Personality Cafe banner
Cancel
Create thread New Forums

Mary Poppins

Jump to Latest
1 - 20 of 55 Posts
W

Word Dispenser

· Spotlight March 2016
Joined
·
12,413 Posts
Discussion starter · #1 ·
Never read the book, but grew up with the movie, and had the opportunity to watch it today.

My thoughts:

Mary: INFJ (Soft, yet firm. Imaginative, but in a way no one gets to know, which leads many to think she is a sensing type. With a strong Fe, is able to discern characters right away. Has a hand in changing George Banks by manipulating him to taking the children to the bank with him, getting him to see a different perspective. Feeding the birds, indeed! ISFJ could also be argued, but I don't think so. She's logical, and doesn't allow sentiments to interfere with her work, which seems to be more than what her vocation would say firsthand. This seems to be the way an INFJ would plan it.)

Bert: ENFP. He's like the other side of the Willy Wonka coin. Always cheery, changes vocations often, enjoys playing with words, poetic and playful. He shows a dreamy side when he's talking about 'the chimney sweep world'. He sees the good before the bad. He's clearly intelligent, but it's not a cold intelligence that permeates the cheeriness, but a true effusion of goodwill towards others. I'd imagine he would rather teach others with a diplomatic kindness, than with hard lessons and testing the way Wonka did. Could also be argued for ESFP, easily.

Mr. Banks: ISTJ (The picture of order, tradition, promptness, integrity. He had a bit of nervous-breakdown at the end of the movie when he loses his job. After he flies kites with the children, we'd like to see how he progresses into further insanity. :p)
Mrs. Banks: ENFJ (A teacher, a leader, she busies herself with her cause of women's suffrage, being the leader 'in song'. Too bad she neglects her children. She hugs her husband after he comes back from his nervous breakdown, 'Oh George! You didn't jump in the river! How sensible of you!')

Despite the fact that the movie seems to revolve around these two, they're the toughest nuts for me to crack:

Jane: ESFJ - Giggly, more outgoing than her brother who goes along with her That could just be because she's slightly older. Seems more orderly than her little brother, a bit more confident.
Michael: ISFJ - Extremely stubborn and suspicious? :p He barely says anything the entire movie, basically parroting people around him. He and his sister seem very similar though, albeit he is introvert, while she is extroverted.

The entire movie could be an abstract representation that's darker, or simply different, than what it appears. Consider that Mary Poppins isn't actually a person, but represents something else.
 
Discussion starter · #3 ·
Swordsman of Mana said:
@Word Dispenser
Mary: ESTJ 1w2>7w6>3w4 Sp/So
Burt: ESFP 7w6>2w3>9w1 So/Sx
Jane: E?F? 9w1/1w9>7w6>3w2 So/Sx
Michael: INFP 7w6>9w1>?w? Sx/Sp
Mr. Banks: ESTJ 1w9>5w6>3w4 Sp/So
Mrs. Banks: INFP 9w1>6w7>2w1 Sx/So
Click to expand...
Cool. I could see that. My only dispute might be Poppins herself.

I think Mary Poppins isn't really showing anyone her true self, and is a more complex character. ESTJ is something she projects to Mr. Banks in order to win him over and dominate. We don't really get to know her during the movie at all, and from what I see, she's playing a role. She strikes me as a learned extrovert over a natural one, seems as if she requires time alone (Every other Tuesday off). The way that Bert makes references to things, and she dismisses them directly. It's as if in the past she wouldn't have done so.

She is playing humble, modesty-- Contrasting with the attention she garners and seems to enjoy after the race in the painting is simply one of many facets. Her personality depends upon her environment, to a greater extent, which would seem Fe-oriented. The idea that she leaves when the wind changes is another reference to the woman herself-- She is mutable. Kind, yet firm. And ultimately, she's a loner.

Perhaps the book would be different, though.
 
#4 ·
@Word Dispenser
her warmth is more subtle and unspoken than an Fe user and she hardly if ever displays her feelings. she has a very Fi/Te-ish heir of formality as opposed to the more mushy presentation of an FJ (she is charming and socially graceful, but this is not the same as Fe).
I could buy any xxTJ type, but FJ just don't seem to work
 
Discussion starter · #5 ·
Swordsman of Mana said:
@Word Dispenser
her warmth is more subtle and unspoken than an Fe user and she hardly if ever displays her feelings. she has a very Fi/Te-ish heir of formality as opposed to the more mushy presentation of an FJ (she is charming and socially graceful, but this is not the same as Fe).
I could buy any xxTJ type, but FJ just don't seem to work
Click to expand...
Well, as I said under the premise of INFJ, she's playing a role. We're not going to see her displaying feelings because of this, and particularly because of her view of keeping sentiments out of her duty. We maybe see a glimpse in her eyes at the end, when she's talking to the parrot-handle of her umbrella, of her thoughts and feelings.

But they're never spoken or expressed fully, only hinted at. This could be Fi, as you suggest, but I'm more likely to believe that she picks up on the feelings of those around her, and helps to sort them out. Her observations of Banks as not seeing past the end of his nose was apt, and her intentions to get him to see the big picture and longterm was quite effective, resulting in him losing his job, and his maniacal breakdown of giggles and supercalifragilisticexpialadociousness was awesome.

Fi is more likely to be spurred on to doing things because it feels right to the user.

We don't get a sense from Mary Poppins of even why she is being a nanny for 'unfortunate' rich kids, though. Apparently this isn't the first time she's come into town, and can we really say she was a nanny that other time? :p

Her motivations aren't given. She's sneaky and not what she appears, I tell you!
 
#9 ·
Word Dispenser said:
Well, as I said under the premise of INFJ, she's playing a role. We're not going to see her displaying feelings because of this, and particularly because of her view of keeping sentiments out of her duty. We maybe see a glimpse in her eyes at the end, when she's talking to the parrot-handle of her umbrella, of her thoughts and feelings.

But they're never spoken or expressed fully, only hinted at. This could be Fi, as you suggest, but I'm more likely to believe that she picks up on the feelings of those around her, and helps to sort them out. Her observations of Banks as not seeing past the end of his nose was apt, and her intentions to get him to see the big picture and longterm was quite effective, resulting in him losing his job, and his maniacal breakdown of giggles and supercalifragilisticexpialadociousness was awesome.

Fi is more likely to be spurred on to doing things because it feels right to the user.

We don't get a sense from Mary Poppins of even why she is being a nanny for 'unfortunate' rich kids, though. Apparently this isn't the first time she's come into town, and can we really say she was a nanny that other time? :p

Her motivations aren't given. She's sneaky and not what she appears, I tell you!
Click to expand...
I agree with you. INFJ are mirrors that reflect the emotions of those around them. You don't see theirs. They are a facade. Fe is all about appropriateness. I barely know anything about Mary Poppins, but she screams appropriateness to me.

Also, she is a mystic with that umbrella stuff. More reason she is INFJ.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Word Dispenser
Save
Reply Quote Like Like
Discussion starter · #10 ·
googoodoll said:
Where did you get the N from though??
Click to expand...
Most of it is seen with her interactions with others in terms of a big picture scale. There's Ni long-term planning, making connections of behaviours, and plotting the course forward. She puts up a clever facade, or her true self is shown while she's arm-in-arm with Bert in the painting. But, I don't think so, as it seems she is simply cutting loose 'for the moment', and setting her plans aside.

There is this tangible disconnection of her own personal feelings when it comes to her mission, which wasn't to be a nanny, but to mend a broken household. She's like a frickin'.. Fairy, in the way she's depicted. A magical being which comes to families in need and brings them together. But, you'll never know her true nature, because then you'd probably go insane. She's hiding behind a clever disguise of Ni + Fe.
 
#11 ·
Word Dispenser said:
Most of it is seen with her interactions with others in terms of a big picture scale. There's Ni long-term planning, making connections of behaviours, and plotting the course forward. She puts up a clever facade, or her true self is shown while she's arm-in-arm with Bert in the painting. But, I don't think so, as it seems she is simply cutting loose 'for the moment', and setting her plans aside.

There is this tangible disconnection of her own personal feelings when it comes to her mission, which wasn't to be a nanny, but to mend a broken household. She's like a frickin'.. Fairy, in the way she's depicted. A magical being which comes to families in need and brings them together. But, you'll never know her true nature, because then you'd probably go insane. She's hiding behind a clever disguise of Ni + Fe.
Click to expand...
I just want to say that you have a great knowledge of how INFJ operate.

I have said this before. Fe is not fake. Some people think it is, because of the facade thing. But with Poppins, she really cares about people, and Fe is how she shows it. It is a mechanism. Just like being a nanny is a mechanism. Her being a nanny is "fake", but it isn't fake because it allows her to carry out her larger idea. INFJ are all about the big picture and sacrifice details.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Word Dispenser
Save
Reply Quote Like Like
#12 ·
I have never seen the film nor read the book so I think I'm as unbiased as I can be and the first Youtube clip I could find is this:


So TeSi. Notice what she's really talking about and it's all Si stuff with Te methodology. She's a practical woman. She's singing about the best way to take medicine and how to clean the household! Nothing Ni about that at all. INFJs aren't practical. They're emotionally dramatic or can be like Genesis in this video:


That's how INFJs play a role. They dramatize.
 
#13 ·
Yeah, Poppins is VERY British. It's really from a British perspective. It seems bland and less inspired than typical INFJ. Very formal. INFJ like what works though, even if it is stuffy and old fashioned. INFJ are not necessarily profound or original people. Poppin's magic is in her simplicity, which is something INFJ appreciate. She has a system that works. I'm supposing she does anyway. I am assuming she solves everything.
 
Save
Reply Quote Like Like
Discussion starter · #15 ·
ephemereality said:
I have never seen the film nor read the book so I think I'm as unbiased as I can be and the first Youtube clip I could find is this:


So TeSi. Notice what she's really talking about and it's all Si stuff with Te methodology. She's a practical woman. She's singing about the best way to take medicine and how to clean the household! Nothing Ni about that at all. INFJs aren't practical. They're emotionally dramatic or can be like Genesis in this video:


That's how INFJs play a role. They dramatize.
Click to expand...
You'd really have to see the film in its entirety, I think. There is something hidden beneath her character, in the film at least. There's a kind of contrast that she emanates, but that might just be light-hearted Julie Andrews' personality leaking into an attempt at portraying the personality of a strict, no-nonsense, proper British woman.

Considering the time of the movie is set in 1910, culture, particularly British culture, demanded a kind of conformity. It's as if she treads the line, while pushing everyone beyond that line, with careful, extensive planning.

This little song? It's a moment in time, and doesn't mean anything in the grand scheme of things. During this time, all women, no matter the type, were expected to behave like this, and to some extent or another, did. In public at least.

It seems that in the past, the farther back you go, you'll see people playing at roles and trying to exemplify them to the point. With practice, anyone could. They were raised to practice until perfection, men and women. Anyone who went against the current were the rare exceptions-- And they were rare. Drama was frowned upon.

But, as other's have said, the book apparently directs her in a more TJ fashion. I wouldn't know. I just consider it something to ponder.

I will say, at least, that she is playing the part of ESTJ externally, but I think that this is due to the children's father's expectations and requirements. Based on the way she acted in the movie, I would think she would have been far different if she'd had a different household, with a less ISTJ father to deal with.

She worked within ISTJ guidelines in order to change them, and ended up making the ISTJ father see a different perspective, albeit by losing his job at the bank and simply being forced to.

But, I may be reading more into it than is necessary. It's just fun to analyze.
 
