyone else. I'm not very well versed in music but I certainly get swept up in food and other interest which I have a more personal viewpoint on. Most of this is actually not important as my point is very simple and these were all things I am totally in agreement with you on. I might not be able to experience music as you do, but I certainly do believe other people can. I happen to be able to experience food differently than other people as well as understanding visual art as these have been interests.
As a secondary point, there is the idea that somehow Jazz is sophisticated and that Rapt in Rappaport is unsophisticated.
So is Jazz somehow vulgar, crude and unsophisticated? Or is Rapt in Rappaport somehow vulgar, crude and unsophisticated. I would disagree with both assessments. Is Rapt in Rappaport and Jazz similar, I would say it is and that Stuart Davis did his own study of Jazz for decades and it's likely he's got a pretty good grasp of Jazz/music vs me. I've seen paintings like Stuart Davis if not paintings by him, so when I saw the picture I had a good idea of what it meant. Also the name Rapt in Rappaport has a rhythmic and tonal quality to it that is musical.
It was clear, but I didn't disagree with the complexity of Jazz or other music but rather what constitutes sophistication.
My opinions are my opinion, they are regularly in contrast to other opinions. I try to know very well the opinions I challenge, and it really matters very little my opinions. I'm more interested in the effect then any opinion I might hold. I would say I am a boldly opinionated person because I don't place a lot of personal investment in my opinions and that I play with them for fun. I think the dialectic and synthesis that I wish to achieve is the purpose of my discussions, rather any specific opinion or viewpoint.And you acknowledged that. And I knew you were talking about the social conditions surrounding it. I thought, from there, we were just trying to clarify our positions. I can understand wanting to be mercurial and say things for effect but... I kind of expect some consistency and flexibility in discussion. As I said in the video, you obviously have very strong opinions about many things. But how do you ever learn anything about how anyone see the world if you just present yourself as a big wall of
Fair enough, though this is a bit difficult for me to understand. You seemed to get very involved in getting across your opinion on why you wouldn't exactly call jazz "sophisticated." I thought this was a sign that it was a personal viewpoint, but you are saying you're invested in the philosophical aspect. That's not something I can see myself doing. When there's a topic I don't feel particularly connected to, I would just kind of shrug it off and move on and let other people discuss it. I actually kind of did that with the Stuart Davis painting. As I said, I'm bad at talking about visual art. So I spoke of it very generally and subjectively, and let you explain to me what you saw in it. On my part, I tried to get across what I saw in jazz as a music. I saw this discussion kind of like filling in two halves of a whole: I wanted to explain what was "sophisticated" about jazz, just as you were explaining Davis' work.
Okay. That makes sense. I won't dispute that. When you said "Jazz is not imo sophisticated" though, I didn't read it that way, though.
I didn't assume that jazz doesn't move you. I just assumed that it moves you in a different way, for different reason, or that you express how it moves you in different ways. Here, maybe we can actually use the Stuart Davis stuff as a point of reference:
I don't think the Stuart Davis stuff is necessarily unsophisticated. With a lot of modern art, the sophistication depends on the eyes you bring to it, rather than what's literally there. To me, Stuart Davis' paintings look like random shapes of various colors put together, lol. Again, I'm not at all articulate when talking about visual art. I look at that painting and go "I could have painted that!"
I'm probably less knowledgeable about modern art than you are about jazz. Isn't it understandable that my opinion on the painting is probably... ill-informed? (I'm not saying your opinion on jazz is ill-informed. From what I can tell, you're actually pretty knowledgeable about it.)
Okay.
I'm... confused, lol. But that's okay. Maybe you or an outside observer can come along and explain this to me, because I still kind of am confused about how you can be boldly opinionated without getting personally invested in those opinions. That's weird to me.
"How could we forget those ancient myths that stand at the beginning of all races, the myths about dragons that at the last moment are transformed into princesses? Perhaps all the dragons in our lives are princesses who are only waiting to see us act, just once, with beauty and courage. Perhaps everything that frightens us is, in its deepest essence, something helpless that wants our love."
-- Rainer Maria Rilke, Letters to a Young Poet
I'm going to use this metaphor since it's appropriate. I tend to try to see the world holistically. See figure A.I'm... confused, lol. But that's okay. Maybe you or an outside observer can come along and explain this to me, because I still kind of am confused about how you can be boldly opinionated without getting personally invested in those opinions. That's weird to me.
