• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

Fine art does NOT require "N" preference....

nolla

Senor Membrane
Joined
May 22, 2008
Messages
3,166
MBTI Type
INFP
I really hope someday to see an end to the constant belittling of the capabilities of those of us who prefer Sensing. It would thrill me to see more people on this list truly understanding that everyone uses both sensing and intuition, and that everyone is capable of pursuing every activity that interests them and that all human beings are capable of, including acting on the basic human drive to initiate positive change, and to create visual works of art.

I think the reason you've seen too much of this attitude, is the "SP = art" stereotype. You see, there probably are many Ns here who feel like they are capable of making art too, and they have been defending their skills against the Keirseyan stereotype. He actually says that NFs try art because they see it romantic, but soon get tired of it since their tactical intelligence is so bad. To me this sounds like such a harsh way to put it that I might myself try to fight the stereotype... I do make art. I don't know if it's fine or anything, but I do make it. No keirsey come here and tell me otherwise. (actually I do get bored a lot, but then I get back to it in few months or so....)
 

The_Liquid_Laser

Glowy Goopy Goodness
Joined
Jul 11, 2007
Messages
3,376
MBTI Type
ENTP
Any type can be an artist. Although I think type affects how an artist approaches their art and what the final product looks like.
 

Little Linguist

Striving for balance
Joined
Jun 23, 2008
Messages
6,880
MBTI Type
xNFP
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
Okay, people, time for a reality check here....

I’ve noticed a number of comments posted here and there on this list about art and type preferences, and since a few of these comments are on private lists that I can’t contribute to, I’d like to respond to them here. It really disturbs me that so many people here have brainwashed themselves into believing you have to have a preference for intuition in order to produce fine art. I feel angry at the way these people dismiss “Sensors” as being not capable of produce anything of artistic value. One of the moderators here writes that she thinks Sensors are only capable of pushing things around on paper or canvas aimlessly, as though having a preference for Sensing means having limited brains, no vision for what we want to do with our time, and no beliefs worth promoting. Another person writes in a private forum that some Sensors “allegedly” see themselves as creative and artistic, as if those of us who do believe we have those qualities might be just kidding ourselves. I’m not sure where this idea originated from. Perhaps it’s because Isabel Myers wasn’t very specific or careful when she equated the word “creative” with N. I don’t know. At any rate, because I’ve created fine art myself (though I don’t rely on it for a living), and have spent years both in college-level art classes around plenty of other fine artists, and have spent lots of time around local professional artists in my city, it seems obvious to me that not only are a number of people who prefer Sensing producing high quality fine art all the time, every day, but… you really need to develop both processes in yourself in order to make something of high quality that will have a lot of visual and psychological impact on others.

The act of creating tangible visual art requires you to be sensitive to detail and keenly aware of what your tools can do. If you want to say something that will be visually arresting, thought-provoking, and memorable, you need to learn technique. You also need to explore the limits of the tools you’re working with. People who aren’t interested in learning technique and paying attention to visual form, balance, contrast and details tend to produce amateurish-looking art that doesn’t capture and hold people’s attention, and the visual message gets lost. (From what I’ve noticed, if these people are lucky enough to find an artists’ co-op or gallery wiling to display their art, they tend to write these loooong artists descriptions, but they also tend to be disappointed by the lukewarm reaction they’re getting from visitors.) The thing is, anyone who wants to learn how to use tools effectively can do if they have the willingness to learn and the ability and drive to spend lots of hours tinkering around with the tools. It also seems obvious to me that you need to be introspective in order to produce art that has something of substance to it. This is ALSO something that anyone, regardless of their type preferences, can do if they are willing to take some time out every day to contemplate what they think is worth valuing and saying, and why they believe it has value, and how they can express that directly visually (as with representational art) or through the use of symbolic color or form. Sensing and Intuition work nicely hand in hand for every artist who is serious about creating something of value that will touch people’s minds and hearts. It also seems obvious that the works of art most beloved by people all over the world (the kind people pay good money to see exhibits of in museums) tend to be the sort that combines keen sensory awareness and quality technique with an equally-as-keen introspection and awareness of something worth valuing – something that gives the viewer a visual message worth paying attention to.


Since joining this list in September, I’ve tried my best to NOT get caught up in arguments that smack of type bias, because I hate feeling like I have to defend my preferences against insults on a daily basis. But this particular bias against Sensors and art strikes deeply at the heart of who I am. I can’t imagine NOT being obsessed with creating visual imagery that talks to viewers about what I value. It’s an essential part of who I am, and it always has been. I’m truly baffled that so manny people have been brainwashed (?) into believing that “N” equals creativity, when every day I see people who obviously prefer Sensing thinking up innovative, fresh ideas that work to improve real life situations, as well as those who love to make memorable visual statements about what they believe is worth valuing. It really makes me want to ask those who perpetrate the bias, ”What planet do you live on? Because you and I don’t seem to be living in the same world.”

At any rate, because of this, I’d like propose a new way of looking about art and creativity: Suppose for a second that it has nothing to do with either S or N specifically, and that creativity can simply be defined as the drive and ability to initiate positive change. This drive can be the result of feeling dissatisfied or restless with the status-quo. Or, it can be the result of noticing patterns and connecting ideas together to form a meta-perspective that will solve a problem either here-and-now or in the future. No matter how you define it, it seems to be about noticing a need for change and going about finding ways of implementing that change. This is something that is not related to any one set of type preferences.

It does seem obvious that creative people – the ones who are most comfortable acting on their drive to initiate positive change—tend to be people who are comfortable living outside their comfort ranges. I would guess that they tend to be people who not only have an interest in developing their lesser-preferred cognitive functions, but that they welcome opportunities to learn, period. So it’s no wonder that when we see work by an artist whose technical virtuosity is astounding AND the message behind his or her art very thought-provoking or moving, it’s not going to be easy to correctly type that artist, unless you’re just into what I call “vanity typing “ – which is, convincing yourself that everyone whose life or whose work you admire has preferences just like your own.

I really hope someday to see an end to the constant belittling of the capabilities of those of us who prefer Sensing. It would thrill me to see more people on this list truly understanding that everyone uses both sensing and intuition, and that everyone is capable of pursuing every activity that interests them and that all human beings are capable of, including acting on the basic human drive to initiate positive change, and to create visual works of art.

Thanks for listening. I welcome thoughtful comments. (Insults, not so much...) ;)


Sarah
ISFP

Sarah,

I totally agree with you. My husband is ISFP, and I think one could easily argue that he has a very keen sense regarding these things. Much more so than I have. He's the one who gets the furniture, decorations, etc. He's the one into art history and historical analysis. Hell, I always ask him if I look decent before I go out of the house in the morning - damned if I know. And in many ways, he is much more bright, creative and artistic than me.

We are both capable, intelligent and creative but in very different ways, which is good because then we can complement each other.

He has this uncanny ability to make spontaneous comebacks, act on the spur of the moment and perceive the beauty in everyday life with a really wonderful optimism. He thinks practically (most of the time). He's creative in a very 'real' sense. He can take advantage of situations and act accordingly in precisely the right way. He is brilliant in one particular area.

I, on the other hand, have more 'fanciful' creativity. My intelligence jumps from one topic to the next as my enthusiasm leaps from one thing to another; it is not constant. So I am a jack of all trades, insofar as I know a little bit about almost every subject. Often, I'm not grounded in this world, which means I see a variety of possibilities - I'm multitalented and can do multiple things at once. I often don't even notice the real world. However, I can plan things in advance in a brilliant way; many times people tell me I'm a natural organizer (thanks to a relatively good Te).

Eh, so what does that mean? Well, you have a choice. You can kill each other and demean each other by saying the other one is a stupid ass for not having the same strengths you have, or you can complement each other.

What does that mean concretely?

a) He wakes me up to the beauty in the world around me; I wake him up to fanciful imagination.
b) He organizes getting things like furniture, paintings, etc. and advises me on new styles; I organize things like paying the bills, getting the money, organizing how things are set up.
c) He can react spontaneously to take advantage of the moment; I can open him up to new ideas or ways of thinking.
d) He helps me to come back down to earth and be more rational; I help him to become more open and emotionally expressive.

Among other things.

So in essence, I agree. S's aren't less valuable - in fact, they are just as valuable and in case of balancing out our weaknesses, more valuable.

You hang in there and don't let these farts get you down. :D
 

sarah

soft and silky
Joined
Sep 3, 2008
Messages
548
MBTI Type
isfp
I think the reason you've seen too much of this attitude, is the "SP = art" stereotype. You see, there probably are many Ns here who feel like they are capable of making art too, and they have been defending their skills against the Keirseyan stereotype. He actually says that NFs try art because they see it romantic, but soon get tired of it since their tactical intelligence is so bad. To me this sounds like such a harsh way to put it that I might myself try to fight the stereotype... I do make art. I don't know if it's fine or anything, but I do make it. No keirsey come here and tell me otherwise. (actually I do get bored a lot, but then I get back to it in few months or so....)


Nolla, what you've written is a good example of why I believe Keirsey's descriptions tend to be limiting rather than freeing. I totally agree with you that all types can and do produce art, and that no type description is helpful if it presumes you have no interest in activities you actually enjoy. Keep at it! (more artsits = a better world!) ;)

By the way, by "fine" art, I simply mean art created for its' own sake -- art produced to visually convey a message that matters to the artist in some way. In contrast to that, graphic design and purely utilitarian craftsmanship are usually called "applied arts", at least in the US.


Sarah
ISFP
 

sarah

soft and silky
Joined
Sep 3, 2008
Messages
548
MBTI Type
isfp
Sarah,

I totally agree with you. My husband is ISFP, and I think one could easily argue that he has a very keen sense regarding these things. Much more so than I have. He's the one who gets the furniture, decorations, etc. He's the one into art history and historical analysis. Hell, I always ask him if I look decent before I go out of the house in the morning - damned if I know. And in many ways, he is much more bright, creative and artistic than me.

We are both capable, intelligent and creative but in very different ways, which is good because then we can complement each other.

He has this uncanny ability to make spontaneous comebacks, act on the spur of the moment and perceive the beauty in everyday life with a really wonderful optimism. He thinks practically (most of the time). He's creative in a very 'real' sense. He can take advantage of situations and act accordingly in precisely the right way. He is brilliant in one particular area.

I, on the other hand, have more 'fanciful' creativity. My intelligence jumps from one topic to the next as my enthusiasm leaps from one thing to another; it is not constant. So I am a jack of all trades, insofar as I know a little bit about almost every subject. Often, I'm not grounded in this world, which means I see a variety of possibilities - I'm multitalented and can do multiple things at once. I often don't even notice the real world. However, I can plan things in advance in a brilliant way; many times people tell me I'm a natural organizer (thanks to a relatively good Te).

Eh, so what does that mean? Well, you have a choice. You can kill each other and demean each other by saying the other one is a stupid ass for not having the same strengths you have, or you can complement each other.

What does that mean concretely?

a) He wakes me up to the beauty in the world around me; I wake him up to fanciful imagination.
b) He organizes getting things like furniture, paintings, etc. and advises me on new styles; I organize things like paying the bills, getting the money, organizing how things are set up.
c) He can react spontaneously to take advantage of the moment; I can open him up to new ideas or ways of thinking.
d) He helps me to come back down to earth and be more rational; I help him to become more open and emotionally expressive.

Among other things.

