# The Artists: ISFP, INFP, INFJ



## BlackFandango (Apr 4, 2014)

I've heard quite a few times in MBTI circles that these three types are the most artistically inclined (though, of course, any type of person can be an artist). I'm curious, what kinds of art would these types gravitate toward, how would their creative processes differ from one another, and how would you tell them apart from their work?


----------



## OffTheBooks (Jan 5, 2012)

That's tough.
One thing that is common about artists, is that artistic thinking is really gained at a young age, and the prioritization of developing that type of thought is often a solitary experience. Choosing to focus on developing the skills necessary to express yourself through one of the mediums is no less solitary, most of the time. I think that may be why you tend to find more introverted types gravitating towards artistic endeavors, by default.
As for various mediums, I guess I have a preferred medium in which to express myself, but only because I'm more skilled in one over the others, and don't really attribute it to a personality, as I learned music at an age where my personality was still largely undeveloped, and easily effected.
I developed my music skills first, out of environment and access.
I'm sure if someone had dropped paints in front of me with art history books, I'd have chosen to express myself that way, over music.
I enjoy writing and photography, as well, but again, a lot of it has to do with access. I just got a camera, 2 months ago, and have been loving it.
Thankfully I don't think medium has much to do with personality, as that would undoubtedly lead to thematic staleness within the medium. 
Art is evocative, and if everyone were evoking the same emotions in photography, and different ones in music, and different ones in painting, etc... we would have much less diversity in the types of art or themes within each medium.

Just my thoughts, as someone that would happily try other mediums, if I had the time/access to tools.


----------



## jada_artist (Nov 21, 2014)

I'm an ISTP and I've been drawing ever since I can remember. On the ISTP side, we are creative but usually more on the mechanical level e.g. engineers. But I'm certainly not good at things like that. However, when I did draw, I was usually copying what I saw. Not from my imagination. And I still do that, but now I've kinda learned to be more creative and come up with my own ideas as well. Copying what I saw gave me the technical drawing skills. 

idk about those other types.


----------



## mikan (May 25, 2014)

The stereotypes say:
ISFP visual artists
INFP literature
INFJ poets

Though I find this very generalizing, any type can be an artists just as there are ISFP INFP INFJs who aren't artists.


----------



## Ghostsoul (May 10, 2014)

mikan said:


> The stereotypes say:
> ISFP visual artists
> INFP literature
> INFJ poets
> ...


I can write poems and literature, but not draw visual art! :laughing:


----------



## mikan (May 25, 2014)

Ghostsoul said:


> I can write poems and literature, but not draw visual art! :laughing:


This is why I said stereotypes :wink:


----------



## Ghostsoul (May 10, 2014)

mikan said:


> This is why I said stereotypes :wink:


I know!
Just thought my lack of being able to fit them was mildly amusing.


----------



## OffTheBooks (Jan 5, 2012)

Ghostsoul said:


> I know!
> Just thought my lack of being able to fit them was mildly amusing.


INFJ that loves poetry but never writes it, here.

I am a songwriter, and have been since a kid, and I guess I do writing for some magazines and news outlets, that are meant to be pretty evocative/provocative, and are pretty imagery heavy, so some people might say there's a connection to be made, there, but I would disagree, as poetry has far more command over words than songwriting or written word.


----------



## Kyusaku (Mar 18, 2014)

It's hard to answer without delving into stereotypes, so I'm going to speak about personal experiences with those types.

The ISFP I know is into painting and photography. She is very inspired and focused, but she is incapable of postponing her work so she has to do her stuff pretty much in one go. Her work is both vivid and deep, but by aiming for a fast result there are lots of mistakes and cutting of corners which pulls it down quality wise.

The INFJs I knew all wrote a lot, they are meticulous in the effects, the pace, they know how to captivate and retain the reader by rewarding constantly. It's very homogeneous, no hiccups, the flow is constant. They were extremely focus and dedicated, as a reader you feel respected, there is definitely a sense of trust building up towards them as narrators.

Whereas INFPs are much more inconsistent... They are trying to innovate and it is mostly hit or miss. They try to include to much stuff and end up without a clear thread to guide the reader through. On the other hand they are able to create self contained worlds with massive amounts of details, and characters that aren't just story telling devices.


----------



## atenea (Sep 14, 2014)

I'm INFP and I'm not an artist. In the past I wrote three short stories for personal enjoyment but I've never showed them to anyone. But that was many years ago. Sometimes I feel the desire to write fiction and I have a good idea, but I'm too lazy to think about the detalis of the story. 

I'm terrible at drawing and other artistic things that need ability with hands. 

As for consuming art, I really enjoy reading literature and listening to music, but I'm not interested in visiting museums, admire paintings and stuff like that.


----------



## mushr00m (May 23, 2011)

INFP. I try to write small intricate one liners and anything more that is kinda mind numbing... I have more patience with art and a definite interest in creating music, moreso electronic music. But writing is generally a bit tedious.


----------



## FearAndTrembling (Jun 5, 2013)

I kind of like what Keirsey said here. He called INFJ "writer" in one description. INFP and INFJ are more word based, abstract, like literature. ISFP is more in the environment. What Keirsey called "artisan concretization". Which is why they are often musicians, they are more in touch with the physical world. I was saying that ISTP and INFJ can be very hard to tell apart. Tolstoy for example could be an ISTP or INFJ. ISTP make good writers too. ISTP and INFJ share the no nonsense attitude too. We want clarity. We want themes to merge.


----------



## ferroequinologist (Jul 27, 2012)

BlackFandango said:


> I've heard quite a few times in MBTI circles that these three types are the most artistically inclined (though, of course, any type of person can be an artist). I'm curious, what kinds of art would these types gravitate toward, how would their creative processes differ from one another, and how would you tell them apart from their work?