Somedays I'm trying to fill the white dot, other days I'm trying to fill the black dot. I think almost everyone has something worthwhile and important to say, but small errors turn into big problems and I'm ultimately just working on these small issues which turn into big ones. I think they're many universal experiences as well as very specific ones, and there is generally a lot of problems when these are confused. I think it's only in these contrasts and discussion of these contrasts that the whole can be seen and it is not something that can arise from a singular experience.
I have personal feelings, opinions and beliefs but I believe they're inconsequential to the truth and that the only truth that matters is what can be proven/shown/effected beyond myself.
I see. Thanks for explaining. Actually, this dicussion has me thinking IEE. They have
Well that was an interesting experiment in communications, lol. Now back to giving me attention.
Last edited by Animal; 05-08-2012 at 11:28 PM.
"How could we forget those ancient myths that stand at the beginning of all races, the myths about dragons that at the last moment are transformed into princesses? Perhaps all the dragons in our lives are princesses who are only waiting to see us act, just once, with beauty and courage. Perhaps everything that frightens us is, in its deepest essence, something helpless that wants our love."
-- Rainer Maria Rilke, Letters to a Young Poet
Well that's the thing, you can't "win" with hkkmr, and you can't save somebody who spiritedly and idealistically jumps into a 20 foot intellectual pit without falling in yourself. I read the exchange feeling rather sorry you took the bait, does that count? You began by saying something beautiful about music and jazz. It was very readable, and I enjoyed it. But when hkkmr starts putting up walls of text like that, nobody can "win"; you either bow out or dissolve slowly. I don't think he's especially going into it with the goal of understanding the other person or reaching a mutual agreement. His thinking style is basically splitting up up a cohesive point into confusing irrelevant nodes while refusing to compromise his ego (he did this to me one time when I was arguing an ethical point). Good effort though. You threw back walls of text to match the best of them. (Still didn't change hkkmr though, did it? ;P)I see. Thanks for explaining. Actually, this dicussion has me thinking IEE. They have
My only other relevant idea to your meetup is that the 6-9 sort of Enneagram duality was happening between you and April.
dolphin, I love you so much for saying this, you don't even know. I thought I was going crazy. You said basically what I was feeling, but couldn't tell was going on. Thank you.
"How could we forget those ancient myths that stand at the beginning of all races, the myths about dragons that at the last moment are transformed into princesses? Perhaps all the dragons in our lives are princesses who are only waiting to see us act, just once, with beauty and courage. Perhaps everything that frightens us is, in its deepest essence, something helpless that wants our love."
-- Rainer Maria Rilke, Letters to a Young Poet
It's not about winning or losing, people that understand me do and those that don't, that's ok too. Discussion isn't meant to be resolved cleanly or with a conclusion or with mutual agreement.The video didn't really have anything about Jazz or music but about sophistication and the apparent lack of sophistication in Stuart Davis's work. I appreciate jazz and music. Ultimately I find some common ground between the works of Stuart Davis and Jazz which Baby didn't see, and that's really all there is to it. Rest of it is me justifying the position and the back and forth that happens. I even said the painting moved me, is that dismissed as well?*can't please anyone
I think it's pretty clear Baby rationalizes things from a
p.s Good to see your memory of past conflicts is sharp!
LOL no problem, I guess I will have to say what I think more oftendolphin, I love you so much for saying this, you don't even know. I thought I was going crazy. You said basically what I was feeling, but couldn't tell was going on. Thank you.
Let me show you how one word can cause a big hoopla.
This is what I initially wrote.. let me replace sophisticated with something else.... No more conflict, no more disagreement... mutual understanding right? But why did it unfold the way it did?
And this is the same as Jazz, which is not status oriented. Jazz is underground bars during prohibition, hookers, alchohol, vice and sin(everything I like)
This is what I've found quite common in information conflicts, little areas of conflict where people won't relent and hold their perspective strongly. And then it gets personal and into attacks. I would like to avoid that as it's what it's becoming so I'll change what I said earlier to this.
I will not be tempted as Baby was tempted. He died for your Jazz sins, but the crown of thorns is not the greatest look for me.It's not about winning or losing, people that understand me do and those that don't, that's ok too. Discussion isn't meant to be resolved cleanly or with a conclusion or with mutual agreement.The video didn't really have anything about Jazz or music but about sophistication and the apparent lack of sophistication in Stuart Davis's work. I appreciate jazz and music. Ultimately I find some common ground between the works of Stuart Davis and Jazz which Baby didn't see, and that's really all there is to it. Rest of it is me justifying the position and the back and forth that happens. I even said the painting moved me, is that dismissed as well?
I think it's pretty clear Baby rationalizes things from a
p.s Good to see your memory of past conflicts is sharp!
But I enjoy jazz and the painting!
Enough talk, let's listen to some jazz.
“Whether we fall by ambition, blood, or lust, like diamonds we are cut with our own dust.”
All I want to say is this: hkkmr in person = quirky, somewhat elfin, Asian food nerd. hkkmr on the forum = a fucking autistic nightmare of a blowhard with a stick up his ass the size of Jupiter. He sucks. I liked the other guy better.It's not about winning or losing, people that understand me do and those that don't, that's ok too. Discussion isn't meant to be resolved cleanly or with a conclusion or with mutual agreement.The video didn't really have anything about Jazz or music but about sophistication and the apparent lack of sophistication in Stuart Davis's work. I appreciate jazz and music. Ultimately I find some common ground between the works of Stuart Davis and Jazz which Baby didn't see, and that's really all there is to it. Rest of it is me justifying the position and the back and forth that happens. I even said the painting moved me, is that dismissed as well?*can't please anyone
I think it's pretty clear Baby rationalizes things from aperspective, I basically never have this trouble with
creatives.
p.s Good to see your memory of past conflicts is sharp!
Definitely! I was wondering why you were so quiet lately.LOL no problem, I guess I will have to say what I think more often
ahaha! Listening now.It's funny how this stuff just cuts the tension in the room.
Last edited by Animal; 05-09-2012 at 01:35 AM.
"How could we forget those ancient myths that stand at the beginning of all races, the myths about dragons that at the last moment are transformed into princesses? Perhaps all the dragons in our lives are princesses who are only waiting to see us act, just once, with beauty and courage. Perhaps everything that frightens us is, in its deepest essence, something helpless that wants our love."
-- Rainer Maria Rilke, Letters to a Young Poet
Carmen is my favorite jazz singer, btw. Check her out.
She uploaded almost all of the songs from her new album "Changes" on youtube during the past couple of days.
Last edited by Park; 05-09-2012 at 02:27 AM.
“Whether we fall by ambition, blood, or lust, like diamonds we are cut with our own dust.”
Beautiful string arrangement on this one. Gives me the chills.
“Whether we fall by ambition, blood, or lust, like diamonds we are cut with our own dust.”
I have to say I am a much more likable person off the forum than on the forum, also at work I'm not very easy to deal with either. I try to totally separate my work intellectual life and my fun life these days, although in any sort of super close relationship there would need to be that.
This one's gorgeous. Like musical silk!
"How could we forget those ancient myths that stand at the beginning of all races, the myths about dragons that at the last moment are transformed into princesses? Perhaps all the dragons in our lives are princesses who are only waiting to see us act, just once, with beauty and courage. Perhaps everything that frightens us is, in its deepest essence, something helpless that wants our love."
-- Rainer Maria Rilke, Letters to a Young Poet
That's funny, because I've never met hkkmr but i envisioned him as quirky and elfin! Well, a ittle bit of a nerd in general, like really into techy stuff. I never got an impression he was autistic... but maybe i just havent been on his bad side
Enneagram: 9w1 6w5 2w3 so/sx
aww, i've found u likeable on the forum hkkmr!
Enneagram: 9w1 6w5 2w3 so/sx
Another classy female jazz vocalist...
This type of music evokes such strong emotions in me that I can't put into words. It's so deep, vivid, and refined.
“Whether we fall by ambition, blood, or lust, like diamonds we are cut with our own dust.”
very soothing... thanks Parkster! i'm ready to sleep well now ...
Enneagram: 9w1 6w5 2w3 so/sx
Well, good night everyone. I'm off to bed, as well.
My pleasure, WA.
“Whether we fall by ambition, blood, or lust, like diamonds we are cut with our own dust.”
I really love her voice, and these quiet arrangements. Great music to dream to.
"How could we forget those ancient myths that stand at the beginning of all races, the myths about dragons that at the last moment are transformed into princesses? Perhaps all the dragons in our lives are princesses who are only waiting to see us act, just once, with beauty and courage. Perhaps everything that frightens us is, in its deepest essence, something helpless that wants our love."
