User Tag List

View Poll Results: Did you enjoy the TV series LOST?

Voters
45. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes - I have Fi as my dominant, secondary, tertiary or inferior function.

    16 35.56%
  • Yes - I have Fe as my dominant, secondary, tertiary or inferior function.

    9 20.00%
  • No - I have Fi as my dominant, secondary, tertiary or inferior function.

    9 20.00%
  • No - I have Fe as my dominant, secondary, tertiary or inferior function.

    5 11.11%
  • Never watched it therefore no opinion

    6 13.33%
First 12345 Last

Results 21 to 30 of 74

  1. #21
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Arclight View Post
    Then it just got really annoying and I haven't seen it in about 3 years. I can't stand Matthew Fox.. or at least His character in that show.. Maybe if dies .. I would check out the final episode.
    For a long time, Jack pissed me off. He was Directive, and I aligned far more with Locke, who was Informative.

    But I thought the character was excellent and wouldn't have had him any other way. I remember when we had arguments here around Season 3-4 where Locke seemed to be veering off into Crazyland and Jack was getting downright aggressive. Some tempers got heated here in the discussions over who could understand whose motivations. But the characters were great; both had nearly opposite ways of viewing the world, and both tenaciously held onto their viewpoints.

    I really liked what they did with Jack over the series arc.
    He finally learned how to let go.

    ....

    As far as the rest, I admired the series from a writer's viewpoint. It was an NP wonderland, and that's a lot harder than you might imagine to pull off. Even if you have a few anchorpoints driven in, a lot of stuff is just throwing crap at the wall and seeing what sticks or what patterns you can discern in the mess. This is what authors do when they write books, however they have the benefit of calling that a "first draft" and then being able to go back and change everything before the audience EVER sees it and do complete rewrites. Because they have the opportunity to endlessly rework the material, the readers never realize how crappy the earlier drafts were and how difficult the writing might have been.

    Tolkien took 12 years to write the Lord of the Rings and wrote draft after draft before he got the core of the One Ring and what he wanted to do with it. Stephen King is notorious for writing a shit-draft but in the process he uncovers a few core elements that end up making the final version soar. (I'm talking about his earlier stuff, btw; it seems like he's sort of burned out in the last 5-10 years or so.)

    TV writers do not get that ability. Whatever you write into the earlier episodes has to somehow give a direction, yet be open-ended enough to allow you to weave a tapestry that you perceive within the act of actually writing and producing episodes. It's also not even a 'writer's effort," you have audience participation (by their response) + the actors themselves who can either make or break a character. Ben Linus was a three-episode guest star, but because of what Michael Emerson did with the role in those three episodes, he became a main character. This sort of stuff is not easy. You constantly have to allow your artistic vision change to embrace whatever is organically happening. This actually is a skill, and one that has to be honed -- to give just enough options (based on one's intuition) to allow for new pathways and patterns to open up, while not enough to seem scattered and diffuse. Sometimes it's hit or miss.

    Which is why I'm pretty forgiving about the loose threads that might not have been tied up, themes that were lost or dropped in favor of other themes, and the whole messy business of writing an organically developing show like this. If they had the opportunity to script and plan all 121 episodes up front, perhaps I would be much harsher, but it is not that type of medium. The writers have to be very P -- you have an idea where you want to paddle the boat, but you have to contend with the waves and the storms, and sometimes you have to change direction mid-course to follow what is becoming an apparently better (or merely inevitable) direction.

    ....

    Thought this commentary was interesting.
    Early Reflections on the Lost Finale | This Lamp
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  2. #22
    Ghost Monkey Soul Vizconde's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    4,474

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by spamtar View Post
    I think that its less of a Fe/Fi thing and more of a P/J aspect which effects the type's overall predisposition to acquire the taste for Lost.
    Quote Originally Posted by ragashree View Post
    Would you be able to elaborate on this?
    The show itself appears a bit outwardly illogical and has a very lose structure; a lot of loose ends.

    According to Myers judging types like to have matters settled...Lost, even in its finale is by its nature and concept unsettled.

    Conversly, according to Myers, perceptive types prefer to "keep decisions open."

    Lost is the most open ended fictional television series that I can recall ever seeing. Thus as noted, Ps in theory, as a group, would tend to have a greater preference for this type of television show than Js because the show is closer to how they chose to perceive the world as opposed to Js.