#16 ·
Word Dispenser said:
You'd really have to see the film in its entirety, I think. There is something hidden beneath her character, in the film at least. There's a kind of contrast that she emanates, but that might just be light-hearted Julie Andrews' personality leaking into an attempt at portraying the personality of a strict, no-nonsense, proper British woman.
Click to expand...
I don't know what you're referring to aside some NF fluffy but it seems to be NeFi, not NiFe.

Considering the time of the movie is set in 1910, culture, particularly British culture, demanded a kind of conformity. It's as if she treads the line, while pushing everyone beyond that line, with careful, extensive planning.
Click to expand...
But it's not about behavior. It's how she thinks. There are so many ways people can conceptualize cleaning. The kind of information she's talking about is TeSi perspective, not NiFe. Did you see the video I linked? Notice how Genesis speaks, what kind of information he conveys. He's looking for Ni archetypes. It begins with the poem he's reciting at the beginning, how it's so abstract in nature. "Infinite in mystery". That's the very opposite of how Mary Poppins seems to think. Her character would find such focus silly and childish, unnecessary. Ni PoLR.
This little song? It's a moment in time, and doesn't mean anything in the grand scheme of things. During this time, all women, no matter the type, were expected to behave like this, and to some extent or another, did. In public at least.
Click to expand...
Behave yes, but think?

It seems that in the past, the farther back you go, you'll see people playing at roles and trying to exemplify them to the point. With practice, anyone could. They were raised to practice until perfection, men and women. Anyone who went against the current were the rare exceptions-- And they were rare. Drama was frowned upon.
Click to expand...
I've seen films depicting all sorts of eras and all sorts of masculinities and feminities. I don't think that's what's relevant here.

But, as other's have said, the book apparently directs her in a more TJ fashion. I wouldn't know. I just consider it something to ponder.
Click to expand...
Why is it important to you that she is not a Te type? I don't see how the book directs her at all. She most definitely seems to have chosen to be where she is now.

I will say, at least, that she is playing the part of ESTJ externally, but I think that this is due to the children's father's expectations and requirements. Based on the way she acted in the movie, I would think she would have been far different if she'd had a different household, with a less ISTJ father to deal with.
Click to expand...
But she's not playing a role. It's in her cognition. Look at the information she's talking about and how she conceptualizes and visualizes the world. What's the most effective way to take medicine? With sugar. Words and logic coming from her own mouth. There's absolutely nothing NF-y about that. It's as ST as you'd get.

She worked within ISTJ guidelines in order to change them, and ended up making the ISTJ father see a different perspective, albeit by losing his job at the bank and simply being forced to.
Click to expand...
I don't think that's works. I don't think people work with or against type logic. Type goes deeper than that. Type is what informs someone's psyche, how we think, visualize, conceptualize, logicalize the world. There's absolutely nothing about behavior itself that type dictates more than that type may make people be more likely to adapt a frame of mind over others frame of minds, because that's ultimately what type is. It's about what kind of focus people have when they experience themselves in the world.

There's no way as an Ni type could even begin to try to think like how Poppins does. It's so foreign I couldn't even pretend even if I tried. The reason for this is because Ni dominance is too strong. The way I think of medicine is different. I'm not interested in the best ways to take medicine. To me, what is medicine? An Ni construct. I think of healing and such, healing body. What's the best way to heal body? Then I immediately think of biology and theory. She's doing the opposite. Her thinking is very grounded in the concrete.

It could well be that Poppins' actor is a different type than Poppins and this is what you are picking up, but Poppins' character herself is undeniably ESTJ.

But, I may be reading more into it than is necessary. It's just fun to analyze.
Click to expand...
No, the problem is your focus, how you try to understand it. See, this is where type logic comes in. Despite being Ne, you still look at the objective world, you look at objects. What kind of object is Poppins? Hence you look at concrete behavior, time frames etc. I don't do that as an Ni type. Irrelevant logic to me. I look at what the contents of her words tell me. What kind of information does it seem to suggest in terms of what functions inform her psyche? She speaks of how to take medicine. She seems to take medicine in a literal and concrete way. She seems body-focused, focused on the moment now, of how the world is experienced, how to repeat those experiences. She seems more concerned about the best way in terms of efficiency of how to achieve all this. This points to TeSi, not NiFe. NiFe is the very opposite of all this.

If I come across as character who lives in a certain very rigid era of time who does not strike me as an ESTJ I'll show you and I'll explain why that character is not an ESTJ despite appearing and behaving, if one judges how you type, as one.
 
Discussion starter · #17 ·
ephemereality said:
I don't know what you're referring to aside some NF fluffy but it seems to be NeFi, not NiFe.



But it's not about behavior. It's how she thinks. There are so many ways people can conceptualize cleaning. The kind of information she's talking about is TeSi perspective, not NiFe. Did you see the video I linked? Notice how Genesis speaks, what kind of information he conveys. He's looking for Ni archetypes. It begins with the poem he's reciting at the beginning, how it's so abstract in nature. "Infinite in mystery". That's the very opposite of how Mary Poppins seems to think. Her character would find such focus silly and childish, unnecessary. Ni PoLR.


Behave yes, but think?



I've seen films depicting all sorts of eras and all sorts of masculinities and feminities. I don't think that's what's relevant here.



Why is it important to you that she is not a Te type? I don't see how the book directs her at all. She most definitely seems to have chosen to be where she is now.



But she's not playing a role. It's in her cognition. Look at the information she's talking about and how she conceptualizes and visualizes the world. What's the most effective way to take medicine? With sugar. Words and logic coming from her own mouth. There's absolutely nothing NF-y about that. It's as ST as you'd get.



I don't think that's works. I don't think people work with or against type logic. Type goes deeper than that. Type is what informs someone's psyche, how we think, visualize, conceptualize, logicalize the world. There's absolutely nothing about behavior itself that type dictates more than that type may make people be more likely to adapt a frame of mind over others frame of minds, because that's ultimately what type is. It's about what kind of focus people have when they experience themselves in the world.

There's no way as an Ni type could even begin to try to think like how Poppins does. It's so foreign I couldn't even pretend even if I tried. The reason for this is because Ni dominance is too strong. The way I think of medicine is different. I'm not interested in the best ways to take medicine. To me, what is medicine? An Ni construct. I think of healing and such, healing body. What's the best way to heal body? Then I immediately think of biology and theory. She's doing the opposite. Her thinking is very grounded in the concrete.

It could well be that Poppins' actor is a different type than Poppins and this is what you are picking up, but Poppins' character herself is undeniably ESTJ.



No, the problem is your focus, how you try to understand it. See, this is where type logic comes in. Despite being Ne, you still look at the objective world, you look at objects. What kind of object is Poppins? Hence you look at concrete behavior, time frames etc. I don't do that as an Ni type. Irrelevant logic to me. I look at what the contents of her words tell me. What kind of information does it seem to suggest in terms of what functions inform her psyche? She speaks of how to take medicine. She seems to take medicine in a literal and concrete way. She seems body-focused, focused on the moment now, of how the world is experienced, how to repeat those experiences. She seems more concerned about the best way in terms of efficiency of how to achieve all this. This points to TeSi, not NiFe. NiFe is the very opposite of all this.

If I come across as character who lives in a certain very rigid era of time who does not strike me as an ESTJ I'll show you and I'll explain why that character is not an ESTJ despite appearing and behaving, if one judges how you type, as one.
Click to expand...
My motivations aren't emotional. I know you didn't claim as such, I'm just making this clear.

It's not important to me that she be a non-Te type. People's types are what they are-- There's no reason to cling onto something that isn't there. My reasoning and argument isn't in order to be proven right. It's simply a mental exercise with no real purpose beyond that. There's no application needed. I was making this argument lightheartedly, even if it may not seem that way.

I don't disagree with you, either. Nor do I truly agree. I can't be as sure as you are, that you are right, anymore than I am sure that I could be right. You have more knowledge than me, more experience, and have spent more time refining your typing abilities, with an in-depth knowledge which I lack. You've gone through a lot of mistakes to reach a thorough understanding of this subject. Much respect.