I don't know about the other two types, but I know that my work tends to be iterative. I have to hash it out over multiple trials an errors. I don't just get an "inspiration", except in the most vague of forms. I have to take time to flesh things out--but my "art has always been a bit more technical. Although, playing a musical instrument is very much an in-the-moment sort of thing, and I seldom do the same thing twice. When I was in school, I chose the trombone because with the slide, I felt it gave me a lot more freedom to create and mold my sounds--certainly over the trumpet. I loved always shaping the sound as I saw fit. I play the harmonica for the same reason--because it gives me endless freedom to add my mood to it. I stunk at guitar when I tried it--I suspect i was too young to start, and quit piano simply because I was terrified of the obligatory recitals. (big mistake). I never felt like a good drawer, so gave up on that, but discovered photography in ninth grade, and the dark room--built my own in our basement bathroom, and shot black and white photography through high school, until my camera broke when trying to use it in sub-zero temps. :-( After that, I got into graphic design--i.e. printing. This was before the Mac, and it was all done hands-on, over a light table, with clip art, hand-drawn art, horizontal cameras and PMTs, and then melted wax, X-acto knife, and other messy things. I loved it. But I learned then, that for me this kind of work was iterative. I would have to hash it out over time. I recently designed a book cover for someone close, and it was a bear. I started with an idea my daughter gave me, but it wasn't working, and it took me a month of playing, looking, etc. before it finally clicked, and the end result is, IMO, quite handsome and catchy. I'm rather proud of it. And I did the page layout for the book as well--and that took some trial and error as well. It is rewarding, but very hand's-on, and quite tedious at times. In some ways, I prefer the photography--but it's the same, really. I used to roll my own film, and I'd roll a dozen frames, and go shoot them all on one thing, come home and develop. it. Now, I may shoot a hundred frames to get one good photo. (gotta love digital!) I work the subject to death, because while I may have a vague concept of what I want, I don't really have a good, final idea until I start shooting, and seeing what my lenses see. And yeah, I will change lenses, exposure--everything--to see how it works. But when I find that "picture", I will take a few more, with variations, and then, sometimes, that opens up other framings, and I'll shoot those as well. I prefer getting it right in camera as well. Photoshop is only useful for enhancing beyond what I can do in camera. But sometimes, I shoot knowing what I will need to do post-processing-wise. 

The whole thing, I hope i got across, is very tactile, and very much a work-in-progress-type process. I almost never have a complete concept to start with, and flesh it out. I have to work things out on the fly. For me, I think that means I could never be a painter, but could probably make a good jazz musician. ;-) 

I have done writing, but I don't think I could ever produce more than a short story. I don't have the chops to plan out and work out a whole plot line or character development. I can write evocatively, but it just happens. And poetry? Blah!!! I have horror stories from elementary school where the dumbest kid in the class wrote better poems than me. It was humiliating, so I never really got into poetry. Just yuck. But I've always struggled for words--good ones especially. I have a huge vocabulary, but it's useless in my brain... just taking up space. ;-)

So, this is how I do it, how about others?


----------



## Booyou (Oct 5, 2014)

INFP here. I'm an artist.I master different kind of tools. If I had to put them in order I'd say Digital Art- Traditional Art- Sculpture; I mostly like to draw figurative subjects, with an almost surreal atmosphere and bright colors. I would call myself an Illustrator. I've been experimenting with animation lately too. 
I love character design. 
My way of painting is extremely intuitive and I do not follow any schemes. 
I have some musical inclinations too, but I could never develop them well. I love singing. And if you give me some alone time with an instrument I could do something with it.
I was really into writing and reading when I was younger, but since I decided to start to learn a bunch of new languages I don't have a strongest language anymore, and it affects my writing.


----------



## Doc Dangerstein (Mar 8, 2013)

... not true.

Franz Josef Haydn, Ernest Hemingway, Aldous Huxley, Oscar Wilde, Mark Twain and many others were extrovert. And God forbid, Earnie was also a sensor and a thinker. How could that possibly be? David Cronenberg, Ludwig van Beethoven, Jane Austen were also thinkers. The mother of classical poetry, Sapho, I always imagined as a sensor and an extrovert. If I were type Walt Whitman: ESFP. I'm thinking Jorge-Louis Borges was NT, not sure which yet.

The brooding, isolated artist is a romanticized stereotype. There is no need to suffer in isolation; and I wonder if the tradition of summoning the muse in Greek epics is to externalize your thoughts, and to look outside of yourself. Yeah ... burden of proof is on you guys. I don't think IxFP/INFJs are more artistic than other types, because I can keep going and continue to name great artists who were not those types.


----------



## Brian1 (May 7, 2011)

An oil painting I did, oh ESTP here:


----------



## ShatteredHeart (Jul 11, 2014)

Double post


----------



## ShatteredHeart (Jul 11, 2014)

Ghostsoul said:


> I can write poems and literature, but not draw visual art! :laughing:


Funny, I can do Poetry and Visual Art, but lack the structure for lengthy Literature. I can right scenes and acts, but I have trouble finishing an entire Arch


----------



## Mimic octopus (May 3, 2014)

There are a lot of types that are artistic and I wouldn't say any three stand out from the rest.

What ISFPs, INFPs and INFJs have in common is a kind of emotional/introverted rebellion from social norms. I think they're definitely the types most likely to wear black clothing/make-up and experiment living in crack house (if that's what you mean by artistic).


----------



## EonsInTheNight (Oct 26, 2014)

INFP, characters and scenes naturally come up in my head but nothing concrete enough and worthy to be put on paper. And I don't know of any kind of technique to help me knite fragment of imagination together into scenes that are worth put on paper.
I mean, I react emotionally to something and then scenes, discussions and moods of that scenes appear in my mind -not things I remember or but scenes my own brain conjures, but nothing to stand out or be self-sufficient to write on about.
It bugs me.


----------



## FearAndTrembling (Jun 5, 2013)

conundrum94 said:


> Eh what I would give for a Socratic life. For fun me and my friends would "Socratic Seminars," speak about a topic at hand. There were only a few simple rules that kept us speaking for hours without any fights or rough moments.
> 
> 1) There is no leader.
> 2) Listen!
> ...


And who is right at the end? Nobody really. It is an organic style. It is art and wisdom. Compare that to how ideas are debated by politicians today. That is why Socrates was killed. Because he didn't know. All politicians insist they know. The people demand an answer. You must know the answers. 

I hate arguments that can be ended by a presentation of a fact. I am not interested in those. Facts are just the beginning.