    I would go further and say that NPs as a group would prefer the show over SPs. I would speculate that as a group SPs would more likely like fast moving sports, game shows and thrillers on one hand or something more practical such as news/cooking shows (or other "how-to" type shows) or documentaries on the other hand. This theory on NPs being the key demographic is because Lost hit on a lot of "abstract themes", which is like crack to a lot of NPs.*

    Naturally there are plenty of exceptions and am not trying to pidgin hole anybody but nevertheless I believe that for this and similar applications I would be shown statistically proved correct.
    I redact everything I have written or will write on this forum prior to, subsequent with and or after the fact of its writing. For entertainment purposes only and not to be taken seriously nor literally.

    Quote Originally Posted by Edgar View Post
    Spamtar - a strange combination of boorish drunkeness and erudite discussions, or what I call "an Irish academic"

  3. #23
    reborn PeaceBaby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    937 so/sx
    Posts
    6,226

    Default

    It was an NP wonderland, and that's a lot harder than you might imagine to pull off.
    Still, each construct requires a core consistency; a place of rules that form the locus of that world; and if this show is an NP wonderland I should love it, no? But the rules shifted and changed, and those whims of fancy offend me. To me, it's disrespectful of the audience.

    And there's no question of my NP'ness here folks.

    I wondered if perhaps Fe was more accepting of the rule changes along the way ... Fi demanding that the human game be played with a consistent core set of rules. Doesn't matter what they are at the outset ... but when you lay the foundation, the house you build can't exceed that blueprint.
    "Remember always that you not only have the right to be an individual, you have an obligation to be one."
    Eleanor Roosevelt


    "When people see some things as beautiful,
    other things become ugly.
    When people see some things as good,
    other things become bad."
    Lao Tzu, Tao Te Ching

  4. #24
    Ghost Monkey Soul Vizconde's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    4,474

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PeaceBaby View Post
    Still, each construct requires a core consistency; a place of rules that form the locus of that world; and if this show is an NP wonderland I should love it, no? But the rules shifted and changed, and those whims of fancy offend me. To me, it's disrespectful of the audience.

    And there's no question of my NP'ness here folks.

    I wondered if perhaps Fe was more accepting of the rule changes along the way ... Fi demanding that the human game be played with a consistent core set of rules. Doesn't matter what they are at the outset ... but when you lay the foundation, the house you build can't exceed that blueprint.
    I agree and as a fellow P am nearly always open to view correlating data that would create additional clues as type preference causation. The world and the human mind is rarely so black and white as to end continued evaluation. The only reason to limit or stop evaluation is time and resource restraints.

    I am curious on how this Fi/Fe poll will play out as the question doesn't seem as clear cut in theory. In other words in this instance I am happy to hear the question raised for which I do not know the answer
    I redact everything I have written or will write on this forum prior to, subsequent with and or after the fact of its writing. For entertainment purposes only and not to be taken seriously nor literally.

    Quote Originally Posted by Edgar View Post
    Spamtar - a strange combination of boorish drunkeness and erudite discussions, or what I call "an Irish academic"

  5. #25
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PeaceBaby View Post
    Still, each construct requires a core consistency; a place of rules that form the locus of that world; and if this show is an NP wonderland I should love it, no? But the rules shifted and changed, and those whims of fancy offend me. To me, it's disrespectful of the audience.
    My problem, PB, is that I do not understand why you are saying the rules changed arbitrarily.

    To me, the rules never changed in a way that mattered.

    Could you explain better what rules you think changed -- especially in a way that "offended" you? That is a pretty strong reaction.

    I just don't understand where you are coming from.

    And there's no question of my NP'ness here folks.
    I never said you weren't.

    So it must be something else -- and to me it is most likely the strong Fi valueset you are applying that I cannot grasp because it's part of your personal internal landscape rather than a ruleset I can derive from simple observation.

    I wondered if perhaps Fe was more accepting of the rule changes along the way ... Fi demanding that the human game be played with a consistent core set of rules. Doesn't matter what they are at the outset ... but when you lay the foundation, the house you build can't exceed that blueprint.
    Do you understand what I've been saying? To me, the rules were consistent. There were inconsistencies but to me they were not crucial ones.

    What rules were inconsistent to you?
    You need to explain them better so I can follow you.
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  6. #26
    reborn PeaceBaby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    937 so/sx
    Posts
    6,226

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    I never said you weren't.
    Oh I know - I just don't have my type in my profile right now so that was for the benefit of the general audience.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    So it must be something else -- and to me it is most likely the strong Fi valueset you are applying that I cannot grasp because it's part of your personal internal landscape rather than a ruleset I can derive from simple observation.
    No, not a personal set of rules per se ... although to be fair, I do think that writers have a responsibility to their audience to craft a work that respects their intelligence and emotions. And, I see the humans in any story as more than pawns ...

    That's not very important though. I don't expect anyone here to justify anything on behalf of the show.

    I was thinking about this a few minutes ago ... here's an example that may be helpful to illustrate.

