Disney version.
I think Belle might be an ENFp. Would explain why I can relate to her so well. What do you all think?
I'm stuck when it comes to the Beast. Some kind of Introvert is all I've got so far...
Gaston-- ESTp?
Printable View
Disney version.
I think Belle might be an ENFp. Would explain why I can relate to her so well. What do you all think?
I'm stuck when it comes to the Beast. Some kind of Introvert is all I've got so far...
Gaston-- ESTp?
ive only seen her typed IEI as far as i remember. i relate to her too, but i dont have the patience to research a disney character for type clues, lol. but if anyone else wanted to provide evidence for IEE it would be interesting to me.
Beast looks like ISTp.
I see it as a story about an E8 needing to be loved for his beastly surface in order to believe he's truly loved.
Belle always struck me as an E9 Fi-INFj. Beast has gotta be E8 Te-ESTj. Gaston seems E3 ESTp.
Agreed. I've seen the Belle IEI typing before, but Beast is far more ESTj than ESTp, and so INFj makes more sense for Belle. Beast has the typically ESTj thing of "bring out the claws (pun intended)" only to defend a bond, like the guy from Sin City. ESTjs normally combine this with a sense of distaste at themselves when they are forced to do "violent" or unpleasant things, but they see it as necessary for themselves as guardians of their community. (Still, they want to hide such violent actions from the other members of the community, not wanting to corrupt them, which is nice for INFjs who tend to have a very powerful reaction to "evil," that bad feeling in your stomach, like a disturbance in the force, lol). Compare this with ESTps who know that they can be businesslike and abrupt and sort of "just put your head down and get it done," if absolutely necessary, but much prefer it when they can express their fun side and enjoy getting things done. They're also less likely to hide it when they do something obviously impressive (whereas ESTjs want to keep their good deeds a little more private usually). ESTjs tend to like communities where they can be generally well-respected, the sort of thing where everybody's seen them do one really nice thing for another person, so word spreads that they're good people, without there ever being a big ostentatious show of it. ESTps, on the other hand, tend to like communities where they have performed well in front of the crowd and received respect and acclamation for it. In other words, Beast is more Se demonstrative/Fi superego than Te demonstrative/Fe superego.Quote:
Originally Posted by Galen
Apparently your memories need refreshing. The beast was also a major stereotype introvert.
Belle: EII-Ne, 4w3 sx/sp (INFP)
Beast: SLI-Te, 8w7 sp/sx (ISTJ)
Gaston: SLE-Se, 3w4 sp/so (ESTJ)
Quote:
Originally Posted by pianosinger
An age thing, maybe? (You're both pretty close, I think.)Quote:
Originally Posted by laghlagh
Heck, Galen (a couple years younger) = Simba (a couple years post B-and-B)
Conclusion: Disney types us all.
I'd like to see a list of disney characters for each socionics type. Do you think this could be accomplished? (maybe if we also include the lesser known ones?) It sounds like there were mainly Delta types among those which were mentioned here.Quote:
Originally Posted by CILi
sorry, double post because of database failures...
Okay, I can see Belle as an INFj, too... So, Delta NF in any case.
Yeah, I can't see the Beast as an ESTj, sorry. I can see why some would say that, though, since he does get aggressive a couple of times. But, with him I see it more as "all bark and no bite," yk? He really only gets aggressive when it is unavoidable, and he'd clearly just rather be left alone entirely.
Signs point to ISTp, then...
I've been thinking about this, too...Would be fun to try, in any case.Quote:
Originally Posted by MegaDoomer
in the disney movie i rather saw belle as EII... although i remember Isha made an interesting argument for LIE in some other thread and it really did make me wonder (I'm not all certain about EII or anything)... I probably saw the beast as delta ST (in the disney movie) although after he became human again, I swear it was like he transformed into an ethical type and wasn't even the same man anymore... oh well. Then he said "look Belle you've transformed me into a near male version of yourself, oh the power of love!". Just kidding. I mean he doesn't have to be an ethical type, but he seemed like a different person once the sun came up and the gargoyles became angels.
the beast was at first a vain, cruel, selfish narcissistic man who was turned into an ugly beast by some witch as punishment for being a jackass... anyway maybe he was EIE. but after he became the beast and stewed for a long time he developed a complex that he's overly gruff and harsh and no one could ever love him because he's such a beast (as opposed to no one could love him because he's a vain, narcissistic, selfish dick), but after belle shows up, she finds an angel in there and by the end he's a total enthusiastic sweetheart. so it's vain pretty boy turned gruff hard manly beast turned sweet pretty boy. i mean i guess if someone can love him when he's a "beast" then it can show him how to love... because he would have never loved a creature such as himself when he was the vain selfish pretty boy (of course he could only love himself at the time, but anyway). So I guess it makes sense.
my favorite part of the movie is when he's the gruff beast as i thought that was the point of the story... him being hard and scary and possibly even sadistic until belle comes along and finds something in him that can love (and falls in love with him) and reveals it to him, destroying his beastliness, breaking his heart, and sending him on his knees in transformation to a higher ethical state. although that sounds like hades and persephone...
i'm having issues though with the idea of transformation... is it about transforming him into something else (which is like killing him), or about simply loving him as he is because as he is there is some untouchable thing inside that loves and is not such a beast but that must remain guarded and protected because by revealing it, it would tear him apart. or perhaps the two are not so mutually exclusive. it's "i see the real you and you're not a beast" vs. "you are a beast, but there is good in you, and i love you anyway so get over yourself". the former seems to deny that he is a beast and says it's wrong to be that way and it's only okay if you're transform into something else that isn't a beast at all (and there's something about that that is horrible).
