Reading Styles Differing Between Types?

[Z Buck McFate]

Ni perceives no timeline and will leap back, forth or current, so the INTJ in question doesn't understand Ni.

The INTJ in question may have been on some more specific tangent- I can see myself making a claim like that without really paying attention to the broader implications of what I’m saying, it’ll just be the clumsily stated subjective truth about some very specific criteria; e.g. saying “I don’t like blue” when the more specific truth is that I don’t like royal blue….but then at some later point maybe I’ll remember that I like periwinkle, so I’ll redact my statement when I notice how clumsily it was initially stated. (And the kinda funny/embarrassing thing about it is that I might really emphatically initially express "I don't like blue".)

Otherwise, this is definitely true- and reading the op, I had the same “a Ni dom said this?” reaction. I agree that it’s very difficult for Ni to separate ‘right now’ from ‘previous experience’ and/or ‘potential experience’. And reading anything about an isolated ‘right now’ or ‘the past’ can feel stifling/very unsatisfying to me if there isn’t something therein to connect it to a wider context of experiences.

The Huffington Post ran an article related to this topic about a month ago.

Here Is The One Perfect Book For Every Single Myers-Briggs Type

I think The Gunslinger was a good choice for ISTPs, given [MENTION=15886]superunknown[/MENTION]'s enthusiasm for the book (data point of 1, hahaha). I hated the book the suggested for INFJs. I think I'd enjoy everything they suggested for the FPs, though I haven't actually read any of them.

I’ve never heard of the one suggested for INFJs, but judging from the description it’s not something I’d ever choose to read. Borges has long been one of my favorite authors though- he was the INTJ suggestion. Of that list- Brave New World (the INTP suggestion) would be a relatively close second.


***

For the past several years I’ve mostly read nonfiction. The last fiction book I read that I really liked was Unbearable Lightness Of Being.

Favorite authors that are coming to mind are Jorge Luis Borges and Dostoyevsky. I think I like them because they help me make sense of my experience of the world.

I just started reading The Little Golden Calf (Yevgeny Petrov), and I really like it so far (most reviews compare it to Don Quixote). What I appreciate about this kind of read (this particular brand of humor) is that it helps me to take life less seriously- things that I’d perceive on my own as being too heavy are made light of, which is extraordinarily helpful to me. Vonnegut has that affect on me too. Or Richard Brautigan or Tom Robbins. eta: And Douglas Adams.


The last thing I read that I didn’t really care for was something by David Sedaris, I can’t even remember the name. I don’t really understand the appeal that guy has. Reading his stuff feels (to me) like being trapped in a car with other versions of myself and we can’t stop arguing with each other about everything.

 

[skylights]

I don't really like time-jumping in books. My favorite stories are usually fictional but not super-fantasy, pretty linear, following a single character or a couple characters through a journey. I like richly illustrated worlds that I can lose myself in, and I like a fair amount of action to keep the story moving. I like books that keep me engaged and on my toes, but that don't scare or depress me. Obviously I prefer the whodunnit to the howcatchem (lol) - I love Agatha Christie and was hooked on Nancy Drew as a kid. I really like old British mysteries and new techno-thrillers.

My ISFJ loves Russian lit, revolution and gulags and the like.

 

[rav3n]

The INTJ in question may have been on some more specific tangent- I can see myself making a claim like that without really paying attention to the broader implications of what I’m saying, it’ll just be the clumsily stated subjective truth about some very specific criteria; e.g. saying “I don’t like blue” when the more specific truth is that I don’t like royal blue….but then at some later point maybe I’ll remember that I like periwinkle, so I’ll redact my statement when I notice how clumsily it was initially stated. (And the kinda funny/embarrassing thing about it is that I might really emphatically initially express "I don't like blue".)

Possibly but only if time travel is viewed in its most simplest terms of past to present comparison where past is the litmus test for 'rightness'. As is evident in many books that include time travel, it's a lot more complex than the comparison aspect.

 

[Jaguar]

For instance I adore the idea of time travel and non-linear storytelling and getting the whole picture in bits that are disjointed like a puzzle I get to smash together in my head. The person I was talking to thought that time travel was "the vice of Si" being that they are Ni and don't see the point in caring about the past.