But, at best, we are still guessing. There's nothing definitive in this science, if you consider it as such.

You claim to see her cognition and thoughts through her words alone. If that's true, it's an impressive capability, but I don't see it the same way, I agree.

You may be right about my focus and understanding. Am I looking at it the wrong way? More than possible. But, there is merit in both of our observations.

As for the clip of Genesis-- Do you really consider this a universal representation of INFJ? Anime in general is dramatic, particularly Final Fantasy. Though, I really do need to play Final Fantasy 7... You have to agree that the INFJ is not always going to be on display in such a way.

She does seem to see the world, visualize, and conceptualize things in the way you describe. But, seeming isn't being. Behaviour isn't thinking, as you said.

I don't know though...

Don't you think, with enough training, you could recite the words to the song and dance around the room in the same manner, same words, same disposition? :p

Everything that came out of your mouth would be rehearsed. Whether you're wearing petticoats is another matter entirely. Out of character, absolutely, but not impossible.

That's the way I considered this character: An ESTJ rehearsal. I didn't see her cognition the way you claim to, because I can't read it. What she says isn't what she seems to think, that is the contrast that I saw. So maybe that's my weakness, and maybe that's why I'm wrong-- Because I only think I'm seeing her cognition.

I saw Poppin's depiction in the movie as being unique. I have not since seen the kind of contrast between certainty and uncertainty, as I have seen in this character.

The idea of medicine in itself, even as a concrete subject, isn't necessarily restrictive. Even an NF can make examples out of concrete ideas, trying to think like someone who would think like someone that has concrete ways of thinking. 'The Wine in Front of Me' from the Princess Bride, as an example.

I suppose the argument comes down to: Is it likely that she is really playing the part of an ESTJ, over being one? Really, it's a flimsy argument in itself. There's no motive or reason that she would be, especially because the book doesn't portray her this way, and the movie probably isn't meant to be as mysterious as I'm giving it credit for. I'm making up a story that doesn't exist based on what is left unexplained. I guess I should call a spade a spade, instead of playing around with the idea that it's a masterful conspiracy. But, the movie becomes so much better with that kind of underlying intricacy that I couldn't resist.

For all accounts and purposes, she is an ESTJ. I think that we both agreed in another thread that a type can't hold pretense for long. It comes out one way or another. People can't really change the way they think.

I was only arguing the possibility that she could be something else underneath. Yes, I know that you think this isn't possible or likely, that type is not a shell of behaviour. I get that. But, the manifestations of cognition from others can be mimicked. In this way, it seemed as if she was trying to hold the pretense of ESTJ, was doing quite well, but something else was leaking out.

That doesn't necessarily mean INFJ either. Fi-Ne, or Ne-Fi perhaps.
 
#18 ·
Word Dispenser said:
My motivations aren't emotional. I know you didn't claim as such, I'm just making this clear.

It's not important to me that she be a non-Te type. People's types are what they are-- There's no reason to cling onto something that isn't there. My reasoning and argument isn't in order to be proven right. It's simply a mental exercise with no real purpose beyond that. There's no application needed. I was making this argument lightheartedly, even if it may not seem that way.

I don't disagree with you, either. Nor do I truly agree. I can't be as sure as you are, that you are right, anymore than I am sure that I could be right. You have more knowledge than me, more experience, and have spent more time refining your typing abilities, with an in-depth knowledge which I lack. You've gone through a lot of mistakes to reach a thorough understanding of this subject. Much respect.

But, at best, we are still guessing. There's nothing definitive in this science, if you consider it as such.

You claim to see her cognition and thoughts through her words alone. If that's true, it's an impressive capability, but I don't see it the same way, I agree.

You may be right about my focus and understanding. Am I looking at it the wrong way? More than possible. But, there is merit in both of our observations.