Belle reminds me of my INFj best friend. They are extremely alike.
And I have no idea what the Beast is. :lol:
He's definitely IT though. . . at least from the impression that I got of him. :content:
:thumbsup:Quote:
Originally Posted by Galen
I can relate to Beauty or the Beast.
I don't recall how much Disney version differed from the general storyline, but Belle as a character seems the epitome of Delta NF, as I think the story itself emphasizes Delta values. Belle as Gamma may work for adaptations in which she's portrayed as more skeptical of the Beast's niceness, perhaps, but it kind of goes against the core idea associated with the character, of seeing potential in others and nurturing it. It's an archetype, and so I'll risk being stereotypical and say it's an NeFi archetype. There are also other stereotypically Delta qualities to it, such as open praise of Belle's preference for a simple life, contrasted with her sisters' extravagance and pride. Or even Ni-devaluing view of future, where occurrences are depicted as unexpected, and characters don't show much foresight, which isn't really addressed or criticized.
ETA: It seems the Disney version was very much different to the story as I know it, or wikipedia says so. I'm not sure if this post applies to it.
For starters in the movie Belle didn't have a sister.
Holy shit, Belle had a sister?
Wow great post about the distinction between ESTj vs ESTp!Quote:
Originally Posted by silverchris9
(whatever the Beast's type may be...)
Yeah, I skipped through the wikipedia article on it and was like :shock:. They seem to have meddled with the plot, too. Whatever.Quote:
Originally Posted by Aleksei
All this ^ is why I had to specify the Disney movie, since it is so different from the original story (as are all fairy-tale-derived Disney movies).
I don't know where to begin, it feels like I am entering the twilight zone with all these assumptions and what not.
Let's begin with the enneagram, I'll forgo a socionics analysis for now.
STFU and watch this clip (stfu meaning, don't watch this with your pre-conceived notions, just watch it as a non-personality analyst)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=__x8CYAVMbk
Now recognize the following aspects of the story, character, and plot.
Lets consider the case for an enneagram 3....
From the site Enneagram Type 3 - The Achiever
Once upon a time, in a faraway land,Quote:
Originally Posted by paragraph one
A young Prince lived in a shining castle
Although he had everything his heart desired,
The Prince was spoiled, selfish, and unkind.Quote:
Originally Posted by the rest
But then, one winter's night, an old beggar-woman came to the castle,
And offered him a single rose in return for shelter from the bitter cold.
Repulsed by her haggard appearance, the Prince sneered at the gift and turned the old woman away,
But she warned him not to be deceived by appearances,
For beauty is found within.
And when he dismissed her again, the old woman's ugliness melted away
To reveal a beautiful Enchantress.
The Prince tried to apologize, but it was too late,
For she had seen that there was no love in his heart.
And as punishment, she transformed him into a hideous Beast, and placed a powerful spell on the castle, and all who lived there.
Ashamed of his monstrous form, the Beast concealed himself inside his castle, with a magic mirror as his only window to the outside world.
Basically the beast is e3w4, he started out as a prince, having a great image, being successful, but was really insecure and didn't know how to love, the old women pwned him into realizing this, and he grew ashamed and withdrew from society (w4).
I think e8 is a bad bad bad false turn... e8's are completely different in nature. The beast is a raging sx/sp e3w4.... ashamed of his true self. This is incredibly obvious when the beast rips his old picture away... it symbolizes tearing down the image and confronting the true self which is a selfish beast. His "beast" self is probably more e8 though, but he is ashamed of it and remains a withdrawled raging narcissist.
I'll do the other characters in e-type if you wish.
HLD--
As much as I appreciate all the thought and effort behind your post, umm...lighten up? You're taking all our "assumptions" and "pre-conceived notions" way too seriously.
Of course, typing the Beast for certain is probably impossible because he _does_ change so much. Explaining him using the enneagram probably does make more sense, since he is such a messed-up character. He probably had a lonely childhood, learned to be arrogant and self-serving, to believe that ugly or poor people were worthless. But all that cannot be put into a socionics type. Peel all that away, though, and what's left? That's what we are trying to figure out here.
Keep in mind we're dealing with a fictional work here... That little prologue part has only poor consistency with how the Beast appears through the rest of the story. Apparently his personality changed along with his appearance or something.Quote:
Now recognize the following aspects of the story, character, and plot.
Oh wow! your a professional aren't you, leading in with a disclaimer.... fucking appreciate it or don't, there's no need to stroke my ego.Quote:
Originally Posted by pianosinger
No I'm not I've dedicated a lot of personal thought into this on my own, this and the lion king are two of the only disney movies I've really ever liked enough to watch again as an adult, at some point I made this connection and thought it through. So this analysis is nothing new to me.Quote:
Originally Posted by pianosinger
You obviously don't know my personality if your telling me to lighten up, I'm not angry I'm just being strongly assertive about my opinions, its not that I find this issue very important, its just that's my style -- kick down the door and slam the facts on the table and tell everyone to stfu.
Part of that boldness comes from the fact that its obvious many people here haven't dedicated the amount of personal thought that I have to it. I feel like I have a much stronger "case" for my assertions and hence I feel the need to let it be known.
More like its impossible because the Beast isn't a real person... but rather a character from a series of folktales from early human cultures which expresses something universal about the human condition.Quote:
Originally Posted by pianosinger
Lol who cares about his childhood... all thats important is the confines of the story, its obvious in the first 3 minutes of the story. Its no fucking mystery, disney movies don't involve complex characters, they are pretty much face value stuff. The story opens and and bam the narrator spits out his story in 5 lines.... its incredibly obvious. e8 is a horrible horrible stereotype... I mean most people's thought process isQuote:
Originally Posted by pianosinger
e8 = aggressive
beast = aggressive
beast = e8
holy fucking shit! how insightful!
Why not? And why does it even matter that I need put the beast into socionics terms?Quote:
Originally Posted by pianosinger
What the hell why do I have to peel all that away... fuck that's what I'm interested in. I'm not interested in what socionics type the beast is...disney characters are highly simplistic, they don't show functional preferences too greatly as they serve a very simple and specific role in a plot. They are made for children, real people have functional preferences which are readily observable from the small things. Like how they spend their time and who they surround themselves with. Its hard to develop a type for the beast because they don't ever show the beast just sitting around shooting the breeze and living an average day. That's because for all practical purposes the beast doesn't live an average day, he is a manufactured character for a fantasy, a story, he is not real, and you cannot compare him to a real person, he does not have a character deep enough to analyze with socionics.Quote:
Originally Posted by pianosinger
Its usually as simple as beast was a prince, he was mean to old lady for being ugly, since he was image obsessed he was punished by being turned into a beast, he could break this curse by loving someone before he was 21, belle stumbled into him, he was an asshole to her, but soon he started to soften up and have feeling for her, eventually the villian decided to kill the beast, he sacrificed himself to protect belle, hence learning to love, hence rebecoming and prince.... THATS AS FUCKING COMPLICATED AS THE CHARACTER IS. He was designed purely to fit that mold, no fucking person actually cares about his functional preference. Hes a tool to narrate a fantasy thats ultimately about enneagram 3/4 themes.
I mean the only validity to socionics would be perhaps analyzing the relationship between belle and the beast... in terms of socionics duality... which frankly I'm not interesting in for a number of reasons.
Oh well I'm glad you speak on behalf of the entire forum..... you know because I need to be informed by you that I'm off topic and all the cool hipsters are out there trying to consider something different and that somehow I need to get with the picture.... thank you honestly, because that's why I wrote what I did... I was trying to help you all figure out what you wanted to know.... I was here to serve you and all the other masses that you speak for... and now that I know what your trying to figure out I'll take the time to better word my future posts (after this) in order to better conform with your mission.Quote:
Originally Posted by pianosinger
I like the E8 idea for the Beast. I think Disney ruined it though. I could see it for a darker tale of B&theB. Maybe I've missed it if anyone's made a film of it... but I would love a darker telling of it where the Beast truly is a beast. I feel like Disney knocked the heart out of the story (but I don't know the original story, so maybe it's only knocking the heart out of my ideal story). It's not that different from the Little Mermaid though where I do know the original story and think Disney killed that one too. (PS: I like both these movies, so I'm not really trying to cut them down.)
But I agree, HLD, the prince before the curse does seem rather E3-ish and the sort of thing you posted was why I said "maybe he was EIE" as horribly stereotypical as that would be (saying he's EIE because of that).
I guess maybe in Disney's defense, the character of the Beast spent a really long time in that castle after the curse and presumably had a lot of time to reflect and change and turn into a less shallow person? you could say the experience aged him maybe.
It just annoys me though that he's not the same character (at least not that I can see). I just don't know how to break his character down and see it as a mess.
I swear we always see this same character in Disney movies for "princes" and the like... Prince Eric, the Beast (when cleansed finally of his "bad" characteristics so he can be identical to the others at last), John Smith, Li Shang, I can't think of any others atm... but aren't they generally all Delta ST-ish? I suppose the other commonality is a more naive kind of prince who can't see himself being bewitched (like Prince Eric caught under Ursella's spell) and I vaguely remember maybe the prince in Snow White being that sort (if not him, then it must have been from some other one of them as I got this impression somewhere)? Of course there always has to be a valiant quality to them as well and hunger for adventure generally.
Btw, about Gaston, I did wonder about EIE sort of, but perhaps that's just a silly suggestion. I mean SLE would be the other consideration.
Well mainly my defense against e8 for the beast is that typical e8's are crude, confrontational, territorial, social, and practical. e8's are more like street-wise movers and shakers, with a lot of instinct. Easily embed themselves with the right people to get things done and so forth. There personality in reality is a lot more social, networking, street-wise, and practical. They aren't really brooding, emotional, and withdrawn. Their aggression comes more out of a sort of thug like mentality to dominate territory, than it comes from being a brooding emotionally victimized asshole.Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
An e8 is more like scarface, pablo the drug cartel, denzel washington in training day, or a street smart cop than the beast.
I don't object to the idea of an e8 beast or anything, its not like I really care what the beast is or isn't, I'm just saying I don't understand the case for an e8 beast what so ever, beyond e8 = aggressive, beast = aggressive, therefore beast = e8.
belle's father is an ILE. :thumbsup:
she's so protective of him....we could try to type by relation.
I know... unfortunately I'm blurring my ideal story vs. the actual movie in my posts... but you could say the Beast had some of those qualities in his beast form (it's just that he doesn't have them when not in the beast form, pre- or post-, at all). So I meant not that I see him as an E8 but that I would like the character as an E8 (in an "if only" way). As is, I can't even break the character down well since he's too inconsistent, imo.Quote:
Originally Posted by HaveLucidDreamz
agree. he seemed ILE-ish to me too.Quote:
Originally Posted by Blaze
No question I agree that the beast has many e8 qualities in his beast form, but I would personally tritype that, I didn't want to mention that however because I didn't want to complicate my analysis.Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
My entire point was that the story fit within a larger picture that was bookended about the beast being a narcissistic prince who was a dick to people, and his major struggle was to learn to love as a beast, I think that larger story arc is closer to his true character than the small details of his behavior... I mean all disney characters do anyways are sing and dance.
My point was that I wasn't saying he was E8 (or any E-type) to begin with, but that in my own idealized story in my mind, I would like the character as E8. I didn't think you understood what I was saying.Quote:
Originally Posted by HaveLucidDreamz
No I did, and that's fine, I mean that's your own idealized story in your own mind, I really don't care about that, its really not my place to involve my self at that level, trying to analyze your own idealized story, your mind is your own territory.Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
I am and still am solely interested in analyzing the disney story, as the topic mentions... the only reason I brought up enneagram was because it was mentioned by others, if it had not been, I would not have pushed my opinions into this topic.
Agreed. If the Beast we see in the rest of the movie were the same person as the prince we see in the prologue, this would all be true. But unlike people, cartoon characters (and all fictional characters), are not necessarily internally consistent. So I would say that while everything you said is true of the prologue, the Beast we see in the rest of the movie is simply a different person. The prologue is basically straight from the fairytale. The beast character we see in the rest of the movie is the character Disney made up, who is totally different, just like Ariel is (slightly) less spoiled than the Ariel in the fairytale, and Hades is more jocular than he is portrayed in Greek mythology, and Esmerelda is less stupid than in the book.Quote:
Originally Posted by HaveLucidDreamz
Wow where does this come from? ...Introverted Belle and Extroverted Beast? Belle is outgoing, popular among all the townspeople, kind and open with everyone... the Beast is reclusive, stays inside his castle, angry at anyone who bothers him during his downtime or visits him unexpectedly.Quote:
Originally Posted by Galen
I'd like to hear a dichotomy explanation for this one, because INFjs are pretty typical introverts and shy and ESTjs are pretty typical extroverts and outgoing. By the way, out-going means one who typically goes out often... staying inside your castle all day doesn't count. :P
:thumbsdown: I don’t think how you personally “relate” to fictional, internally-inconsistent characters in a family movie is a great way of typing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Director Abbie
Chill out dude. It is just a Disney movie. You say ‘just appreciate’ what you have to say, or don't? Then fine, I don't. Not when you come across as strong like that, analyzing a youtube video, preaching at people.Quote:
Originally Posted by HaveLucidDreamz
This could be a good idea.Quote:
Originally Posted by Blaze
:thumbsup: I personally agree with Aleksei, except I type Bell as ENFj, not INFp (Even though you put EII, which is INFj, but I think you meant INFp. And SLI is ISTp and SLE is ESTp). Definitely both Belle and the Beast are Beta (say that 5 times fast XD), for how much they value power. Seems like most people here at least agree on typing Belle as NF and the Beast as ST.Quote:
Originally Posted by Aleksei
Well see that's what I am talking about... just be honest but heres the thing...Quote:
Originally Posted by Mountain Dew
1) I wasn't angry when I wrote that, its just how it (my opinion) naturally came out when I wrote it, it wasn't like I was sitting red-faced at the computer, thats how I interject my opinion with anything. Maybe your reading it the wrong way.