A so-called INTJ equates time travel with the past while simultaneously claiming time travel is the vice of Si. Irony . . .
In the book Analytical Psychology: Its Theory & Practice, Carl Jung wrote:

"Intuition is something like H.G. Wells's Time Machine."

 

[Sunny Ghost]

I can usually blow through non-fiction books more quickly than fiction. But I do like a good story. Mostly, I like a good lesson. Something I can take with me.

My tastes aren't very even. I like some sci/fi, some fantasy, some futuristic/dystopian stories, horror/scary, and emotional stories/drama/chick literature.

I had read once that Se/Ni has a different reading style than Si/Ne. Se/Ni wants to take in all of the sensual parts of the story, fully recreating the image and scenery in their head, relishing on certain sentences or words. Whereas Si/Ne style tends to read at a quicker pace, often trying to predict the outcome.

 

[Galena]

[MENTION=10131]IndyAnnaJoan[/MENTION]: Good one. A literary holy grail for me is a sound lesson that cuts deep to my own personal demons and will stick in my gut for years to come.

 

[Concur_Withall]

Introverts read more.

Intuitives read more complex stuff.

Thinkers don't share what they read.

Judgers read the book all the way through.

 

[Cellmold]

Anything that presents a relevant message to my own life and the potential states I might go through in that life.

But also anything that gives me a perspective I might not have considered, which triggers my mental drifts.

 

[Cellmold]

Anything that presents a relevant message to my own life and the potential states I might go through in that life.

But also anything that gives me a perspective I might not have considered, which triggers my mental drifts.

 

[Glycerine]

I like realistic fiction, nonfiction social science (I can't stand self-help or inspirational books though) and some philosophy. I should start reading again.

 

[Anew Leaf]

I can usually blow through non-fiction books more quickly than fiction. But I do like a good story. Mostly, I like a good lesson. Something I can take with me.

My tastes aren't very even. I like some sci/fi, some fantasy, some futuristic/dystopian stories, horror/scary, and emotional stories/drama/chick literature.

I had read once that Se/Ni has a different reading style than Si/Ne. Se/Ni wants to take in all of the sensual parts of the story, fully recreating the image and scenery in their head, relishing on certain sentences or words. Whereas Si/Ne style tends to read at a quicker pace, often trying to predict the outcome.

Ohh this is especially interesting. It's like with the SeNi-ers, reading becomes something to experience in a different way than SiNe-ers. I know I am a speed reader who whips through things to parse the general meaning of what's going on rather than slowing down to savor it all. For the desire to know ALL supercedes the ability to savor. I try, really I do, to savor such things, but I cannot. Or I suppose more accurately I can only do that on a second read, and I better find enough that I missed to make the second read worthwhile.

such as the Song of Ice and Fire series.

 

[Sunny Ghost]

Ohh this is especially interesting. It's like with the SeNi-ers, reading becomes something to experience in a different way than SiNe-ers. I know I am a speed reader who whips through things to parse the general meaning of what's going on rather than slowing down to savor it all. For the desire to know ALL supercedes the ability to savor. I try, really I do, to savor such things, but I cannot. Or I suppose more accurately I can only do that on a second read, and I better find enough that I missed to make the second read worthwhile.

such as the Song of Ice and Fire series.

I had always wondered how true this stood for all Se/Ni people vs Si/Ne people. So it's cool to hear you say that you do have a different way of approaching books. My ESTJ friend confirmed the same. She just picks up the general jist with Si and goes off with it with her Ne. But I'll stay stuck on one page, one paragraph, one line sometimes. Just rereading it, fully taking it in, sort of allowing it to go deeper. I've never reread a book, because I usually feel I've already memorized it after the first go around, or will instead just skim it the second go around.

 

[21%]

I love things that are atmospheric -- that's a big thing for me. I love fantasy -- not so much sci-fi, since I don't really like the 'atmosphere' of space. I love feeling the warmth from the hearth. I love feeling the wind when you look over a capital city for the first time from a nearby hill. I love long-winded introspective passages. I love little moments when characters sit and recollect, and nothing happens. I love it when things are a little sad. I love it when characters revisit places from the past, and you feel that they have come such a long way. I love winter mornings and brightly lit lively nights, when the storm is raging outside. I love it when the climax is something very personal and silent and is decided in a heartbeat, in a breath, in a look.