As for the clip of Genesis-- Do you really consider this a universal representation of INFJ? Anime in general is dramatic, particularly Final Fantasy. Though, I really do need to play Final Fantasy 7... You have to agree that the INFJ is not always going to be on display in such a way.
Click to expand...
Of course that's not a universal depiction of the INFJ or that every INFJ is going to be like Genesis, but that's beyond the point I'm raising. What's important is that he's depicting an archetype of his type, and does so extremely archetypically so which is why I use him as an example at all because he gives a good, albeit stereotype, impression of what the type is actually like. Sephiroth is an ENFJ, you see a similar mentality in him but more subdued. And yes, Final Fantasy is a dramatic video game series, but why is it dramatic? Because it's full of betas and beta values and nowadays also, likely written and produced primarily by beta individuals. Ever since Square merged with Enix in particular, we've seen a development in this trend.

I can give you another example. This guy:

GRArkada - YouTube

ISTP but same kind of drama we see in Genesis or Sephiroth.

She does seem to see the world, visualize, and conceptualize things in the way you describe. But, seeming isn't being. Behaviour isn't thinking, as you said.
Click to expand...
If she does, then why don't I relate to her at all? I don't see her focusing on the intuitively archetype.

I don't know though...

Don't you think, with enough training, you could recite the words to the song and dance around the room in the same manner, same words, same disposition? :p
Click to expand...
That's beyond the point. Then you are asking the wrong question. The question is what type the character Poppins is, not what type her actor is. They may not be the same. Unless this is what you're trying to point at.

Everything that came out of your mouth would be rehearsed. Whether you're wearing petticoats is another matter entirely. Out of character, absolutely, but not impossible.
Click to expand...
But that's the character, not her actor. They are not the same.

That's the way I considered this character: An ESTJ rehearsal. I didn't see her cognition the way you claim to, because I can't read it. What she says isn't what she seems to think, that is the contrast that I saw. So maybe that's my weakness, and maybe that's why I'm wrong-- Because I only think I'm seeing her cognition.
Click to expand...
Now you seem to speak about three different things. Her actor, the actual character and the character's cognition as influenced by society.

Now, I will try to describe how I think an INFJ would act in a delta ST society: They would likely conform through the logic of Fe, not wanting to cause too much ruckus or attention to themselves, more so because they are introverts. They would be "dreamers" in the sense that they would dream of a life outside of the Si-confined worldview they are entrapped in, likely trying to pursue an outlet for themselves where they can express their cognition better like in the arts or such.

It would however, become evident whenever delta ST values are brought up, that this is not desired. Tradition, focus on hard work and dedication would not be what is desirable. The idea of cleaning would be seen through Ni as a symbolic act in society.

I saw Poppin's depiction in the movie as being unique. I have not since seen the kind of contrast between certainty and uncertainty, as I have seen in this character.
Click to expand...
?

The idea of medicine in itself, even as a concrete subject, isn't necessarily restrictive. Even an NF can make examples out of concrete ideas, trying to think like someone who would think like someone that has concrete ways of thinking. 'The Wine in Front of Me' from the Princess Bride, as an example.
Click to expand...
Yes, but when intuitive types create analogies and metaphors, they do so in order to represent an intuitive idea. There's nothing intuitive about Poppins' song.

I suppose the argument comes down to: Is it likely that she is really playing the part of an ESTJ, over being one? Really, it's a flimsy argument in itself. There's no motive or reason that she would be, especially because the book doesn't portray her this way, and the movie probably isn't meant to be as mysterious as I'm giving it credit for. I'm making up a story that doesn't exist based on what is left unexplained. I guess I should call a spade a spade, instead of playing around with the idea that it's a masterful conspiracy. But, the movie becomes so much better with that kind of underlying intricacy that I couldn't resist.
Click to expand...
The answer could be simple enough - Disney just rewrote the character to fit their idea of how to tell the story better as a visual medium. It's like saying that Aragorn in the books must be the same Aragorn in the films. The former he's a dickhead, the latter acting as if he alone must bear the entire weight of the world upon his shoulders and is far from a chauvinist dick. Your argument is kind of the lines of that Aragorn in the films still has that chauvinist dick hidden within him so he must be acting being all so deeply troubled. That's not the real him but a facade. See? Why make it complicated when the simple answer could be that they are just imagined differently by their respective creators. No one would have liked Aragorn as he was written in the books, honestly. He would not have garnered much sympathy. Hence, his character was changed so it would be easier to relate to his trials. Because his character is changed despite going under the same name, he's now a new character. It's like bringing in two twins into the same room who look the same and share the same name and have for most of the part, have had close to the same life experiences. Yet they are separate and unique people different from one another.

