the state i am in said:
dfw is definitely an infp. i would guess dave eggers is an infp as well. kesey seems pretty certainly an enfp. so would be henry miller, tom robbins, and joseph campbell. i think vonnegut would be more of an f than a t. I think elizabeth smart would be an infp and lester bangs would be infx (not sure if p or j). i think gonzo journalist tom wolfe (not thomas) would be an infj, along with milan kundera, joan didion, and haruki murakami (possibly an infp). i struggle to see kafka as a t, he seems like an enneagram 4 to me all the way. i'm not exactly sure why hesse and huxley are infps?
what about italo calvino, garcia marquez, rimbaud, honore de balzac, and rilke? and if nabokov is an intp, is donald barthelme considered an intp as well?
changing my mind. vonnegut as intp seems right (i focus too much on timequake, deadeye dick, and bluebeard) but perhaps infj could work as well. i resonate with it deeply, he waxes poetic about the lost sense of connection in modern life. extended families, not feeling alone, etc. he seems sad instead of angry, but he's an old man and maybe he usedtabe angry. kafka- still not sure. why is he typed intp? like philip k dick i guess i can see intps as universe builders. but kafka's whole oeuvre seems to be based on his relationship with his father. metamorphosis seems like an exercise in Fe to me, absorbing the impressions of others about yourself and teh way the environment feels. maybe an infj. i think william s burroughs is more of an intp than intj, but i haven't seen any good discussions. seems more inf Fe than ter Fi to me.
enfps: ken kesey, henry miller, joseph campbell, tom robbins. they're all enfps. joseph campbell is a mythologist, he has this buzz about him, this great energy. he and henry miller all influenced tom robbins. ken kesey has the ultimate dom Ne. his merry pranksters. so enfp. he's the non-navigator (as told in electric koolaid acid test). no esfp could EVER write sometimes a great notion. it's faulknerian in scope, then bigger. tom robbins has hilariously great metaphors and similies. great dialogue, just always hopeful, upbeat, wanting to find the best in people. first fav band was the doors. henry miller's philosophy is always merry and bright. he always finds a way, scrapes along, gets other people to give him food, love, attention, pussy. he wins them over with his bursting warmth, connection, enthusiasm. it's infectious.
infps: dfw, no question. hurting, intuitive, can't get out of the past, can't free himself, brilliantly careeningly perceptive. yes, and more yes. eggers could be xnfp. real world, really dave? he's a mover and a shaker too, always getting things done. he has GREAT Ne, he knows how to network like a motherfucker. mcsweeneys, i just need to see him talk to KNOW. but he has so many ventures, is always out there doing things, starting foundations, etc. i could see him as either, really. probably infp, he has his shit together a little more than most enfps. lester bangs- absolutely infp. no question. he's kerouac reincarnated (and my personal hero). he has his values, he judges music how it relates to him and his idealized image of rock and roll purity. and his Ne is sickeningly sweet and twisted. i'm guessing calvino and garic a marquez are infps. maybe all of magical realism. there's a flavor of feeling so finely shaded, so detailed and complete, so drifting along and so fresh and alive like flowers in springtime, and from where and from what? it's not the context of the story that hits you, it's their depth of feeling peeking out from the pages and peering around their words. very beautiful. i can see hesse and maybe huxley here too now.
infj: milan kundera is a distilled dostoeyevsky. sleek, precise, deeply and penetratingly revealing. the emotion breathes on the pages from simple gestures worn by caricatures of humanity, who represent all of humanity in one fell swoop. nothing extraneous is necessary and context rules his philosophy of the novel. creating deeper and deeper context, polyphoony as his calls it. tom wolfe is a strange guess. i feel the Fe. he gets inside voices, slangs, styles. he feels how they work inside out, absorbs them and tweaks them so cunningly, so slyly, it's great. he elucidates, exaggerates, plays with. murakami i do not yet see clearly. i've read 3 of his books but not the wind up bird chronicle. norwegian wood, kafka on the shore, south of the border west of the sun. resonates as infj to me, but it could just be understatement of feeling. they have depth of feeling, but they don't often know how they feel internally. they are usually younger characters so they could be struggling infps or infjs who respond instead to others. at times he seems so distant and mythic and elegant. i could see him and calvino and even garica marquez as infps or infjs too, this one is tough.
joan didion and elizabeth smart, i'm just not sure. i resonated with both, maybe they're enfps. on a strangely invisbily related note, why is shakespeare infp instead of enfp? he seems enfp to me way more than infp.
donald barthelme and vladimir nabokov confuse me. i'd guess intp, too deconstructionistic and formally playful to not be dominant Ti. they take writing apart and put it back together piece by piece. they get jolted and electrified by their own witticisms and solipsisms and inventions. you can feel the excitement when they've got it flowing. it also feels like they're writing in punctuated bursts and stop-starts. and when it stops, it stops. barthelme's favorite writer was intj samuell beckett, but his writing is so much more pieced together, less integrated, less whole. it's what makes him great (and to my ears) a more engaging read than beckett. plus the hypercontextualization of his literary stances, positions, inventions, etc.
what's the verdict on william blake and ginsberg? ginsberg seems infp 100%. is his hero blake the same?