----------



## Scootaloo (Mar 18, 2013)

Honestly, I'm creative in any way. I live for creativity. IF someone asks me to paint something, I'll do it. Sew something? Sure! Draw something? Definitely. Write a novel? No problem. Write poetry? Bitch please!

But mostly, I'm musical.


----------



## Fischer (Aug 16, 2012)

FearAndTrembling said:


> And who is right at the end? Nobody really. It is an organic style. It is art and wisdom. Compare that to how ideas are debated by politicians today. That is why Socrates was killed. Because he didn't know. All politicians insist they know. The people demand an answer. You must know the answers.
> 
> I hate arguments that can be ended by a presentation of a fact. I am not interested in those. Facts are just the beginning.


Exactly nothing was up for debate. Never a winner(more like ever said what they had to say). We were interested in what people were going to say when we ask them a question. Wait waited intently(they waited on me mostly I have to write some of my responses before I say them). I know what my influences are going to make me deiced. What about these 7 other people? What are their influences? 

All of this because of silly 2-10 page articles.

I hate political debates, they are as bad as the Kardashian's. That's what the Times are for.


----------



## Doc Dangerstein (Mar 8, 2013)

> I've heard quite a few times in MBTI circles that these three types are the most artistically inclined (though, of course, any type of person can be an artist)


... I heard that too. And it's just not true



> I'm curious, what kinds of art would these types gravitate toward


... Any



> how would their creative processes differ from one another,


... by how they approach their work



> and how would you tell them apart from their work


... by their biography and content of their work.

The need to create and to express yourself is a human idea. Regardless of who you are type-wise

Lets hear it for the next ESTJ to be a grand creative force. Like it or not, St. Peter and Mohammed were ESTJs and both were creative giants who build entire civilizations. Or what about the ESTP/ISTP master surgeon who takes a chance on a daring operation that will be studied by the next generation of doctors and become a routine procedure

We have our masterpieces because someone felt inspired and did something. And we did so passionately and not because we are one of three types. Creative potential is human potential: to limit yourself and to see three types as artistic is to turn a blind eye to the big picture.



> The topic of the creative processes of other types is an interesting topic, and worthy of discussion, it's just not the discussion before us at the moment.


... agreed. Except I'm not the one to give this thread a limiting title. I don't need re-articulate as to how I feel about these limits. So, how I experience creativity as an extrovert ENxP, leaning F:

I like to switch mediums: sometimes I'm a pianist and composer, other times I write words, other times I find expression in mathematics. Yes, I'm one of those who thinks an elegant theorem is poetry. I like to challenge the limitations of human thought and perception. I trained mainly as a pianist of which teaching supplies my financial subsentence: but to think of myself as such is limiting

I don't find my inspiration deep inside my soul. I have thoughts and emotions like other people, sometimes they are worthy of commentary but what it truly inspiring is the universe outside of myself, the known and the unknown. Vastness is beautiful.


----------



## keiralexa (Nov 23, 2014)

OffTheBooks said:


> That's tough.
> One thing that is common about artists, is that artistic thinking is really gained at a young age, and the prioritization of developing that type of thought is often a solitary experience. Choosing to focus on developing the skills necessary to express yourself through one of the mediums is no less solitary, most of the time. I think that may be why you tend to find more introverted types gravitating towards artistic endeavors, by default.
> As for various mediums, I guess I have a preferred medium in which to express myself, but only because I'm more skilled in one over the others, and don't really attribute it to a personality, as I learned music at an age where my personality was still largely undeveloped, and easily effected.
> I developed my music skills first, out of environment and access.
> ...


Had your personality type not been indicated in your profile, I still would've guessed that you're an INFJ from the way you wrote


----------



## EonsInTheNight (Oct 26, 2014)

I do agree that other types can make great artists and only because one is ISFP/INFP/INFJ it doesn't mean they are creative.
But I also think they are generally more drawn to artistic expression, but these doesn't always -or most time- equals talent.

But there is something about these types tough -and I would add ENFP here too, I feel that they can add different colors and nuances to well-known emotions in the way other types may not.
But it's just something I suspect, I wouldn't necesarly bet on it.

Anyway, other types can excel in their own style also. I was really fond on the descriptive style of Hemingway the second time I've read "Farewell to Arms", both when it comes to the world and characters. I suspect Hemingway was ISTP, because I think the main character is a self-insert, and that's what he appears like.


----------



## Kyusaku (Mar 18, 2014)

@Spastic Origami 

As much as I agree with your point about all types being inclined to arts, I have to call you on your opinion about the artistic temperament. 

It is quite ironical that you vehemently fight MBTI typism yet use the exact same process to prove your point: artistic temperament being less productive it is less worthwhile, and so you turn the original presumption on its head and tell those same temperaments are unfitting of artistic endeavors. 

You come from the standpoint that for art to have meaning it needs objective value, which it doesn't. Van Gogh never sold a painting yet continued, because he liked it. Most of us might never be recognized or known for our talents, it's absolutely not the point. If anything, IxFP and INFJ types have pleasure by the act of creativity itself, even if it isn't their own. Just look at most of those types' avatars to see where their interest lies. They might never create something worthwhile, but they are passionate about that topic. 

Using the argument that so and so is famous and garners lots of critical approval doesn't make it more artistically worthwhile. Art is personal first and foremost. Abstract visual arts used to be called degenerate or loonies' art after all. Consensus has little value here.


----------



## Doc Dangerstein (Mar 8, 2013)

@Kyusaku

Who's talking about critical acclaim as an indicator of value? I'm certainly not. The point is that Van Gogh did the work: he studied his craft, he had an idea that was his own and expressed it through his painting. This objective value is that he delivered. What bothers me is how many people call themselves creative, or call themselves artistic and they just talk, talk, talk ...

I want people to SHOW me. Let's hear the music, let's see the painting, let me read your manuscript. It doesn't have to be technically perfect: Things get revised once you improve in your craft or you clarify your ideas. When I talk painting, writing, or anything creative I would love to talk of the works themselves, the ideas behind the works and the techniques used to create them. Why can't we be spared of the empty rhetoric of self promotions and self admiration?

... If anything, maybe there is a common IxFP/INFJ aesthetic because all types take pleasure in creativity in itself. Look how different Rainer Rilke's Letters to a Young Poet are from Ray Bradbury's Zen and The Art of Writing. In particularly the essay, How to Keep and Feed a Muse. Both NFs, Ni vs Ne, introvert vs extrovert and an world apart but similar in how they approach the creative act. At I get the INFJ vibe from Rilke.

I never found inspiration for anything inside of me. Everything is a personal commentary on what I see, what I experience and what I conceive in the external world. I read Rilke's letters to a young poet: solitude is important because personal reflection is important. But my soul is out THERE, looking inwards is not very inspirational to me. There has to be a sense of wonder, a curiosity about the outside world otherwise everything remains a blank stare. Rilke is wonderful and there's great value to his work: Notebook of M-L Brigge is something amazing, but Bradbury's essay on creativity is what resonates with me.

I would love to write something like Stravinsky or Bartok that would start a riot in the concert hall. That won't happen until I start living an exciting life again, full of adventure. Not until I meet amazing and inspiring people and travel the world. I will have to work at a coffee shop, an airplane or a perhaps a rooftop overlooking the city. Forget the comfort of my bedroom or a quiet, elegant studio. A nightmare to work in such an environment. 1st-world extrovert problems. Lol.


----------



## phoenix_9 (Nov 22, 2014)

Kyusaku said:


> [MENTION=55049]
> 
> If anything, IxFP and INFJ types have pleasure by the act of creativity itself, even if it isn't their own.


Yep.


----------



## Kyusaku (Mar 18, 2014)

Spastic Origami said:


> Who's talking about critical acclaim as an indicator of value? I'm certainly not. The point is that Van Gogh did the work: he studied his craft, he had an idea that was his own and expressed it through his painting. This objective value is that he delivered. What bothers me is how many people call themselves creative, or call themselves artistic and they just talk, talk, talk ...
> 
> Why can't we be spared of the empty rhetoric of self promotions and self admiration?


This is the point I can't agree with.

While I agree with you that many artists try to sell their sloppiness as whimsical genius, that criteria is too broad. For some the concept of creation is more appealing than the act of creating itself. As you put it, technique has to be mastered, and it is as decisive in the end result as the inspiration itself. Then it makes sense for those people to follow the streams of creativity upwards instead of externalizing it.They aren't artist in the pure sense of the word, but they can become keenly aware of where that creative energy is coming from and thus modify its impact on their own life. By being able to divert their flow of inspiration they meet the definition of what I believe an artist is. And I suppose the meat of the argument lies in that definition alone.


----------



## Doc Dangerstein (Mar 8, 2013)

Maybe. I can't accept being lost in your imagination as an act of creativity; it might be a sign of a lingering trauma, phobia or a means of escape. This is not to say that I don't feel compassion for the suffering because I do. I have imagined many things to cope with my pains. But that's all it was: a means to feel better. Therapy.

Daydreaming is a great medium and it leads to many creative moments but suffering is not a perquisite for creativity. We have a diseased notion in our culture that an artist is a tortured soul. We romanticize this image, cultivate a self destructive life style around this vision in hope of finding inspiration. I need concrete evidence for creativity: show me your work, talk to me about your ideas. If all I hear is talk, and if all I see is a lifestyle of alcohol, drugs and self deprecation I will leave. People foster the lifestyle and confuse it with artistry. This is the "artistic temperament" I have issues with. This is what bothers me.

... again. This is my extrovert's perspective. This what I see in those around me. This is the world I don't want for myself. Maybe things are different in your city. I remain optimistic because I met some truly wonderful people in my travels and seen some amazing new work.

I need evidence of the creative force: I need to see the work materialized, I need to hear the ideas expressed and I need to articulate my own thoughts and show my own work. Otherwise, it's nothing. I make the same demands of myself, not everything is a creative moment. We no longer respect the word, creativity. We throw it around as a meaningless adjective. Sometimes people use it to flatter themselves.

All I'm really trying to say is: keep it real and respect the muse.


----------



## ferroequinologist (Jul 27, 2012)

Spastic Origami said:


> I want people to SHOW me. Let's hear the music, let's see the painting, let me read your manuscript. It doesn't have to be technically perfect: Things get revised once you improve in your craft or you clarify your ideas. When I talk painting, writing, or anything creative I would love to talk of the works themselves, the ideas behind the works and the techniques used to create them. Why can't we be spared of the empty rhetoric of self promotions and self admiration?


Well, there's your problem... I don't know how to say this, but you are inserting yourself. Nobody has to show you anything. It isn't about you. It isn't about what you think about it. In fact, if you go to the ISFP forum, and check out the photos, videos and "show us your work" section, you will find it all very sparsely populated. Is it because they are all talk and no work? Not hardly. It is because they don't create their art for others to criticize or ignore or ridicule. 

As others have said, it is more the creating that matters, not the creation. Your posts point to some external judgment or assignment of value, based on result...

But all of that is beside the point. Almost none of the discussion on this thread has been on the topic of the original question. How do you create? What does your creative process look like? 

I described mine--it's iterative--a small, trial and error process, requiring hand's-on toying with the items. Playing an instrument is a bit different, but just as experimental. I get bored just following the notes on the page, and have to improvise--add color, so to speak. I like(d) instruments that gave me that flexibility. Oh, and my photography is even more different. I like to work a concept so I get it right in camera. I'm never as happy with a photo I need to go over in PS vs. one that I got right in camera. I don't know why that is, but while I can do a lot with PS (er, PhotoShop) and the myriad of other photo tools I have, none of those give me the same sense of satisfaction as nailing it in the camera.  Maybe it's a throw-back to my film days, shooting and developing my own pictures, or shooting slides, where you _have_ to get it right in-camera... I don't know, but these two are exceptions, or rather modifications, to my first rule of iteration. ;-) 

So, how folks do their creating? It would be interesting to see how the various types create.


----------



## Doc Dangerstein (Mar 8, 2013)

ferroequinologist;12684922But all of that is beside the point. Almost none of the discussion on this thread has been on the topic of the original question. How do you create? What does your creative process look like?[/QUOTE said:


> actually I have, and surprise surprise, the action is external.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## ferroequinologist (Jul 27, 2012)

Thought today's Peanuts was fitting:

Peanuts Comic Strip, November 24, 2014 on GoComics.com


----------



## BlackFandango (Apr 4, 2014)

ferroequinologist said:


> Well, there's your problem... I don't know how to say this, but you are inserting yourself. Nobody has to show you anything. It isn't about you. It isn't about what you think about it. In fact, if you go to the ISFP forum, and check out the photos, videos and "show us your work" section, you will find it all very sparsely populated. Is it because they are all talk and no work? Not hardly. It is because they don't create their art for others to criticize or ignore or ridicule.
> 
> *As others have said, it is more the creating that matters, not the creation. Your posts point to some external judgment or assignment of value, based on result...
> 
> ...


Thank you!

Speaking of my own process, I tend to have a vision in my head of what I want from the start, and the work becomes turning that vision into a reality. Ironically enough though, sometimes I find that if a finished work hues too closely to my original intent, it comes out kind of mechanical and boring, so I've learned to, when I must, go against my first instincts, and let the work tell me what it needs. Which can lead you to some very surprising places. Also, I like for an artistic endeavour to challenge me. I feel I do great work when I'm taking artistic risks, and walking along the edge of making a piece of shit, I guess because it keeps my judgment about what works and what doesn't keen and sharp; one cannot haphazardly stroll across a tightrope and expect to survive.


----------



## BlackFandango (Apr 4, 2014)

Oh, and I don't mind if people of other types wanna describe their process as well. I'm just still mainly looking for the three types I listed.


----------



## EonsInTheNight (Oct 26, 2014)

Spastic Origami said:


> Maybe. I can't accept being lost in your imagination as an act of creativity; it might be a sign of a lingering trauma, phobia or a means of escape. This is not to say that I don't feel compassion for the suffering because I do. I have imagined many things to cope with my pains. But that's all it was: a means to feel better. Therapy.


I agree with most of what you say, the extroverted life-loving artist is just as valid as the introverted melancholic one.
But I really don't like what you said above.
You make it sound like being strongly introverted is something wrong. I'm pretty sure many think the same of this kind of people, but saying that those highly introverted are so because of trauma [because extroverts become more introverted due to trauma] it's like saying that being highly extroverted is a sign of being constantly drunk because many introverts can be like extroverts if they're drunk.
And yeah, I'm sure this is not what you meant, but this is how it came out sounding like.


----------



## Doc Dangerstein (Mar 8, 2013)

... and this is why I'm consistent about having external validation. I don't mean that work has to published and approved by other people. The work has to exist: something you can point to and say "I made this, this is my work. The same question can be asked of me: You're running around all the time, do you have anything to show for it? I could be running away from myself, or indulging the pleasures of running around but I'm not being creative when I don't have evidence for my creativity. You might this lucid world inside and it might be a pleasant and necessary place to visit, but is it creativity when nothing materialized

It doesn't matter if your lost inside your thoughts or trekking the cities of Europe or jungles of Peru, they are events passing by. Creativity is an act of deliberation: you bring things into existence through the expression of the will. A defiance of everyday entropy.

... nope, no inspired visions. I see things have potential and work with that. Whatever vision I get is an expression of a single manifestation of potential. There is never an end product in my mind: even what I wrote right now started off vague hint of what I wanted to say and had no finite destination. Even the thought of having an end-goal disturbs me: what if be having an strict objective you miss something that is of greater value? I had to learn to stay focused and give a piece structure.

I hated school because essays meant having a thesis. And planning. And setting goals. And forging yourself into a society worshiping corporate slave. And loving it. And seeing my teachers as Ronald McDonald. An exemplar of the politically correct, all inclusive corporate slogans breeding the next generations of consumers. Devouring and devoured. Consumption without tuberculosis. I digress, but it's really cool how you do the exact opposite and push outwards. The challenge for me is to have an actual point.

I found this thread elsewhere. Maybe we could find the source of creativity in the quotes from different types.

Cognitive Function Quotes


----------



## BlackFandango (Apr 4, 2014)

Spastic Origami said:


> I found this thread elsewhere. Maybe we could find the source of creativity in the quotes from different types.
> 
> Cognitive Function Quotes


This gave me an idea to go on CelebrityTypes and perhaps try to find quotes that speak to each type's creative drive.

*INFJ*
"My chief goal is to find a way to make [what I do] meaningful to other people."
- Daniel Day-Lewis

*INFP*
"As a writer, you [are often] told: 'Write about what you know.' But Kafka didn't. Gogol didn't. Did Shakespeare write only what he knew? Did Camus? Our own selves are limitless."
- Regina Spektor

*ENFJ*
"I'm speaking toward a deeper sentiment that I feel and I know a lot of people feel. [It has] to do with redemptive moments that come in the face of some real indignity. That's the current that I'm trying to tap into."
- Zack de la Rocha

*ENFP*
"The thing I love about acting is getting to change and look at different people in different lives and do different projects."
- Keira Knightly

*ISFP*
"[My music has] always been my way of expressing what for me is inexpressible by any other means."
- David Bowie

*ISTP*
"If you get involved in any kind of problem-solving in depth on almost anything, it's surprisingly similar to problem-solving anything else."
- Stanley Kubrick

*ESFP*
"I was always the kid in school who tried to get attention. ... I'd do little unexpected performances."
- Leonardo DiCaprio

*ESTP*
"I pay attention to what's going on around me. I'm always looking for new energy, new talent."
-Madonna

*INTJ*
"The ... development of man [has as its] ultimate purpose the complete mastery of mind over
the material world."
-Nikola Tesla

*INTP*
"[With my writing] I hope to provide a metaphor for the
average reader's daily life. Most of us live in a slightly conspiratorial relationship with our employer and perhaps with our marriage. I think what gives my works whatever universality they have is that they use the metaphysical secret world to
describe some realities of the overt world."
-John le Carre

*ENTJ*
"Imagination will often carry us to worlds that never were. But without it, we go nowhere."
- Carl Sagan

*ENTP*
"[I like] looking at everything [from the perspective] that you normally don't get to see. That fascinates me."
- Adam Savage

*ISFJ*
"I'm a bit traditional [and I believe in] doing something with
care and putting time into it."
- Gwyneth Paltrow

*ISTJ*
"I believe in finishing what I started."
- Rivers Cuomo

*ESFJ*
"There's too much darkness
in the world. ... Everywhere you
go, there's a feeling of inadequacy, or a feeling that you're not good enough. I want to
bring a certain light to the world."
- Alicia Keys

*ESTJ*
"I've always had a tremendous sense of responsibility - work, work, work."
- Alec Baldwin


----------



## EonsInTheNight (Oct 26, 2014)

I do agree to limit 3 types as the artistic ones, people of every type can be artists.

But still...
If you look at modern music, the rock'n'roll, you get that there are certain people that had a crucial impact in shaping the genre into something more than it initially was. 3 that come quickly to mind would be Bob Dylan, Jim Morrison and Paul McCartney. They were all ISFPs.
Yes, you get other hugely influencial singer/composers like Mick Jagger, John Lennon or Lou Reed that weren't ISFPs.
So, people of different personalities contributed to giving rock'n'roll different paths and creating mythos around themselves. 
But one particular type holds a share of that history that no other type by itself can hold up to: ISFP. So, this type, while not uniquely gifted, stands apart.

Another stricking example is when it comes to movie history, specifically auteurs directors. If I would have to type the greater ones they would be Akira Kurosawa, Andrei Tarkovsky and David Lynch. I believe all these 3 are INFJs. I didn't name them because of their type, it happened that all 3 to correspond to the same one. 

Possibly, something similar would happen to writing and INFPs.


----------



## Chamondelle (Sep 8, 2013)

I can do well in many field of arts. Music, various medium visual(fine) art (painting, drawing, 3d art,), fashion, design, etc. Etc. You mention. But can never copy exact things from reality without distortion; Guess this is where I part from ISFP.

And I can't write stories without being subjective and wrong at grammar level...


----------



## ashleigh_christina (Sep 3, 2014)

I'm an ISFP and I'm decent at drawing, but it's not my strong suit. I'm more into writing, I love writing music, lyrics, poems, novels etc. Music and photography are definitely my strong suits.

My brother (an INFP), is pretty good at visual art (like drawing), and good at writing speeches. He's great at coming up with ideas for novels, but isn't very good at actually writing them.


----------



## Doc Dangerstein (Mar 8, 2013)

There are many on your list who I do admire, except I don't necessarily agree with typing. I think Mick Jagger actually is ISFP and Jim Morrison is an INFP. Everything about The Doors is metaphor and when I listened to Jim speak on the evolution of technology, media and the state of music he is not descriptive but speculative. David Lynch might also be INFP. 

A generation prior you had Ernest Hemingway, ESTP, as a writer. Judy Dench, Glenn Close as actresses, also ESTP with an introverted counterpart in James Dean. And I believe Miles Davis but ISTP except I'm sure of his dates. Do you think it's a question of what aesthetic is fashionable at the time? The 60s came and with it a new aesthetic and a new set of values. I don't want to debate which is better; both perspectives are valuable and have their place.

I'm going out on a limb and I will speculate that INFJs are greater moralists than INFPs: compare Dante or Dostoevsky, INFJ, with Albert Camus and William Shakespeare who are INFP. Judging types are more likely to tell their position on the subject matter. Perceivers are happier to show things and let the reader decide on their own. It's a question of ought versus is, J versus P. Perceivers are also notorious for ambiguous endings: think The Stranger/Camus, Love in the Time of Cholera/Marquez or The 'Sun Also Rises/Hemingway.

I'm a music/lit guy, in cause no one noticed


----------



## ferroequinologist (Jul 27, 2012)

Spastic Origami said:


> There are many on your list who I do admire, except I don't necessarily agree with typing. I think Mick Jagger actually is ISFP and Jim Morrison is an INFP. Everything about The Doors is metaphor and when I listened to Jim speak on the evolution of technology, media and the state of music he is not descriptive but speculative. David Lynch might also be INFP.
> 
> A generation prior you had Ernest Hemingway, ESTP, as a writer. Judy Dench, Glenn Close as actresses, also ESTP with an introverted counterpart in James Dean. And I believe Miles Davis but ISTP except I'm sure of his dates. Do you think it's a question of what aesthetic is fashionable at the time? The 60s came and with it a new aesthetic and a new set of values. I don't want to debate which is better; both perspectives are valuable and have their place.
> 
> ...


Judy Dench strikes me as a Te type...

And yeah, Morrison INFP--but who knows which of his lyrics are the real him and which were drug/alcohol-induced? 

James Dean has been typed ISFP. 

But I agree with your final point--J types tend to want to tell others what or how, while perceivers prefer to just put things out there to let others decide. That is me, and I frequently feel (irrationally) guilty even doing that.... And yeah, give me an ambiguous ending--that's what I like--something to keep me thinking. And if there isn't one, I'll make it one--the Matrix series, for me, has a very open ending, which my wife and I have discussed for hours. I also like O'Henry-style surprise endings.


----------



## Doc Dangerstein (Mar 8, 2013)

This is going back long before I knew of MBTI. I studied music at university and was taking a performance class and I remember getting into a row with my instructor over the interpretation of a piece I was playing. She felt that an interpretation is something prepared with the emotions coordinated and enacted during the performance communicated to the audience. I felt that emotions happen spontaneously, that imposing my personal emotions onto the audience would be disrespectful of their personal space and deprive my listeners to experience the music as they see fit.

James Dean, granted. T/F is hard for me to distinguish unless it's blatantly obvious. I'm still not sold on Judy Dench being Te dominant: she often plays the regal figure but in her interviews she is very fluent, adaptable and comical. I remember reading that she liked the fear of going in cold. I always imagined a Te dominant to approach their art like Aristotle describes in his Poetics. By categorization of type, genre, mood and form and writing accordingly to meet these specifications. I hated writing analytical essays because they require a thesis, much prefer writing a personal column. We're taught to always have a point. My point is that I want people to observe, speculate and come to their own conclusion.

Much of our education is Te. Read the "What makes you happy?" thread in the ENTJ forum where goals and accomplishment of goals takes precedence. We are taught that goals and winning is pleasure. I'm occasionally tricked into a competitive frenzy. The feeling always leaves me exhausted and betrayed. Even if I win. Competence and efficiency I can appreciate as part of my workshop, being able to execute my ideas cleanly and with precision.


----------



## ferroequinologist (Jul 27, 2012)

Spastic Origami said:


> I'm still not sold on Judy Dench being Te dominant: she often plays the regal figure but in her interviews she is very fluent, adaptable and comical.


I confess, I am judging her by the roles she plays... bad form.  But still, that's how I see her in my mind's eye.  I always enjoy her work.


----------



## ferroequinologist (Jul 27, 2012)

Spastic Origami said:


> This is going back long before I knew of MBTI. I studied music at university and was taking a performance class and I remember getting into a row with my instructor over the interpretation of a piece I was playing. She felt that an interpretation is something prepared with the emotions coordinated and enacted during the performance communicated to the audience. I felt that emotions happen spontaneously, that imposing my personal emotions onto the audience would be disrespectful of their personal space and deprive my listeners to experience the music as they see fit.


That sounds very Fi to me... On the other hand...



> We're taught to always have a point. My point is that I want people to observe, speculate and come to their own conclusion.


I like to have a point. I used to work with a guy, who, whatever anybody said, he'd retort, "What's your point?" For him it was just a way to brush off people, or shut them up, but it got me thinking... Sometimes, it's good to have a point. So, in my speaking (sermons), I like to have a point--one point. Yeah, it's Te-ish, but then, my endings are always open-ended. My point is not to tell people what to think or how to act, but to spur them to think, reflect (and yes, feel), and then decide for their own what to do. 

In these discussions, we each tend to have a point--sometimes several. That is not a bad thing. What I do find bad is when someone tells me what to think or how to feel... And the thing I hate the most is to feel manipulated into thinking or feeling a certain way. You can almost guarantee that if I sense manipulation--even the slightest hint--I will stop listening to you, and will discount whatever you say--it'll get an extra scrutiny, maybe i should say. Unless it just sounds like bunk, I will seriously attempt to listen to what you have to say, but my antenna will be up, and my senses on all-alert for that manipulative influence on me. Attempt to manipulate me, and you make your work much harder. Give me the facts. Give me your perspective in the simplest terms--without embellishment--and I'll listen and weigh it, but start trying to twist me or lead me on, and you have hindered your cause immensely. 




> Much of our education is Te. Read the "What makes you happy?" thread in the ENTJ forum where goals and accomplishment of goals takes precedence. We are taught that goals and winning is pleasure. I'm occasionally tricked into a competitive frenzy. The feeling always leaves me exhausted and betrayed. Even if I win. Competence and efficiency I can appreciate as part of my workshop, being able to execute my ideas cleanly and with precision.


Most of life is extroverted judging--pretty much across the board--at least in the West. And, to some extent, I guess it is necessary, but my concern is that everybody is so busy telling everybody else how to live--from across the spectrum--that many people have lost their ability to judge their own selves. One could call this a Je-dom issue, but it is so prevalent that I find it hard to believe that there are so many Je-doms in this world... It has just become expected. I could go on...


----------



## EonsInTheNight (Oct 26, 2014)

Spastic Origami said:


> There are many on your list who I do admire, except I don't necessarily agree with typing. I think Mick Jagger actually is ISFP and Jim Morrison is an INFP. Everything about The Doors is metaphor and when I listened to Jim speak on the evolution of technology, media and the state of music he is not descriptive but speculative. David Lynch might also be INFP.
> 
> A generation prior you had Ernest Hemingway, ESTP, as a writer. Judy Dench, Glenn Close as actresses, also ESTP with an introverted counterpart in James Dean. And I believe Miles Davis but ISTP except I'm sure of his dates. Do you think it's a question of what aesthetic is fashionable at the time? The 60s came and with it a new aesthetic and a new set of values. I don't want to debate which is better; both perspectives are valuable and have their place.
> 
> ...


I type Morrison ISFP because of his notorious extra-marital sexual escapades, which is not something I would associate with ISFP but could be explained in his case due to Se. [I'm not taking him as a general example, but in certain case Se can manifest as such]. Take for example Court Kobain, I've never heard of him being into groupies, he was the kind of guy who called his wife his best friend and puked due to anxiousness of dating his crush.
My typing of Hemingway is dodgy, because it's based on the main character from "Farewell to Arms" who I thought was a self-insert and not much of an extrovert.

I don't think that INFJs make greater moralists based on your examples. As an INFP, I care deeply about morality, but I hate it when people believe they have the right to tell other people what decisions they should make, life should live, out of a sense of "knowing" what is right. Also, I dread the thought of negating the value of entire ways of life -sometimes I do feel as such in my darkest moments but I try to pull myself out of it. I think that through art one should promote principles that can be adapted into different ways of life but which are sources for good, I don't believe in art which follows the example of Holly Books in giving sanctions. I've only read from Dostoyevski "The Idiot" and I liked it for his characters, I didn't feel he was too judging of them tough.
On the other hand, I can't see Lao Tzu as anything but an INFJ and his philosophy is the opposite of sanctioning Holly Books.

Your points about the earlier generation being more in line with xSTP is very interesting. But I think one should look at great art through the centuries, which is harder to type tough. How can you type Homer? Or Shakespeare for that matter?
Also, I wouldn't put actors in this debate, because while I do think that they are true artists, they aren't "patrons" of art in the way writers, composers or movie auteurs are.

Also, you seem to have a thing for agreeing too much with CelebrityTypes.


----------



## ferroequinologist (Jul 27, 2012)

bobnickmad said:


> I type Morrison ISFP because of his notorious extra-marital sexual escapades, which is not something I would associate with ISFP but could be explained in his case due to Se. [I'm not taking him as a general example, but in certain case Se can manifest as such].


This bit gave me pause... His behavior--it seems almost more like an inferior Se as seen in INFJs. Makes me wonder if he weren't an INFJ instead of Fi type... curious...



> Also, you seem to have a thing for agreeing too much with CelebrityTypes.


A word in defense of those guys. They are very careful in their typings, and very open to reevaluating someone's type if some one has good reasons for disagreeing... Of the sites out there proclaiming celeb personality types, I think they are probably more to be trusted than other sites--not, mind you, that I agree with them on every one of their types. But if they disagree with another site, I am more likely to side with them than other sites. These guys are very Jungian, and not behavioral in their approach, which also makes them a bit different from other sites. I like the site enough that I paid for membership there.


----------



## Deejaz (Feb 19, 2014)

I'm an INFJ. I've loved art since forever. I enjoy it a lot. I like appreciations and abstract art. But my best is mimicking artworks, copying them and making it my own. I sometimes get quite lost when I'm expected to 'just create something' without a prompt or inspiration, it takes me quite awhile to decide, but even then I don't use the 'plan', I tend to create artworks with trial and error. See and feel what I think about it, let my hand take over. 


(Tapatalking)


----------



## EonsInTheNight (Oct 26, 2014)

ferroequinologist said:


> This bit gave me pause... His behavior--it seems almost more like an inferior Se as seen in INFJs. Makes me wonder if he weren't an INFJ instead of Fi type... curious...
> 
> 
> 
> A word in defense of those guys. They are very careful in their typings, and very open to reevaluating someone's type if some one has good reasons for disagreeing... Of the sites out there proclaiming celeb personality types, I think they are probably more to be trusted than other sites--not, mind you, that I agree with them on every one of their types. But if they disagree with another site, I am more likely to side with them than other sites. These guys are very Jungian, and not behavioral in their approach, which also makes them a bit different from other sites. I like the site enough that I paid for membership there.


The way he talks about authenticity is surely Fi, strong Fi. 
I'm doubtful that 4th functions can act as strongly. Like for example, an INFP in distress with inferior Te would try to control every small aspect of his life rather than just bossing people around like an ESTJ/ENTJ.
I don't know what to say about shadow types. An INFP in distress with unhealthy Te is still an INFP.
Don't know how an INFJ would actually act.


The issue with an assessment not being quite to a certain extent behavioral is that it leads to empty theorizing.


----------



## Doc Dangerstein (Mar 8, 2013)

... nah, I'm thinking of my mom as an exemplar of Te-creativity. Even with everyday tasks she must assign them appropriate categories and gets horribly lost when something disrupts her structure. She is an incarnate of Iron-Lady Thatcher with the same drive to prove herself. She was 50 before she could appreciate things in themselves, and even at 70 she tells me a Diesel engine is a higher form of expression because it is useful. Yet when she's alone, by herself, she likes to check out random curiosities but doesn't always feel comfortable discussing them

... and Jim, maybe he was a sex addict. I could see inferior Se calling for inconclusive and false evidence to support outrageous theories. Or to dismiss evidence that disproves said theories. I'm thinking of an interview I listened to that was initially aired on Canadian radio. Can't find it anymore.

... I find Canadian culture to be Fe and it's overwhelming at times. We have so many -isms, and -phobias and the emphasis on multiculturalism is suffocating. Wouldn't it make more sense to have a legislature that takes into account a single populace which conforms to the requirements put forth by the Geneva human rights convention. What happens when a group is an offending party immune from criticism because they are protected by law? By defending culture, are we defending people oppressed by the culture or the institutions that oppress them? Rant aside, I'm not a fan of telling people how to live and I don't like to be told what I should value. I like Adam Michnik's perspective: my freedom stops where another person's freedom begins. From a debate he did with Daniel Cohn-Bendit on the future of human liberty

I do check my hunches on CelebrityTypes, and I do check here and other forums as well. But yeah, I gotta cut this short for now ...


----------



## Jazzy Starlight (Dec 28, 2014)

_"The brooding, isolated artist is a romanticized stereotype. There is no need to suffer in isolation; and I wonder if the tradition of summoning the muse in Greek epics is to externalize your thoughts, and to look outside of yourself."
_

I am an introvert. It is sad when people think of introverts as selfish. When actually, we are not. 
When I am isolating myself, the reason is because I just don't like expressing bad emotions. I use my INFP sensitivity not just for myself but also for other people. I don't like to hurt people. So what do I do? I communicate with them. I tell them how they hurt and they'll tell me what's wrong so that we could both improve ourselves. But some people are not just good at communicating and they always have the need to argue. Now, I don't like to argue because when I tend to use my sensitivity selfishly, I use foul words just for the other person to get hurt when they hurt me. It doesn't make sense and I'm aware of that. So, sometimes if I can't really talk to the person I just leave it to God. I don’t talk to them so that we won’t hurt each other.

Then, I use art as an escape. I've noticed it just recently, that I am usually making art when I'm experiencing anxiety or pressure or loneliness. I feel good that I turn bad emotions into beautiful art. 

It's not about mastery. It's not that Introverted Feelers are usually or the only ones who are GOOD at art. It is just how art MEANS to them. 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I guess Extroverted types find it easier to express themselves through communication that art just becomes play to them. But for me, it is my main form of expression. But I don't know, maybe all forms of expression are considered as art. 

If that is so.. Then we all are an artist as long as we express ourselves according to the gifts given to us. 
Humor could be a form of expression, then could that be considered as art?
Dancing, socializing, communication, singing, Science, Philosophy.. They could all be mediums of expression. Are all these considered as art?
Inventions.. Ideas.. Sorry I'm lost. I don't know what art is anymore :/


----------



## Rainbow Eyes (Feb 25, 2015)

I'm a writer and enfp.


----------



## Rainbow Eyes (Feb 25, 2015)

Jazzy Starlight said:


> _"The brooding, isolated artist is a romanticized stereotype. There is no need to suffer in isolation; and I wonder if the tradition of summoning the muse in Greek epics is to externalize your thoughts, and to look outside of yourself."
> _
> 
> I am an introvert. It is sad when people think of introverts as selfish. When actually, we are not.
> ...


There are quite a few extroverted artists. I am a writer, for example. I'm mostly a screenwriter and a fanfiction writer, though. I will occasionally draw pictures, but it's more for the benefit of others rather than myself, so I wouldn't consider it a form of expression.


----------