2) I am not preaching at people, thats a little excessive, I was just making the case that the beast isn't e8 he is e3w4, and providing as much evidence as possible to make my case. Preaching... nah its not like I consider my opinion spiritual dogma or something. It is a disney movie, like you said.
3) I know its a disney movie, thats not why my response was strong, its because how naive people type, seriously, sometimes people need to get a strong criticism instead of hold hands and clap for each other like we are potty training toddlers here. I'm going to say what I think as direct as possible without consoling your feelings and I'd expect the same.
Now while I appreciate your honesty, I don't appreciate the mischaracterization, your going a little beyond simply saying you don't appreciate my post, it feels as though you immediately disqualified the rationale point I was making because of the manner in which it was presented, which honestly, that shouldn't be the case, substance trumps flash or presentation. Now likely your going to say you don't agree with that either, but please do it calmly, there is no reason to act like some victim of abuse, just say what you think and that is sufficient. Seriously.... OMG I strongly disagree and said STFU! wahhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, omg thats not bad at all, seriously your being ultra-sensitive here. How do you know I didn't mean it in a more light hearted way and not all knife-in-the-heart.
Also you do understand how annoying it is to tell someone to chill out... I don't know of anyone who is upset and on command simply chills out because they have been ordered to? I seriously don't understand it. It's like the most annoying thing in the world.... I don't know that's just me. It's also annoying when your sad and people are like "Smile!".... lol yea because that's what I was doing wrong in my life... I wasn't smiling lol.... hahaha seriously. Just explain this.... I'm actually curious to here your explanation.... please be my guest, I 'm just dying to here your explanation for this.... I may learn something.
Socionics introvert/extrovert =/= "outgoing" or not. Also popular =/= extrovert and unpopular =/= introvert. I guess what I'm saying is that yes, Belle is very popular, but look at her in the first song: she's totally into her own little world in the book, and everybody else is commenting on her. She's a total introvert, focused on herself and her own world.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mountain Dew
The Beast as introvert is a more defensible position than Belle as extrovert, but my sense of it is that his apparent introversion is more due to circumstance than inherent personality. Of course, it's a cartoon, so there's not as nuanced of a distinction between those two things. But yeah, that's my argument: he appears introverted because, well, if you were a hideous beast that people run away from every time they see you (and if they see you often enough, they start a mob and try to knock down your castle and kill you), you probably wouldn't
Not in the slightest. The Beast doesn't value power (except maybe in the Prologue, and I've disallowed that evidence on the grounds that it is traditional, whereas the rest of the film represents the Beast character as he is imagined/portrayed in the film). He values secrecy, maybe, but he's practically ashamed of his physical power, which is why he only pulls it out on occasion. And sure, when he's pissed he does mean stuff, but I don't think it's at all inconsistent with LSE (or any type really) to say, "You stepped on my lands, now you're my prisoner." And besides that, the entire plot turns on the Beast learning to use Fi, basically. The Beast has to learn to forge a human connection in order to be a complete person. Of course everybody has to do that, but insofar as interpersonal bonds are the foundation of his personal development, that sounds like Fi-DS, not Fi-polr.Quote:
:thumbsup: I personally agree with Aleksei, except I type Bell as ENFj, not INFp (Even though you put EII, which is INFj, but I think you meant INFp. And SLI is ISTp and SLE is ESTp). Definitely both Belle and the Beast are Beta (say that 5 times fast XD), for how much they value power. Seems like most people here at least agree on typing Belle as NF and the Beast as ST.
This thread is somewhere between slapstick and a train wreck.
From what I recall in the movie, Belle seems to give off a strictness in behavioral standards, which I don't see all that often in ENFps. I only have Beast as ESTj because he's E8 as fuck and I find it very hard to imagine an ISTp E8 (as much as I'd like one to exist :( ). His reclusive nature is only due to his generally poor emotional well-being. I could easily imagine an E8 secluding himself like that in order to gain power over his own domain, or just to hide himself out of shame or fear of scaring others. Basically everything that silverchris said in his last post.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mountain Dew
Also nothing about being extroverted stipulates having to be out-going, at least not in any literature I trust.
TRUST YOUR FEELINGS, THEY WILL LEAD YOU HOMEQuote:
Originally Posted by Mountain Dew
fwiw Aleksei's INFP and ISTJ typing are in MBTI, not Socionics. He's delineating between the two.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mountain Dew
Also I don't see how either of them are at all Beta. The movie doesn't glorify any of the supposed Beta values and neither to the eponymous characters.
Chip seems IEEish to me...
Yes--he's learning how to become the typical Disney prince character.Quote:
Originally Posted by silverchris9
(I'm still having trouble with seeing this character... I too had been looking at the brunt of his character in beast form... but I've found myself trying to synthesize the character in my mind... and this all leads to the inescapable question of "what is a person?" and when is a person not the same person anymore... and can this apply to actually the same physical person after some huge change occurs? etc.)