 

[Randomnity]

Ohh this is especially interesting. It's like with the SeNi-ers, reading becomes something to experience in a different way than SiNe-ers. I know I am a speed reader who whips through things to parse the general meaning of what's going on rather than slowing down to savor it all. For the desire to know ALL supercedes the ability to savor. I try, really I do, to savor such things, but I cannot. Or I suppose more accurately I can only do that on a second read, and I better find enough that I missed to make the second read worthwhile.

such as the Song of Ice and Fire series.

Yeah, this is how I am too. I could never stand the pages and pages of description, just tell me what happens! (which is why i`m a heretic who liked LOTR movies much more than the books, although I read them all).

I don`t really know if it`s a type thing, I suspect for me it`s related to my impatience in general.

 

[cafe]

I love fantasy, both epic and urban, including paranormal romance.
I'll read just any kind of genre fic as long is it isn't too depressing or scary, but most of what I read is fluff.
I read sci-fi, mystery, historical fiction (including but not limited to bodice rippers), romance (though I've been known to pretend the male protagonist is a werewolf, just to liven things up).
One of my favorite series has a time travel element, though it isn't the main theme.

I can get impatient and bored and when I do, I usually just skim over the stuff between the dialogue. If I love the book, I may well go back and reread it to see what I missed, but I'm strongly driven to find out what happens. I need to know now, dammit!

And I love humor. One of my favorite PNR series is set in a small, rural Kentucky town, so you've got redneck werewolves living in trailer parks and vampires being gossiped about at church potlucks. It is silly, but it makes me very happy.

 

[Such Irony]

Yeah, this is how I am too. I could never stand the pages and pages of description, just tell me what happens! (which is why i`m a heretic who liked LOTR movies much more than the books, although I read them all).

I don`t really know if it`s a type thing, I suspect for me it`s related to my impatience in general.

Yeah, I liked the LOTR movies better than the books for the same reason. You aren't the only one.

 

[Qre:us]

Yeah, this is how I am too. I could never stand the pages and pages of description, just tell me what happens! (which is why i`m a heretic who liked LOTR movies much more than the books, although I read them all).

I don`t really know if it`s a type thing, I suspect for me it`s related to my impatience in general.

Yup, too much exposition, and I'm bored to tears, flipping ahead, to see when the actual story begins.

I can agree with [MENTION=10131]IndyAnnaJoan[/MENTION] theory, that Si/Ne likes to read quick, attempting to guess at an outcome. I ready pretty damn fast, and am always trying to predict how it will end. Love books that plesantly surprise me. It's like a dialogue happens between myself and the author, "gotcha!"

My favourite book, Alice's Adventures in Wonderland

 

[SpankyMcFly]

Do you think that your type affects what kinds of books you enjoy reading?

My reading habits have changed quite a bit over time. Consequently I'm not so sure it's "type" related.

When I was a youngster and my reading was at it's most voracious I mostly read fiction; science fiction, fantasy/adventure and the occasional non-fiction book on war history and history in general. Tolkien really had a large impact on my enjoyment of the genre. Fast forward 30 years and it's the opposite. I mostly read non-fiction and periodicals. I like my info bite sized and it's quite rare for me to get into a book that is more than a couple hundred pages. Yeah, real life caught up to me. Work, commute, sleep, eat, spend the couple/few hours I have on more bang for my buck options, i.e. typing this post

 

[SubtleFighter]

Another person here who likes the LOTR movies more than the books. I could only finish the first book, actually, for that reason. Geez, I have never seen a bigger exposition dump in my life than in the preface of Fellowship of the Ring. (edit: well, maybe the beginning of Brave New World would give it a run for its money...)

 

[SpankyMcFly]

Another person here who likes the LOTR movies more than the books. I could only finish the first book, actually, for that reason. Geez, I have never seen a bigger exposition dump in my life than in the preface of Fellowship of the Ring. (edit: well, maybe the beginning of Brave New World would give it a run for its money...)

You sir/ma'am BLASHPEME!!! You take that back, nao!