    When I watched sci-fi TV with my brother (INTP) he would complain about the rules of physics or gravity or propulsion etc being broken, or not working the way they were depicted. For example, he would complain, "aircraft can't be shaped like that; the aerodynamics would be totally incorrect - it would never achieve lift. Plus, what would be the fuel source? If they used a product of fission, the weight of shielding would prevent flight as well. This is stupid."

    I feel that way about people, characters. I can't really define it better than that at the moment.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    Do you understand what I've been saying? To me, the rules were consistent. There were inconsistencies but to me they were not crucial ones.

    What rules were inconsistent to you?
    You need to explain them better so I can follow you.
    I appreciate your effort to understand my viewpoint. Perhaps if I borrow that DVD set of yours, I shall tally up my human rules of LOST and how they were thusly broken and we can discuss them at a meet-up
    "Remember always that you not only have the right to be an individual, you have an obligation to be one."
    Eleanor Roosevelt


    "When people see some things as beautiful,
    other things become ugly.
    When people see some things as good,
    other things become bad."
    Lao Tzu, Tao Te Ching

  7. #27
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PeaceBaby View Post
    I feel that way about people, characters. I can't really define it better than that at the moment.
    And this is the issue... I think the characters are actually acting authentically, moreso than many characters in many other narratives I've witnessed over the years in books, movies, and TV.

    ....That is why I'm realllllllly confused!

    You've mentioned a few things in older discussions but they seemed like trivial points of the characters, not core motivations and personality types. These are strong characters.

    I appreciate your effort to understand my viewpoint. Perhaps if I borrow that DVD set of yours, I shall tally up my human rules of LOST and how they were thusly broken and we can discuss them at a meet-up
    Yay! You're coming to the East Coast? Or do you expect me to fly to Chicago? (And do you expect me to fly ANYWHERE after watching Lost? )
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  8. #28
    insert random title here Randomnity's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Enneagram
    6w5 sp/sx
    Posts
    9,489

    Default

    So what does it mean if you neither loved nor hated it, but rather thought it was thoroughly mediocre (but watchable on a boring day)?
    -end of thread-

  9. #29
    Ghost Monkey Soul Vizconde's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    4,474

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    You've mentioned a few things in older discussions but they seemed like trivial points of the characters, not core motivations and personality types. These are strong characters.
    I can appreciate how the audience (especially F doms) would get a bit bothered by incongruities in the characters. Somebody would act quiet sane and reasonable and suddenly they would do something extremely unreasonable like murdering somebody without cause or apparent motivation. These twists were fun at the beginning but it happened so often that I assume most of the audience become incredulous. Halfway toward the end of this season the characters were admittedly acting both neurotic in general and very incongruent with how they acted at the beginning.

    At this stage there were 3 primary options

    1) suspend disbelief with the anticipation that this would all eventually make sense in the cosmic balance
    or
    2) feel that ones social intelligence was being insulted or values violated and begin to feel resentment towards the television series.

    3) do both and hold off complete judgment until the end to see if it was worth in retrospect. (my choice)
    I redact everything I have written or will write on this forum prior to, subsequent with and or after the fact of its writing. For entertainment purposes only and not to be taken seriously nor literally.

    Quote Originally Posted by Edgar View Post
    Spamtar - a strange combination of boorish drunkeness and erudite discussions, or what I call "an Irish academic"

  10. #30
    Ghost Monkey Soul Vizconde's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    4,474

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Randomnity View Post
    So what does it mean if you neither loved nor hated it, but rather thought it was thoroughly mediocre (but watchable on a boring day)?
    Prolly means you are an ISTP or have no predisposition one way or the other to this genre.
    I redact everything I have written or will write on this forum prior to, subsequent with and or after the fact of its writing. For entertainment purposes only and not to be taken seriously nor literally.

    Quote Originally Posted by Edgar View Post
    Spamtar - a strange combination of boorish drunkeness and erudite discussions, or what I call "an Irish academic"

Similar Threads

  1. How did you get the politics you did
    By Zergling in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 63
    Last Post: 01-21-2016, 06:06 PM
  2. [INFP] How did you find the person of your dreams?
    By elementaltale in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 06-30-2010, 10:28 PM
  3. Do you like the rain?
    By Ming in forum The Fluff Zone
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: 06-06-2010, 09:31 PM
  4. [ISTP] ISTPS:are you like 'The Dude'
    By brainheart in forum The SP Arthouse (ESFP, ISFP, ESTP, ISTP)
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 07-19-2009, 01:20 PM
  5. Did you read the instruction manual to that game?
    By Alwar in forum The Fluff Zone
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 06-23-2009, 02:42 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO