Personality Cafe banner
1 - 20 of 30 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,085 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
After reading Hamlet for one of my classes, I am at loss for why EIEs are called the "Hamlets". The kid looks like a pretty clear INFP to me. Indecision, musing about his pain... I mean he's not a healthy anything, but I really don't think he suffers the faults of an ENFj.

We can debate all day about Hamlet's type -- and there's actually already a thread where people do just that -- but that's not what this thread is for so much as it is for explaining why Hamlet is used as the Socionics title for ENFjs. I don't get it. Anyone have any insight?

I also understand that "hamlet" (according to my latest google search, and perhaps his is obvious) also means "a small settlement," but that doesn't make sense for EIE either. I don't know. I'm confused. Help?

Edit: okay, I found this post that tries to explain why EIEs are classified as Hamlets http://www.socioniko.net/en/1.1.types/et.html but I still think it's a stretch. I'll have to look at some more portrayals of Hamlet though, since the actor I saw in Hamlet was extremely Fi with no Fe. I'm sure a lot of it depends on line delivery.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,600 Posts
Really? I always found him to be Fe. He was only rarely Fi. He kind of seemed to just muse with the idea of Fi. He placed a lot of emphasis on bandstanding emotionalist pleas.
Seems like an unhealthy ENFj, but than again, a lot of things "flew" back in Shakespeare's time that don't now. Let alone the time period referenced in Hamlet.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,085 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
Really? I always found him to be Fe. He was only rarely Fi. He kind of seemed to just muse with the idea of Fi. He placed a lot of emphasis on bandstanding emotionalist pleas.
Seems like an unhealthy ENFj, but than again, a lot of things "flew" back in Shakespeare's time that don't now. Let alone the time period referenced in Hamlet.
Yeah, there's a good chance I'm just misunderstanding his character. I'm really confused by the entire play, and me not getting Hamlet might be part of it.

I read the play and then watched this version of it they had on Netflix, and to me he just seemed Fi?
Just without really analyzing him, he seems to have so much literal "internalized emotion," and he does so many things that I just can't fathom doing as an ENFJ. But I have seen other renderings of this speech, and just in general I can see where people would get ENFJ from with him... I don't know. I'll have to look into it more.

But thank you for your thoughts!

Edit: also this part made me think Fi, just how he's musing in such monotone to himself while alone.
I mean, I can't say I don't sit around and think thoughts to myself (who doesn't), but I think that it would be portrayed differently if he were ENFJ. I dunno though, again.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,078 Posts
If I've simply got to link FeNi with something, it'd be France. Everything about them is FeNi. Their history is tumultuous enough for a FeNi, the languade is...yeah, the customs...EVERYTHING!

Hamlet? He's an unhealthy fool! It's tough to type him when what he really needs is a DIAGNOSIS, not TYPING!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,347 Posts
Hang on... Where does the idea that Hamlet is indecisive come from? He's not.

If he has a flaw, it's not indecision, but that he wants life to conform to his ideal - not a moral or an ethical ideal, so much as art; he wants life to be both symbolic and theatrically effective. He's as much stage-manager and amateur dramatist as he is philosopher prince.

He's subtle and thoughtful, in a way that the reckless Laertes or the bloodthirsty Fortinbras aren't - both of whom in Hamlet's position would have skewered Claudius five minutes after talking to the ghost. Neither L nor F are admirable characters, but they reflect what Hamlet could be like. (The other young man, Horatio, is the Watson - the admiring loyal friend type and confidant, an intermediary between the audience and Hamlet, rather than a character in his own right.)

He's also in many ways a man of action - look at the whole fighting pirates, commandeering ships, exchanging letters to get Rosencrantz & Guildenstern executed in his place, sword-fighting swashbuckling derring-do of the last couple of acts.

Hamlet wants proof before he will act; he needs to know that the ghost is telling the truth (and isn't some goblin damn'd spinning a yarn to inveigle him into its clutches), and that Claudius murdered his father. If he simply went ahead and slaughtered Claudius, and C. turned out not to have murdered Hamlet Sr., H. Jr. would have damned himself. So he stages The Murder of Gonzago to test Claudius's reaction, and then confronts his mother. He doesn't kill Claudius at his prayers because to do so would be 'hire and salary, not revenge' - he delays not because he can't make up his mind, but because to kill Claudius then and there would be to send him up to heaven, rather than sending the incestuous, murderous, damned Dane to hell. And then he accidentally stabs Polonius (thinking that the rat i'the arras is Claudius - so much for indecision; it's an entirely impulsive action), and is bundled out of the country; between being exiled and Ophelia's funeral, he's not even in the country - so when would he have the opportunity to kill Claudius?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,085 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
Hang on... Where does the idea that Hamlet is indecisive come from? He's not.

If he has a flaw, it's not indecision, but that he wants life to conform to his ideal - not a moral or an ethical ideal, so much as art; he wants life to be both symbolic and theatrically effective. He's as much stage-manager and amateur dramatist as he is philosopher prince.