For all accounts and purposes, she is an ESTJ. I think that we both agreed in another thread that a type can't hold pretense for long. It comes out one way or another. People can't really change the way they think.

I was only arguing the possibility that she could be something else underneath. Yes, I know that you think this isn't possible or likely, that type is not a shell of behaviour. I get that. But, the manifestations of cognition from others can be mimicked. In this way, it seemed as if she was trying to hold the pretense of ESTJ, was doing quite well, but something else was leaking out.

That doesn't necessarily mean INFJ either. Fi-Ne, or Ne-Fi perhaps.
Click to expand...
Yes, NeFi is more likely.
 
Discussion starter · #19 ·
ephemereality said:
Yes, but when intuitive types create analogies and metaphors, they do so in order to represent an intuitive idea. There's nothing intuitive about Poppins' song.
Click to expand...
I couldn't agree more. It's painstakingly concrete.

I take songs in these sorts of movies as a type of monologue with a theme that may be a mere example, rather than an exact representation of what the character (not the actor) is saying. Basically-- intepreting the music as an art in itself, with its own message that can be twisted beyond its external appearance into the possibilities that exist within the theme, and everything connected to it.

But, even everything she does in the movie outside of the songs is non-intuitive. At best, there's simply that hint of the actress, rather than the character, bleeding through. An ENFP holding the face of an ESTJ has got to be an enormous challenge. And something that's more believable in this context is that the actress herself wanted to leave hints through her performance, if it wasn't accidental.

Anyway, you raise all awesome points here, and I have nothing to nitpick or add-- You covered it all rather completely.

INFJ is the one I can never pinpoint. I don't know why. It's like I gloss it over. I mistype INFJs as other types, and vice versa. Maybe with these examples you've given in tow, I can have a better idea of what they're about.
 
#20 ·
My god:

But it's not about behavior. It's how she thinks.
Click to expand...
And you're in her head? What is a bigger indicator of thought than behavior? When you remove behavior, you remove the empirical basis and resort to mind reading. Which is why people like you can be "experts" on the subject, because there are no experts.

The way I think of medicine is different. I'm not interested in the best ways to take medicine. To me, what is medicine? An Ni construct. I think of healing and such, healing body. What's the best way to heal body? Then I immediately think of biology and theory. She's doing the opposite. Her thinking is very grounded in the concrete.
Click to expand...
That's because she IS in the concrete, and talking to children. I am not interested in the best ways to take medicine either, but if was a nanny, I would be. Jesus. Are you capable of seeing anything from anyone else's perspective, or any kind of context? She formed a plan, that works, that is appropriate for the situation. The end.

If she does, then why don't I relate to her at all? I don't see her focusing on the intuitively archetype.
Click to expand...
I can't relate to you at all. You don't even understand analogy or metaphor. You just memorized a bunch of people who did. You're all map, no terrain. You know nothing about the terrain. All you have is maps. Word Dispenser is actually on the terrain, something you will never touch.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Word Dispenser
Save
Reply Quote Like Like
1 - 20 of 55 Posts
About this Discussion
54 Replies
9 Participants
Last post:
68097
Personality Cafe
posts
11M
members
172K
Since
2008
A forum community dedicated to all ranges of personality types and people. Come join the discussion about health, behavior, care, testing, personality types, and more!
Full Forum Listing
Explore Our Forums
INFP Forum - The Idealists INFJ Forum - The Protectors INTP Forum - The Thinkers INTJ Forum - The Scientists Myers Briggs Forum