-- Rainer Maria Rilke, Letters to a Young Poet
"drinky"Thanks guys.
i would say that i did notice the connection between you and Auvi vs me and hkkmr. in his video Auvi mentioned how he prefers communication involving "knowing glances" and things like that - i believe both you and Auvi often interacted this way. it's more of a subtle kind of communication - a "silent" way to display feelings, and show disposition towards something, rather than being blatantly and openly emotional about it. it's something i generally associate more with Fi types than Fe types.
i found you to be a warm, more laid-back variant of EII. some can be a bit stiff, but you were not that way at all. you were very pleasant, fun, and easy to be around (as was Auvi!)
i would agree that having some drinks loosened everyone a up a bit, and it was fun!
i forgot to tell you - you have some of the prettiest eyes i've ever seen. i believe it was on Sunday that i especially noticed this, because your makeup brought them out even more
it's interesting that you see me as "grounded" and that you see me as having a "forceful" presence. i don't think i've been described this way before. as for groundedness, yes, i try to be aware of the world around me, so that i can strive to be sensible and not ignorant about things. i don't want to feel disconnected from the world - i felt that way for years - and i was depressed all the time.This will probably sound completely out of left field, but if you were just a random person whose self-typing I didn't know, I actually would have thought some sort of sensing type in a Fi quadra for you... possibly ESI or even SLI. This is just stereotypical mumbo-jumbo, but you have a much more "grounded" presence than I usually associate with Ni types, and you seemed to be more centered in the "real world" of things and people. Also, that "gap" may well have been literal: you spent most of the first day walking several paces behind us taking pictures.
But now I think Starfall might be onto something with the different enneagram types. It might also be a subtype difference. Most people seem to be seeing Fe-subtype for me. I know you said you were probably Fe-subtype, but you didn't seem as emotive as I expected. When I think of Fe-IEI, I think of Justin Timberlake (I know he's a dude, but I know girls like this, too): playful, emotive, warm with a somewhat soft disposition. You came across a bit more... serious? Well, less goofy, at any rate. And you had a more forceful presence.
may i ask what is "forceful" about me?
i can be very goofy - it's just not a side i show very easily i guess.
it seems we are both using ourselves as the benchmark against which we judge whether someone else is IEI or not - since we both recognize the fact that we are different, we both suggested different types for each other
i still think i am probably IEI-Fe, though if i recall correctly, April said that i seem closer to ILI rather than SEI.
as for my DC photos (thank you for the compliment!), i'll see if i can find more decent ones, and perhaps post them in the meetup thread.
That comment by Baby also stuck out to me. i've also found this to be an Fi-valuing feature, and part of why i lean delta NF for him.
Enneagram: 9w1 6w5 2w3 so/sx
My understanding of Fi vs. Fe is this:
Fi = internal statics of fields; I see Fi as a focus on static “attitude” of liking or disliking, or a judgment/conclusions one comes to about a person. Expression of Fi manifests itself more in the content of what is spoken – the “what is said” rather than the “how.” Those with Fi-PoLR tend to be insecure about others’ attitudes towards them, overall; they tend to need physical shows of affection (Fe) rather than words (Fi).
Fe = external dynamics of objects; I see Fe as a focus on the dynamic flow of conversation. Expression of Fe manifests in the “how it’s said” rather than “what is said” – it’s based on mood, cadence, tone, rhythm of conversation, and music of speech, etc. It’s also known as “prosody.” Those with Fe-PoLR tend to be insecure in how others are reacting to them, from moment to moment; they tend to feel more secure with explicit words of affection (Fi), because they aren’t as confident at interpreting non-verbal cues (Fe).
I consider myself kind of incompetent at words of affection. It comes out stilted and feels like empty words, and the people who I feel affection for would probably look at me like I’m a freak if I tried. LMAO. I’d rather do it non-verbally: through playful insults, conveying it through looks, laughter, as peck on the forehead, a head laid down on the shoulder, hugs, affectionate punches in the guts. I try to convey it in my physical mannerisms, voice, and posture. Beta STs are pretty good at playing this game, I find. They’ll play along with you: punch you back, curse you out with a grin on their face, wrestle you, lol.
The EIIs and IEEs I know are much more comfortable just saying “I love you” verbally, and aren’t as interested in expressing it through physical manifestation. They say it very simply and without scruples. And from what I’ve observed, Delta STs are receptive to that unadorned verbalized affection, and aren’t very comfortable/adept at feeding back the nonverbal playful stuff; they’d much rather do it more simply with an arm around the shoulder, or via giving presents, or being helpful around the house, or whatnot. They are not comfortable playing the Fe game.
Does this make sense to anyone, or am I just crazy? lol.
Last edited by Animal; 05-09-2012 at 03:10 PM.
"How could we forget those ancient myths that stand at the beginning of all races, the myths about dragons that at the last moment are transformed into princesses? Perhaps all the dragons in our lives are princesses who are only waiting to see us act, just once, with beauty and courage. Perhaps everything that frightens us is, in its deepest essence, something helpless that wants our love."
-- Rainer Maria Rilke, Letters to a Young Poet
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