He's subtle and thoughtful, in a way that the reckless Laertes or the bloodthirsty Fortinbras aren't - both of whom in Hamlet's position would have skewered Claudius five minutes after talking to the ghost. Neither L nor F are admirable characters, but they reflect what Hamlet could be like. (The other young man, Horatio, is the Watson - the admiring loyal friend type and confidant, an intermediary between the audience and Hamlet, rather than a character in his own right.)

He's also in many ways a man of action - look at the whole fighting pirates, commandeering ships, exchanging letters to get Rosencrantz & Guildenstern executed in his place, sword-fighting swashbuckling derring-do of the last couple of acts.

Hamlet wants proof before he will act; he needs to know that the ghost is telling the truth (and isn't some goblin damn'd spinning a yarn to inveigle him into its clutches), and that Claudius murdered his father. If he simply went ahead and slaughtered Claudius, and C. turned out not to have murdered Hamlet Sr., H. Jr. would have damned himself. So he stages The Murder of Gonzago to test Claudius's reaction, and then confronts his mother. He doesn't kill Claudius at his prayers because to do so would be 'hire and salary, not revenge' - he doesn't delay because he can't make up his mind, but because to kill Claudius then and there would be to send him up to heaven, rather than sending the incestuous, murderous, damned Dane to hell. And then he accidentally stabs Polonius (thinking that the rat i'the arras is Claudius - so much for indecision; it's an entirely impulsive action), and is bundled out of the country; between being exiled and Ophelia's funeral, he's not even in the country - so when would he have the opportunity to kill Claudius?
Thank you for your analysis. I wouldn't have picked up on that otherwise, and it's a good thing I saw that point of view before I committed some form of academic self-deprecation when opening my mouth in my Shakespeare class on Tuesday.

It's embarrassing to admit it, but I actually got the indecisiveness from John Green
I would post the video but it's really not worth watching. At the end he goes on a rant about how indecisive Hamlet it, so I got the idea Hamlet was indecisive. Honestly I'm having a hard time figuring out the core of the play (beyond the obvious actions that take place).

But I see what you're saying. I personally found it pretty wise that Hamlet waited to prove Claudius' guilt before killing him, and he seems pretty set on killing him (he would've killed him when he was with his mother.. if only Claudius had been there?) But I take other people's ideas about the story and adapt them into my own understanding. I should know by now not to do that with John Green (the poor guy went so hard on his feminist analysis/rant on The Odyssey that he... completely misinterpreted the book), but I haven't learned that.

I'll have to go back and read it again. I was planning on doing that already, but I'm probably going to have to do it a bit more now. Thank you again for your input.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cosmic Hobo

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,085 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
If I've simply got to link FeNi with something, it'd be France. Everything about them is FeNi. Their history is tumultuous enough for a FeNi, the languade is...yeah, the customs...EVERYTHING!

Hamlet? He's an unhealthy fool! It's tough to type him when what he really needs is a DIAGNOSIS, not TYPING!
I can't say anything about France because I haven't been... I just have heard from friends and they don't seem to think it's the most... well, the most "Fe" place. But I can see where you get the Ni from.

I'm not in the business of "diagnosing" characters, but I can see where one would want to try to project psychological disorders onto Hamlet. A lot of people try to do that. It's a common thing. Just not one I quite agree with. But that's a debate in itself, a common literary debate actually. And one I'm honestly not equipped to get into.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,085 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
@Jeremy8419 I would watch another version, but it's hard to get ahold of :/ Unlike Hamlet in the 2000 film, people of this day don't have easy access to Blockbusters anymore.

And I understand that monologues are internal thought (I've taken several theatre classes, I was in theatre honors society, I'm in a Shakespeare class now...), but Hamlet's monologues still seem... broody to me. Then again, I'm having a hard time understanding them. I'll have to read them over again and look at their literary interpretations a bit.

In the meantime, here's the thread where people have been discussing Hamlet's type. Not many votes for Fe-dom... and not many votes for high Fe in general. http://personalitycafe.com/guess-type/90694-hamlet.html
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,347 Posts
Thank you for your analysis. I wouldn't have picked up on that otherwise, and it's a good thing I saw that point of view before I committed some form of academic self-deprecation when opening my mouth in my Shakespeare class on Tuesday.

It's embarrassing to admit it, but I actually got the indecisiveness from John Green
I would post the video but it's really not worth watching. At the end he goes on a rant about how indecisive Hamlet it, so I got the idea Hamlet was indecisive. Honestly I'm having a hard time figuring out the core of the play (beyond the obvious actions that take place).

But I see what you're saying. I personally found it pretty wise that Hamlet waited to prove Claudius' guilt before killing him, and he seems pretty set on killing him (he would've killed him when he was with his mother.. if only Claudius had been there?) But I take other people's ideas about the story and adapt them into my own understanding. I should know by now not to do that with John Green (the poor guy went so hard on his feminist analysis/rant on The Odyssey that he... completely misinterpreted the book), but I haven't learned that.

I'll have to go back and read it again. I was planning on doing that already, but I'm probably going to have to do it a bit more now. Thank you again for your input.
No problem!

Literary critics tend to completely misinterpret, or read too much into, texts, particularly if they've got an ideological axe to grind.

The two best adaptations of Hamlet are:
the Kenneth Branagh version - the full-length four hour movie;
the BBC Shakespeare version, with Derek Jacobi. (The whole series is terrific.)
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,600 Posts
MBTI uses a combination of functions from Socionics and ascribes them as a single function. Often Fi on there means Fe Ego and Fi Id on socionics. Emotiveness is Fe, Distance between People and subjective morality is Fi, Society frameworks and possibilities are Ne, and probabilities of human outcome and emotions are Ni. The usage is also important. Is Hamlet often Fi for Fi's sake? Or is he often Fi'ing to determine what relationships to end and the justification for such? EIE is marked as a projector and presenter of Fi for the sake of universal good-will and joy to all mankind. Tiny Tim is a positive example of this. Hamlet usually turns his internal dialogs into external announcements of righteousness. Being a tragedy, you can see he is usually so close... But no cigar.
 

·
Spotlight March 2016
Joined
·
8,193 Posts
I haven't yet had the pleasure of reading through, or even watching Hamlet. I'm more familiar with a few of Shakespeare's other plays. I do plan to read through them all, since I tend to be quite fond of Shakespeare, but I'm reading Jane Austen's works first.

Still, it sounds like it's not difficult to see Hamlet as an EIE, for one reason or another, based on the analysis given-- Even by the guy who makes you think that Hamlet is indecisive. :proud:

I at least know that Don Quixote captures ILE very well. :laughing:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
382 Posts
I was thinking Hamlet as an EIE has more to do with Hamlet being symbolic representation of theater / theatricalness, rather than with Hamlet being concrete portrayal of EIE's? I mean he, as a fictional character, don't have to represent all stereotypical EIE traits; maybe the goal was to associate theatrical expressions, hence supposed "EIE nature", with Hamlet.
Like Dostoyevsky, being called INFj - the humanist, represent "humanism" through his literature, but more symbolically, not necessarily being stereotypical EII during his whole life.
When I think about Hamlet I see some dude talking to skull, which is immediately making me think about theatrical expression of feelings :p
I dunno though, dunno what was the goal of people who invented those nicknames of types.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,078 Posts
I was thinking Hamlet as an EIE has more to do with Hamlet being symbolic representation of theater / theatricalness, rather than with Hamlet being concrete portrayal of EIE's? I mean he, as a fictional character, don't have to represent all stereotypical EIE traits; maybe the goal was to associate theatrical expressions, hence supposed "EIE nature", with Hamlet.
Like Dostoyevsky, being called INFj - the humanist, represent "humanism" through his literature, but more symbolically, not necessarily being stereotypical EII during his whole life.
When I think about Hamlet I see some dude talking to skull, which is immediately making me think about theatrical expression of feelings :p
I dunno though, dunno what was the goal of people who invented those nicknames of types.
Funny, when I see a guy talking to a skull, I see a guy talking to a skull. Does it have any resemblence towards the world of theatre? Yes, but only because of Hamlet and Shakespeare. Otherwise, it'd be closer to necrophillia than to histrionic stuff. And, yeah. I have no idea what those names given to TIMs are supposed to represent.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pressed Flowers

·
Registered
SLI, ISTJ, 1w9, 164
Joined
·
2,087 Posts
Those nicknames where invented for the sake of convenience. From what I read Augusta thought that names like extraverted intuitive rational feeling type were too long and proposed the nicknames. They are more symbolic and not necessarily represent their corresponding types.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
994 Posts
If I've simply got to link FeNi with something, it'd be France. Everything about them is FeNi. Their history is tumultuous enough for a FeNi, the languade is...yeah, the customs...EVERYTHING!

Hamlet? He's an unhealthy fool! It's tough to type him when what he really needs is a DIAGNOSIS, not TYPING!

I can't say anything about France because I haven't been... I just have heard from friends and they don't seem to think it's the most... well, the most "Fe" place. But I can see where you get the Ni from.
France is Alpha as fuck. Everything seems Alpha quadra to me, the culture, the mentality, the language, the values. I would say they are Alpha with some leaning towards beta more than delta, but def. not Ni valueing at all.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,672 Posts
I don't even know anything about socionomics, but the main character of the story I'm writing is an INFP, and his middle name is Hamlet.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,167 Posts
Ah, so you're not an ENFP anymore, @Xahhakatar?

I at least know that Don Quixote captures ILE very well. :laughing:


I agree entirely. And yet it seems to be more common to place him in the IEE category, or more specifically the MBTI ENFP category. I've read Don Quixote, and I personally didn't see the ENFP attitude people keep going on about.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,672 Posts
Ah, so you're not an ENFP anymore, @Xahhakatar?
Apparently, I'm an INTP because I hate everything and I'm very blunt about it. I also think Hamlet's an INTP.

While I am kind of a computer geek, I am against INTPs being stereotyped as such because archetypes existed long before computers and the average classical INTP was more emo like Hamlet.
 
1 - 20 of 30 Posts
Top