A Noob from the EI made the following typings...I feel like tearing him to pieces but that's probably a bit too mean. Now for those who read any of these writers, they're up for grabs
( Read more... )
I blush to admit, I haven't read most of them. Of many, I haven't even heard (to my credit, I've mostly been reading Ovid lately).
Off the top of my hat, I'd say Tolstoy is no 3, Austen a 1 (as you suggested yourself), Rushdie could well be a 7 (from what little I've read), but just as well a 4w3, Milton is no 3 either, Nabokov not a soc-first, Byron rather a 4.
Byron may actually be a 4, as people usually assume, but from reading biographies on him, he also showed strong tendencies towards sx 7. Hompo and I discussed that on the EIDB years ago...
I haven't read Byron for a long time. I personally had trouble with people's original typing of him (4w5 sx/soc? Wouldn't that mean he's Shelley's twin...?).
Austen portrait looks like a sp One I knew irl. And her writings feel highly controlled, never letting anything off stream (whether fantansies, introspective self-indulgence, subjective commentaries, etc.) Perhaps a very sx-last six would have this flavor as well. But I will probably bank on One for now.
You're right, Byron and Shelley don't exactly seem like twins. I think people often underestimate the extent of sexual first non-4's focus on love/romance/connection, as well as their ability to express their deeper emotions. Could either he or Shelley have been a 4w3, though?
Austen I'm just torn about. One or 6, but I would think social first. She was so observant of and knowledgeable of all the social dynamics. If sp/so, she must have had a very strong secondary.
Shelley has a pretty obvious 5-wing to me. The way he gets all "intellectual" about things...and his open iconoclasm. He doesn't seem to think even once about adapting. Huge connection to One. Austen struck me as either sp/so or so/sp. Sx last anyhow...her all-so-sensible worldview is exemplary.
(The comment has been removed)
(The comment has been removed)
I blush to admit, I haven't read most of them. Of many, I haven't even heard (to my credit, I've mostly been reading Ovid lately).
Off the top of my hat, I'd say Tolstoy is no 3, Austen a 1 (as you suggested yourself), Rushdie could well be a 7 (from what little I've read), but just as well a 4w3, Milton is no 3 either, Nabokov not a soc-first, Byron rather a 4.
Sorry, that's it.
Reply
Reply
Austen portrait looks like a sp One I knew irl. And her writings feel highly controlled, never letting anything off stream (whether fantansies, introspective self-indulgence, subjective commentaries, etc.) Perhaps a very sx-last six would have this flavor as well. But I will probably bank on One for now.
Reply
Austen I'm just torn about. One or 6, but I would think social first. She was so observant of and knowledgeable of all the social dynamics. If sp/so, she must have had a very strong secondary.
Reply
Reply
I must agree with you there.
Shelley is probably 4w5, I'll agree with that too.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment