# Name a good book and Type it as you would a person



## LyeLye (Apr 24, 2014)

Just post a book with characters, a tone, or a message that fits the description of any Enneagram type, with the reason why you think it falls under that Type. You can even give a little synopsis if you want to.

I'll start out.

Kushiel's Dart by Jacqueline Carey: Type 4

The novel is actually a pseudo-historical high fantasy, about a courtesan living in a fantasy version of Renaissance France. The society she portrays is idealized, although it does suffer from some flaws, such as a superiority complex. The tone of the novel, written from the courtesan's perspective, is elegant but a bit flowery at times. All in all, if this book were a person, I'd type them as a Type 4.


----------



## Blindspots (Jan 27, 2014)

The Book of Disquiet by Fernando Pessoa - Type 4w5

Rather melancholy tone. Questions, is overwhelmed by, sometimes rejects an objective and shared reality.


----------



## LyeLye (Apr 24, 2014)

Chrnos said:


> The Book of Disquiet by Fernando Pessoa - Type 4w5
> 
> Rather melancholy tone. Questions, is overwhelmed by, sometimes rejects an objective and shared reality.


Thank you for introducing to me this book! I just bought it and can't wait to read it.

Does anyone know of any books that are Types other than Type 4?


----------



## Flatlander (Feb 25, 2012)

Ayn Rand - The Fountainhead: Type 1.


----------



## 7rr7s (Jun 6, 2011)

How To Win Friends and Influence People. -Dale Carnegie. 3w2. So/Sx. 

How to build rapport, master the art of being charming, and get people on your side in business and personal relationships.



Naughty Nomad. -Mark Zolo. 7w8. Sx/So.

Travel autobiography detailing his adventures through Asia and parts of Africa filled with lots of insane high risk adventures, drugs and lots of sex. 



The Great Gatsby. -F. Scott Fitzgerald. 3w4 So/Sp.

The Great American novel about a mysterious man's rise and fall amidst obsession and excess in the 1920's.


----------



## charlie.elliot (Jan 22, 2014)

among the books I've read recently -

The Unbearable Lightness of Being by Milan Kundera - Type 4
Orlando by Virginia Woolf - Type 4w5
The Bell Jar by Sylvia Plath - Type 4w5
(so many Type 4's in 20th century literature!!!)

Kurt Vonnegut-
Sirens of Titan- Type 6 ( fulfilling your destiny blindly through some greater authority)
Slaughterhouse Five- Type 9 (ignorance and resignation in the face of terrible catastrophes)
Cat's Cradle - Type 3 (governments maintaining power entirely through the use of smoke &mirrors - "see the cat? see the cradle?")
He's captured the inner triangle nicely there!


----------



## LyeLye (Apr 24, 2014)

charlie.elliot said:


> among the books I've read recently -
> 
> The Unbearable Lightness of Being by Milan Kundera - Type 4
> Orlando by Virginia Woolf - Type 4w5
> ...


Thank you for your reply! Now I want to read the books on your list that I haven't already read. I can get both insight into the minds of other enneagram types hopefully, and discover some new good books.

Did you really feel that The Bell Jar was 4w5? I know that a lot of people do, but when I read it Esther came across to me as a 4w3. I felt like I was reading about a version of myself disintegrating. Esther is just so ambitious and at times she's even able to disguise her feelings (until she just starts to go mad of course). Of course, I will admit that I've taken the test to find my wing several times now - and while 60% of the time it's 4w3, the other 40% it's 4w5.


----------



## HellCat (Jan 17, 2013)

Ernest Hemingway

The sun also rises. 6w balanced wings sx/sp I think

A twisted relationship with a loyalty that is destructive in its passion and frustration with the inability to consummate it. 

Brett wants men for the sex and uses them as much as they use her for her wild heart and beauty. She is devoted to Jake in her heart, even though he cannot feed her physical needs. 

My pragmatic self after reading it the first time. "seriously she can't just get some toys" Pitiful excuse. 

Hemingway's empathy with her, touches me. She is celebrated despite her bitchy shallow selfish ways at time, just as he does his male protagonists. I love how Jake takes control of her and melts her at the same time. Hes not a wuss, he is simply powerful and quiet. There for her. 

My favorite book. I understand her better than any literary character next to Jane Eyre.


----------



## charlie.elliot (Jan 22, 2014)

LyeLye said:


> Thank you for your reply! Now I want to read the books on your list that I haven't already read. I can get both insight into the minds of other enneagram types hopefully, and discover some new good books.
> 
> Did you really feel that The Bell Jar was 4w5? I know that a lot of people do, but when I read it Esther came across to me as a 4w3. I felt like I was reading about a version of myself disintegrating. Esther is just so ambitious and at times she's even able to disguise her feelings (until she just starts to go mad of course). Of course, I will admit that I've taken the test to find my wing several times now - and while 60% of the time it's 4w3, the other 40% it's 4w5.


That is true, she is ambitious, probably a 4w3 like you said, very image-conscious. I guess I was thinking of the book overall as being 4w5 since it deals with her journey through madness, the greatest isolation you could experience.


----------



## mushr00m (May 23, 2011)

George Orwell 1984 - 1w2 or 9/6w5/3w4 SO/SX


----------



## hal0hal0 (Sep 1, 2012)

mushr00m said:


> George Orwell 1984 - 1w2 or 9/6w5/3w4 SO/SX


Out of curiosity do you see that typing extend to Orwell himself? I definitely see Orwell as a Soc-first, probably, if I had to guess, INFP So/Sx (possibly So/Sp) with strong 6w5 influences. I do see the flips of phobia/counterphobia with him, particularly in Down and Out in London and Paris.

Hm, let's see here:

*Catch-22*: Clearly a Sp-heavy influence, probably Sp/Sx if I had to guess based off the sheer absurdity and animosity towards the Soc instinct. Probably phobic 6w5 Sp/Sx if I had to guess.

*The Canterbury Tales*: Huh, total guess but how about 7w8 Sx/So? No clue.

*The Satanic Verses*: I keep wanting to peg Rushdie as a reactive type, so 6w7 Sx/So.

*East of Eden*: Shockingly 4w3 Sp/So (kinda makes sense considering the Cain and Abel connections... i.e., Envy for parent's love).

*Gravity's Rainbow*: No clue. Probably Soc-first... maybe 5w4 So/Sx?

*Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead*: Delightful, which has nothing to do with enneagram but... how about 9w1 Sp/Sx?

*Lolita*: Blatantly obvious 7w6 Sx/Sp (or possibly Sp/Sx). Easiest one to type on this list, IMO.

*Demian*: prolly 5w4 Sp/So?

*Ulysses*: No idea because it's all over the place and there's too many characters (which could be Soc influence, but dunno). Going off of Stephen's analysis of Shakespeare (b/c why not) I might say 5w6 Sx/So? Bloom would be 5w4/9w1 Sp/Sx.

*Will You Please Be Quiet Please?*: Sp/Sx something. Maybe 9w8.


----------



## mirrorghost (Sep 18, 2012)

Chrnos said:


> The Book of Disquiet by Fernando Pessoa - Type 4w5
> 
> Rather melancholy tone. Questions, is overwhelmed by, sometimes rejects an objective and shared reality.


so strange you mention this, because i am slowly reading this book and picked it up again yesterday and was thinking about this very thing. whoa synchronicity. i kept going back and forth between 4w5 and 5w4 but you're probably right, it's more 4w5.


----------



## L'Enfant Terrible (Jun 8, 2014)

The shadow of the wind - Carlos Ruiz Zafón

4w5


----------



## Flatlander (Feb 25, 2012)

The Force said:


> The shadow of the wind - Carlos Ruiz Zafón
> 
> 4w5


I misread 'wind' as 'mind' and google search brought up a Penrose book. Reminds me I gotta do some reading in that area.


----------



## L'Enfant Terrible (Jun 8, 2014)

Flatliner said:


> I misread 'wind' as 'mind' and google search brought up a Penrose book. Reminds me I gotta do some reading in that area.


Now I really want to read Shadows of the Mind. damn you,people on the internet with your awesome mistakes and all...


----------



## caramel_choctop (Sep 20, 2010)

The Book of Disquiet - Type 5 sp


----------



## charlie.elliot (Jan 22, 2014)

Ender's Game - type 8w9 sp/so


----------



## mushr00m (May 23, 2011)

hal0hal0 said:


> Out of curiosity do you see that typing extend to Orwell himself? I definitely see Orwell as a Soc-first, probably, if I had to guess, INFP So/Sx (possibly So/Sp) with strong 6w5 influences. I do see the flips of phobia/counterphobia with him, particularly in Down and Out in London and Paris.


That's an interesting question and probably does coincide with his actual personal typing perhaps his drives can be seen through his works and so it's definitely possible the types I worked out for 1984 are also an extension of his personal drives. Soc dom seemed the easiest aspect to work out tbh :tongue: And I think the INFP typing is likely right aswell - Fi/Ne is quite evident in 1984 and Animal Farm, his use of subjective ethics, the aesthetic elements based on make-believe subjects and making them real just really resonates as something very Fi/Ne/Si. It's been awhile since I read Down and Out in London and Paris but if remembered rightly, aspects of reactive triad comes strong into play and themes of struggle, disillusionment and yes, I picked up on the phobic/counterphobic flips also! His awareness of hierarchy and his attitudes towards it in all the books above is very evident, a clear 6/1 combo. He made for a very interesting typing case for sure :kitteh: Do you have any thoughts on his heart fix...


----------



## hal0hal0 (Sep 1, 2012)

mushr00m said:


> That's an interesting question and probably does coincide with his actual personal typing perhaps his drives can be seen through his works and so it's definitely possible the types I worked out for 1984 are also an extension of his personal drives. Soc dom seemed the easiest aspect to work out tbh :tongue: And I think the INFP typing is likely right aswell - Fi/Ne is quite evident in 1984 and Animal Farm, his use of subjective ethics, the aesthetic elements based on make-believe subjects and making them real just really resonates as something very Fi/Ne/Si. It's been awhile since I read Down and Out in London and Paris but if remembered rightly, aspects of reactive triad comes strong into play and themes of struggle, disillusionment and yes, I picked up on the phobic/counterphobic flips also! His awareness of hierarchy and his attitudes towards it in all the books above is very evident, a clear 6/1 combo.


His Road to Wigan Pier is a fascinating one to me, in part because it's the clearest instance of his inferior Te coming out. In a way, I think it is his most impassioned, forceful and even angered of pieces.



mushr00m said:


> He made for a very interesting typing case for sure :kitteh: Do you have any thoughts on his heart fix...


Hm, heart fix. Yeah, that one I've had to think about for a bit, because most his work seems mostly devoid of his own self-perception, self-worth and he doesn't seem to think in terms of how he himself is either valued, seen, etc. I am reasonably certain of a core 6w5, owing to the analytical, borderline detached demeanor of his, such as his experience of getting shot in the Spanish Civil War in Homage to Catalonia:



GeorgeOrwell said:


> “They laid me down again while somebody fetched a stretcher. As soon as I knew that the bullet had gone clean through my neck I took it for granted that I was done for. I had never heard of a man or an animal getting a bullet through the middle of the neck and surviving it. The blood was dribbling out of the comer of my mouth. ‘The artery's gone,’ I thought. I wondered how long you last when your carotid artery is cut; not many minutes, presumably. Everything was very blurry. There must have been about two minutes during which I assumed that I was killed. And that too was interesting—I mean it is interesting to know what your thoughts would be at such a time. My first thought, conventionally enough, was for my wife. My second was a violent resentment at having to leave this world which, when all is said and done, suits me so well. I had time to feel this very vividly. The stupid mischance infuriated me. The meaninglessness of it! *To be bumped off, not even in battle, but in this stale comer of the trenches, thanks to a moment's carelessness!* I thought, too, of the man who had shot me—wondered what he was like, whether he was a Spaniard or a foreigner, whether he knew he had got me, and so forth. I could not feel any resentment against him. I reflected that as he was a Fascist I would have killed him if I could, but that if he had been taken prisoner and brought before me at this moment I would merely have congratulated him on his good shooting. It may be, though, that if you were really dying your thoughts would be quite different.”


And so begins my thesis for the day, lmao :laughing:.

Mostly, he seems heavily analytical of the situation, talking in terms of observation and situation, as opposed to being remembered, valued, etc.., although there is a glimmer of that image-fix as bolded above. I see, however, the most evidence for a 3w4 fix. 

I believe that Orwell's image-concerns are relatively minor, suggesting, in terms of tritype, a relatively weak influence of the heart-fix (i.e., heart last). For the most part, Orwell's work is in terms of experience, analysis and conviction, suggesting strong 6 influences as well as 1-influences owing to "right action" particularly in books such as The Road to Wigan Pier. For the most part, I sense very little concern for how he himself is valued or his own personal self-concept. Certainly, image-type concerns carry a heavy Soc-instinct influence, as you said, emphasizing and exploring social hierarchies in particular (i.e., Animal Farm: "All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others").

I think Orwell's image concerns carry a heavy Soc influence in general, and are most evident in perhaps his two most personal works—The Road to Wigan Pier as well as Keep the Aspidistra Flying (which, imo, is sort of a fictional autobiography, depicting the sort of inner pride of being poor or not of the upper crust of society). The Road to Wigan Pier is where Orwell goes into his own family's position in the socioeconomic sphere, describing himself as belonging to that rather unique niche of the "lower-upper-middle class":



OrwellRoadtoWiganPier said:


> I was born into what you might describe as the lower-upper-middle class. The upper-middle class, which had its heyday in the eighties and nineties, with Kipling as its poet laureate, was a sort of mound of wreckage left behind when the tide of Victorian prosperity receded. Or perhaps it would be better to change the metaphor and describe it not as a mound but as a layer — the layer of society lying between L2000 and L300 a year: my own family was not far from the bottom. You notice that I define it in terms of money, because that is always the quickest way of making yourself understood. Nevertheless, the essential point about the English class-system is that it is not entirely explicable in terms of money. Roughly speaking it is a money-stratification, but it is also interpenetrated by a sort of shadowy caste-system; rather like a jerrybuilt modem bungalow haunted by medieval ghosts. Hence the fact that the upper-middle class extends or extended to incomes as low as L300 a year — to incomes, that is, much lower than those of merely middle-class people with no social pretensions. Probably there are countries where you can predict a man’s opinions from his income, but it is never quite safe to do so in England; you have always got to take his traditions into consideration as well. A naval officer and his grocer very likely have the same income, but they are not equivalent persons and they would only be on the same side in very large issues such as a war or a general strike — possibly not even then.


Of course, a case could be made for Soc 2 as well, since Maitri describes both Soc 2s and 3s being concerned with either achievement, prestige or climbing the Soc ladder. The difference, however, is I think the 2's fixation is borne more out of Pride's desire for control or mastery (i.e., power-seeking triad). The more people the 2 has under its network, the more secure it feels in terms of worth. Thus, "achievement" for the Soc 2 is more a means to an end, whereas for a 3, the achievement sort of IS the end goal.

For Orwell, I see Soc 3w4 influences most strongly in Keep the Aspidistra Flying, a rather endearing book, in part because of the way Orwell taps into the dignity of the lower classes, creating a sort of rebellious attitude to the pigs of the upper crust (to reference Animal Farm). The title of the book Keep the Aspidistra Flying refers to the way in which Orwell's own "lower-upper-middle class" didn't make enough money to earn a "respectable" living, but pressured in a way, to keep up appearances of prestige, even if they could not afford it. Thus, the houseplant aspidistra became a symbol for Orwell of the way in which prestige and keeping up the appearances of wealth, became more important than the actual utility of wealth.



OrwellKeeptheAspidistraFlying said:


> “Better to reign in hell than serve in heaven.”
> 
> “What he realised, and more clearly as time went on, was that money-worship has been elevated into a religion. Perhaps it is the only real religion-the only felt religion-that is left to us. Money is what God used to be. Good and evil have no meaning any longer except failure and success. Hence the profoundly significant phrase, to make good. The decalogue has been reduced to two commandments. One for the employers-the elect, the money priesthood as it were- 'Thou shalt make money'; the other for the employed- the slaves and underlings'- 'Thou shalt not lose thy job.' It was about this time that he came across The Ragged Trousered Philanthropists and read about the starving carpenter who pawns everything but sticks to his aspidistra. The aspidistra became a sort of symbol for Gordon after that. The aspidistra, the flower of England! It ought to be on our coat of arms instead of the lion and the unicorn. There will be no revolution in England while there are aspidistras in the windows.”
> 
> ...


Haha, he was being so sarcastic with the bolded. I think there's this assumption that 3s can't be rebellious, but I don't think that's really right. 3s don't necessarily care about "playing the game" and I think there's this conflation with type 4 being the "rebellious" one that, frankly, is overblown. The 3's fixation comes from fixating upon the superficial or surface level of the identity. Thus, the 3 is inclined to overidentify with the surface characteristics and call these masks its actual Self. Which is not to say that 3s are "fraudulent" per se, but rather, their sense of Self isn't strong, so they forge their identity as a proxy for the inner sense of insecurity of who they are (hence, identification through labels such as class stratification, occupation, interests, status, etc.).

The 3 could, for instance, identify and be proud of being a bum, to put it crudely.


----------



## hal0hal0 (Sep 1, 2012)

@mushr00m I think another great example of Orwell's prideful "lower-upper-middle class" can be seen in GB Shaw's Pygmalion or its musical adaptation My Fair Lady. The character of Freddy and his mother (or Mrs. and Miss Eynsford-Hill in Shaw's original play) are seen as desiring to keep up the _*appearance *_of sophistication, prestige and wealth, when, in reality, they are not quite so well-to-do. Thus, Shaw was exploring much the same terrain as Orwell, in regards to how the prestige surrounding wealth overshadowed wealth's practical utility.






So the Eynsford-Hills represent a fixation upon surface level characteristics such as prestige or "making a good impression" in contrast to Eliza Doolittle, whose concerns are more practical, and Professor Higgins, whose concerns are primarily intellectual.


----------