It's just rather like that line "but he was mean and he was coarse and unrefined"... I mean the beast had trouble doing things like using silverware because his beast paws couldn't pick it up very well, but it goes beyond this... he has absolutely no manners, doesn't know how to be polite or how to approach people, is floored by how people react to him, can't control his temper and totally loses all self-control when he's pissed, is automatically harsh and unpleasant and then steps back from it as though surprised by just how harsh he was wishing he could take it back or be more of a human about things... etc. And none of this seems fitting with the person we see in the beginning of the movie who I would imagine to be very refined and polite, have excellent manners and people skills (as afforded him by a wealthy noble upbringing), but who chooses to disregard his schmoozing skills when he turns away the old hag because he doesn't think her worthy of his presence since he's beautiful, rich, etc. and she's not. Even were this person the prince is turned to a hideous beast, it's hard to imagine him becoming the sort of character the beast is. So I guess all of this is why I would just break the character down into three parts (pre-beast, beast, and post-beast) and look at it in terms of inconsistencies between these transitions, while considering mainly the "beast" character as he is what appears for the majority of the film.
I guess that it's also that I see at least a few different stories intertwined together.
Looking at it from the beginning with the prince character as I imagine him... he starts out vain and narcissistic and doesn't consider the old hag worthy of his image-based "magnificence" and is cruel to her because she has no image attributes (like wealth, youth, beauty) that are worth anything and so he can treat her like shit... but then she turns him into something that has no image attributes either and he's faced with the problem that no one could love him like this (because he couldn't even love himself like this). He has to then question his entire reliance on image as it pertains to self-worth, and begin looking deeper, but of course at the same time feeling increasingly hopeless because since he only saw himself as his image, he doesn't believe there's any hope, believing that everyone else will only see the hideous image, unable to look beyond it (just as he wasn't willing to). So when Belle comes along and can love him despite the hideous image it shows him what he was missing before and sort of enables him to see people rather than superficial images, overcoming the image fixation and making room for the ability to love others as people. So he is both humbled by being ugly and unlovable for so long and freed of image fixation by someone else being able to love him despite all this. Of course in order for Belle to love him, he would have to be lovable in some inner way... somehow he would have to transform from being the ugly selfish person he was before (he was ugly on the inside)--perhaps all the time to stew over it and the time for self-reflection could have helped? (I find this story most uninteresting)
Anyway that story isn't the story in the movie though.
But he would still have to learn how to form real connections and relationships with people, to care about people, because Belle couldn't grow to love him if he didn't (she has to find something sweet and kind in there). So what he has to learn is still the same story regardless of the entrance point.
I'm really not very sure about either of these characters (or about anything in socionics as my sig may point to). But I would possibly disagree with Belle as being "outgoing". She may seem so when she going through the town singing (but she has to do this because she's a Disney cartoon character), but it's more her own private song to herself. Her trip through the town is to go to the library so she can get more reading materials, as apparently she spends most of her time "with her nose in a book" and although the town's people pay a huge amount of attention to her because they think she's odd and that her behavior just isn't right (i.e. her behavior of ignoring all of them and all of their customs and burying her head in books all day before returning home to her overly weird father where I assume she spends most of her time), I wouldn't say she's "popular" with them, at least not in a good way where they all adore her. They all notice her because she's weird to them (either they dislike her for being so, are jealous of her because of her looks, or in the case of Gaston see her as something that outshines the others to possess probably because of how she doesn't come off as approachable since she's always ignoring the towns people and often some of the things going on around her--I mean Gaston had to take her book from her and throw it in a mud puddle to finally get her full attention--he sees her as a challenge since she's the only girl in town who doesn't pay any attention to him).Quote:
Originally Posted by Mountain Dew
Of course Belle also seems rather initiative-taking I suppose. She's just waiting for something to happen to give her an excuse to leave the "provincial little town." And she's frequently exclaiming things rather enthusiastically.
I'm thinking about this more.
I agree. I was pointing out that someone else's typing-by-relating wouldn't work.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mountain Dew
Actually I'm saying he is the same person, however, in enneagram terms the beast goes from being an unhealthy 3 to an unhealthy 4. The character shift that occurs is e3 -> e4, he goes from being a heartless narcissistic prince to a withdrawn self-ashamed beast. I mean the literal beast thing and stuff is just there for the kids, but the actual plotline or story arc of the beast's character is concerning a 3 to 4 heartfix shift. The beast is basically an unhealthy 4. Here are the quotes from 4 - Enneagram Type Four: The Individualist on unhealthy 4's.Quote:
Originally Posted by silverchris9
belle by contrast is an e2 heartfix, trying to help him out and his attitude is reproachful, aloof, and self-loathing. Thinking and instinctual characteristic play very little in the disney story, the story arc is mainly feel good fairy tale stuff inject with disney animation, musicals, and kid friendly characters.Quote:
Originally Posted by unhealthy 4
The reason I object to e8 is mainly because the e8 is a lot more practical, action oriented, body fixated, and extroverted. A typical 8 wouldn't be in a castle all emo and aloof and upset for no reason, a typical e8 would be productive and out making connections and trying to make stuff happen in a practical action oriented way. e8's rarely get all emotional, they tend to be more instinctive and bodily centered than introspective, soul-searching, or contemplative. Their orientation is outward, involved in the action, and less focused inward.
Yea I looked up the story on wikipedia, apparently it came from a french story that was written sometime between the medevial age and the modern era. Apparently in that story, there are some differences, but the basic concept is the same that is presented in the prologue.Quote:
Originally Posted by silverchris9
Yea there is a lot of disneying in the story, like there is no candlestick and teapot character, those are the typical fun kid friendly characters. Then there is no musical stuff. Second of all there is no gaston in the original literature. He was added probably to portray the contrast between him and the beast. Also originally the beast isn't literally a beast. Then there are minor flubs in the story... like belle just doesn't accidentally stumble into the castle or whatever, the "beast" apparently kidnaps her father, a merchant on business, and forces her to stay in the estate with him. All the animation and musical stuff are to make it fun and kid friendly, and the story was reordered slightly. It's pretty much in the fairy tale spirit, because after a while all those little tales and whatever got re-written in Europe's romanticism period and adopted by disney in the 20th century.Quote:
Originally Posted by silverchris9
Beast is somewhat harder to type, but Belle and Gaston seem pretty obvious. You constantly get the feel of Belle's Ni fantasy/imagination dominance with the Fe style of INFp humanitarianism/sociability: sizing up the grander implication of the community's character and dealing with people effectively through words and gesturing, yet obviously disconnecting from their reality because of Ni. She's pretty unconscious of Ne. Ne Disney characters are usually like "I long for something new I've never seen before," and even Ni types have that aspect deep within them, but they miss it, it's not a strong theme of their dominating personality. What Belle longs for it seems as though she's already seen and developed countless times in her imagination. What shines through is the Te oppression from Gaston + his expectations (I relate to him in that way of wanting a reasonable plan), but he seems pretty Ni-PoLR and "fake-Se" (that is, not Se ignoring, but mimicking). Belle longs for someone much more free spirited, adventurous and indirect, but also that bold, maybe daring, personality (the exact same way for me, how I see Se dominants like ESTps as very wise and at their best engulfed in the moment) where like Gaston is pretty controlling/rational-seeming. ESTps have a much more spontaneous and free feel to me, and their Se is pure and unfiltered. Belle goes with the ISTj in the end because of her similarities to him, something I've seen myself others do with their activation partner. Sort of "live out" or "support" each others fantasy, so to speak. What's cool about Disney is that they make types and their themes pretty easy to grasp.
Belle - INFp
Beast - ISTj
Gaston - ESTj
No way. I don't know enough about ISTjs to say anything regarding the beast, but Belle doesn't strike me as an IEI, and Gaston is certainly not an LSE. He's a blatant :Se:-valuing braggart who sucks up attention.Quote:
Originally Posted by polikujm
I agree that Gaston is not LSE, but I'm not altogether certain Belle is not IEI.
I could see ISTj on the basis of three thingsQuote:
Originally Posted by Director Abbie
- Introverted
- Beta Quadra
- ST Club
I could see IEI for Belle also, on the basis of NF, however I would go for a delta NF instead, belle seems much more Fi oriented, however this messes up the symmetry with quadra values
Finally I disagree with Se Gaston, he isn't Se at all, he is a typically narcissistic braggart and doesn't have any real Se. All his Se is the fake kind. He pretends to be really tough and manly, hunting, but he's a womanly man who likes looking at how beautiful he is in the mirror. His bold assertiveness comes from the ExxJ temperament, while the ST club is obvious. In a modern sense Gaston would probably be a typical d-bag white hat wearing jock who uses hair care products that say "For Men" so that he can sleep soundly without feeling too much like a woman. He probably also takes bubble baths listening to Enya and once kissed a frat boy and secretly enjoyed it. He basically is the image of a man's man and not a real man's man. Se is extremely down to earth, they come across shallow, realistic, pragmatic, unimaginative, and cynical.... but they usually are too grounded to be narcissists. Se types are likely to be a little cruel and shallow by giving ugly/weak/disadvantaged people a hard time and such and being brutally honest because they lack the imagination to see reality for anything than what it ACTUALLY is right now.... however that is not the same kind of thing as being shallow like a narcissist. Narcissism and vanity are much more of an ExxJ thing.
If his :Se: is the fake kind, he's EIE. SLEs are often narcissists. They find it funny to announce to the world that they're the greatest at everything. An LSE could not act like Gaston and still think himself worthy of a girl.Quote:
Originally Posted by HaveLucidDreamz
Nah Se-types are competitive which is different. They are experience junkies, because their base function is all about the most external aspects of reality... if nothing exciting is going on, they have to create something exciting, so they get competitive frequently, and really get engrossed in the moment of it. They are driven by experiences, and usually have a great penchant for recalling stories, but there language in retelling stories is usually filled with concrete down to earth language describing the direct experience in realistic terms. To others this can seem to be competitive, boisterous, and braggart like, but really its them injecting some excitement (Fe-HA) into what they consider a boring environment. If you actually ask an Se-type to compare themselves to others on their skills, usually they will be fairly down to earth about themselves and their abilities. The problem is with Se-types is that they occasionally will go to great ends to create a "smoke screen" of their persona, trying to frame themselves in a purely positive light and forgo any negativity, except around people they trust (which are few), this to them isn't narcissism as much as a survival mechanism-- they describe it as optimism and self-confidence though, and to others it seems like shallow egotism. Generally Se-types especially ESTp tend to type enneagram wise more around the e7 and e8 fix than around the e3 fix.Quote:
Originally Posted by Director Abbie
Remember all ST's have weak Intuition and Feeling, although LSEs value exclusively Fi and Ne, while undervaluing Fe and Ni. So that is to say, LSE's aren't skilled at Fi, they suck at it just as much as a SLE, its just that while SLEs don't value Fi and find it a bother, LSE's seek after it and can't provide it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Director Abbie
My house must be really boring, then. So my SLE brother tries to spice things up withsome annoying :Fe:. We try to spice it up with :Ne: and he decides we're all stupid. The beeping blanket.
But since LSEs value :Fi:, they will try to avoid doing things considered unethical according to it, like throwing themselves around town as a big ugly show-off.Quote:
Originally Posted by HaveLucidDreamz
I see it different, I think valuing a function isn't so much about valuing what it represents, but valuing receiving support in that field.Quote:
Originally Posted by Director Abbie
In other words LSEs don't have any better values and ethics than an SLE, but what they do have is a much larger appreciation for that stuff. They don't have a better skill with the function they have a better appreciation for it. LSEs generally try to behave according to what they feel is "Proper" and "Sensible" and therefore they attract Fi-types which help them realize a feeling-based reason behind why this or that is "proper". I think its a stretch but Gaston likely is just behaving like a flamboyant braggart because society tells him this is the proper role for men and that its proper he acts this way and in return he can expect a trophy wife and receive much Fi-care from her.
That's a long shot, but a legitimate claim.Quote:
Originally Posted by HaveLucidDreamz
Without considering relations, any type conclusions become as inconsistence as MBTI. I assure that's not a good idea.
And Lucid, you are an Se-valuing fag. :wink:
:thumbsup: Reminds me of my New Year's resolution.Quote:
Originally Posted by Divided
I favor silverchris's posts in this thread.
Maybe, I don't know.... but regardless most of what I am writing about Se is coming from recalling personal experiences with Se-types, I've had two good friends that were SLE and there are three LSI's in my mom's family (Grandfather, Mother, and Uncle).... so I've seen a lot of Se from people I've known. It's been a major chunk of the values that permiate in my relationships with friends and family. Alot of people look at Se in a negative light and betas as well, but real successful SLEs are like Donald Trump, FDR Roosevelt, and Teddy Roosevelt. They make great leaders, practical results oriented people, great communicators, and the like. They aren't just always the annoying braggart, throughout human history there have been many charismatic SLEs that contributed positively to mankind and they all share at a certain general level a particular psychological orientation towards Se and to a lesser extent Ti.Quote:
Originally Posted by Divided
I just explained why he's not Se. Maybe to you that's how Se is, where as I'm pretty sure that's just how some extroverted guys, especially Fi valuing guys, can be. Is he too extroverted for your taste?Quote:
Originally Posted by Director Abbie
poli what on earth is your avatar?
and belle/gaston can't be IEI/LSE bc i relate to belle and dislike gaston DUH THAT'S HOW IT WORKS
Maybe Belle wants you to convert to her type?
Oh my avatar is nice, its some kind of LTTP fan remake.
You probably relate to belle because she is the smart, bookwormy, caring, empathetic, dreamer girl. I think any NF/NT girl would relate to her, I've heard this from other people actually oddly enough.Quote:
Originally Posted by laghlagh
Gaston, lol I'd be swayed by your arguments more if I actually believed there was a single person that liked Gaston out there... come on the guy is villian for a kid's story, the character was designed in the disney vault laboratory to be hated, they probably tested the character on little kids to make sure they hated him.
Belle - IEI
Beast - LSI( probably) or SLE
Gaston - SEE ( in my opinion all Renaissance villains are aggressors, besides Jafar, Scar and Hades)
Maurice - ILE
Mrs Potts - SEI
Lumiere - one of ethical extraverts.
Cogsworth - LII or ILI, perhaps.
EII - LSE, the whole story is very Fi/Te imo
Hi, I love your cats. ByesQuote:
Originally Posted by Aiss
I see it as delta story, so Belle is EII, Beast is LSE. And of course the bad guy is beta, Gaston is SLE. From beta POV it inverts and Gaston is the secret hero:).