So in essence, I agree. S's aren't less valuable - in fact, they are just as valuable and in case of balancing out our weaknesses, more valuable.

You hang in there and don't let these farts get you down. :D


:hug: Thank you, that was beautiful! (by the way, my NF hubby takes care of our finances too -- he knows me too well to trust me with them...) ;)

Sarah
ISFP
 

Virtual ghost

Complex paradigm
Joined
Jun 6, 2008
Messages
19,769
I think that many types of art actually need S in significant amount but there is no reason that N can't be artist.
 

LadyJaye

Scream down the boulevard
Joined
Nov 6, 2007
Messages
2,062
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
7w6
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
Any type can be an artist. Although I think type affects how an artist approaches their art and what the final product looks like.

Exactly. S and N have no bearing on one's ability to be artistic. Pink is an N, and draws some of the best pictures I've ever seen, in my unbiased opinion. :D

hernameisrio on deviantART
 

mlittrell

New member
Joined
Sep 3, 2008
Messages
1,387
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
9w1
Is this your defense mechanism against possible future comments saying you are favoring your own type in any given situation?

There's no way around the fact there are more Ns than Ss around here.
i just say it because its fun haha
and slightly true from time to time.
i don't favor any type
is it a defense mechanism of sorts...sure i guess if thats how you wanna take it :)
 

wedekit

New member
Joined
Nov 10, 2007
Messages
694
MBTI Type
INFJ
I would NEVER argue that fine art is geared towards N types. I think if any sort of division were to be made, it would be in the types of art S's and N's tend to engage in.

For example, representational art seems geared more towards sensors in that it is characterized by precise detail in shape, chiaroscuro, and proportion. I would NEVER imagine being able to do anything like that, though I'm sure there are N's that can and do. In fact, I admire people who can more than I can put into words.

I think that there are apparent N "movements" in art; particularly the movements that are a sort of protest against the academic art style that used to be considered "superior". Impressionism comes to mind.

Picasso would be an interesting person to type, in my opinion. He was amazing at both cubism (which seems to have a more "N" flavor) and representational art (his First Communion, for example).

I'm not an artist, an art/art history major, or anything like that. I am actually taking my first Art class ("Introduction to the Visual Arts") ever this semester in college, and I have been soaking it all up. It is much more interesting than I ever imagined. This is all just my interpretation of what I've learned.
 

sarah

soft and silky
Joined
Sep 3, 2008
Messages
548
MBTI Type
isfp
I would NEVER argue that fine art is geared towards N types. I think if any sort of division were to be made, it would be in the types of art S's and N's tend to engage in.

For example, representational art seems geared more towards sensors in that it is characterized by precise detail in shape, chiaroscuro, and proportion. I would NEVER imagine being able to do anything like that, though I'm sure there are N's that can and do. In fact, I admire people who can more than I can put into words.

I think that there are apparent N "movements" in art; particularly the movements that are a sort of protest against the academic art style that used to be considered "superior". Impressionism comes to mind.

Picasso would be an interesting person to type, in my opinion. He was amazing at both cubism (which seems to have a more "N" flavor) and representational art (his First Communion, for example).

I'm not an artist, an art/art history major, or anything like that. I am actually taking my first Art class ("Introduction to the Visual Arts") ever this semester in college, and I have been soaking it all up. It is much more interesting than I ever imagined. This is all just my interpretation of what I've learned.

Hm...... I don't know if this was your point, but I can't say I agree with the idea that N = change and fresh ideas and S = establishment and purely representational art. Anyone who's fed up with the status quo can produce something original. for what it's worth, Artisans (SPs) tend to get bored very easily with the establishment and the status quo. And they like to make bold statements.

Picasso seems to me to have been a stereotypical SP. And the master of Impressionism himself (Claude Monet) said once that the only two things he cared about in this world was his massive garden and painting the effects of light on surfaces. Oh yeah, and he liked to decorate his house. Hardly a man full of abstract ideas.


Sarah
ISFP
 

wedekit

New member
Joined
Nov 10, 2007
Messages
694
MBTI Type
INFJ
Hm...... I don't know if this was your point, but I can't say I agree with the idea that N = change and fresh ideas and S = establishment and purely representational art. Anyone who's fed up with the status quo can produce something original. for what it's worth, Artisans (SPs) tend to get bored very easily with the establishment and the status quo. And they like to make bold statements.

Picasso seems to me to have been a stereotypical SP. And the master of Impressionism himself (Claude Monet) said once that the only two things he cared about in this world was his massive garden and painting the effects of light on surfaces. Oh yeah, and he liked to decorate his house. Hardly a man full of abstract ideas.


Sarah
ISFP

Well, I wouldn't say "purely" for any type, because there are always exceptions. I think it would be unwise of me to ever underestimate the creativity of any individual person based on their type. My post was mainly based on what we could hypothetically say about art and type.

Like I said in my OP, representational art SEEMS more geared towards sensors by definition, though I wouldn't limit it to sensors only. Attention to details is fundamental to representational art, which is not natural to those with a strong N preference. Byzantine art was considered representational back in the day, and it for sure is not as "representational" as art can get in today's world.

I think it is also interesting to view art as a way to enhance yourself as a person. Maybe Picasso was a strong sensor that developed his own intuitive function by creating his own style of art?

If you believe that type has any kind of validity, I don't see how you can stop yourself from exploring how type could influence a person's personal art preferences. I'm sure the discussion could be more engaging if we were to talk about the functions (Se, Si, Ne, and Ni) in terms of art, but I would have to ponder that some more.

I think what was possibly throwing you off in my previous post is that I speak in "maybes" and hypothetical statements. I'm not really trying to argue one way or another; I argue for the possibility.

Edit: Since you are probably more knowledgeable than me, I would be interested in hearing your interpretation of the type of other artists if you ever feel up for it!
 

sarah

soft and silky
Joined
Sep 3, 2008
Messages
548
MBTI Type
isfp
Well, I wouldn't say "purely" for any type, because there are always exceptions. I think it would be unwise of me to ever underestimate the creativity of any individual person based on their type. My post was mainly based on what we could hypothetically say about art and type.

Like I said in my OP, representational art SEEMS more geared towards sensors by definition, though I wouldn't limit it to sensors only. Attention to details is fundamental to representational art, which is not natural to those with a strong N preference. Byzantine art was considered representational back in the day, and it for sure is not as "representational" as art can get in today's world.

I think it is also interesting to view art as a way to enhance yourself as a person. Maybe Picasso was a strong sensor that developed his own intuitive function by creating his own style of art?


Well, here's the way I see function development: Can you get yourself dressed in the morning? Can you cook? Drive a car? Use hand tools or operate simple appliances? Paint a wall? Go cross-country skiing? Balance on one foot? Go grocery shopping? Ride a bike? Walk down the street without running into things? All those activities and much more require you use of your sensing function. You simply can't do them if you don't use your sensing function. I know of nobody who prefers intuition who can not function in daily life, so they all must be using sensing to some degree. Some people who prefer intuition even train themselves to get good at skills that require heavy use of sensing. Obviously, people can access both, which means that people who prefer sensing can and do use their intuition function just as easily as the intuitives use sensing. :)

(By the way, I know you weren't trying to say that if you prefer intuition, you have access to both your sensing and intuition functions, but if you prefer sensing you don't have access at all to any form of intuition. It's too bad that a lot of type enthusiasts have chosen to believe that, and it's THAT attitude that prompted me to write my original post, but I wasn't lumping you into that category.)

The way I've experienced the development of my lesser preferred functions is that they simply develop in me regardless of whether I notice anything happening at the time or not, but that at some point, if I want to use them effectively instead of clumsily, I have to choose to trust them enough to see value in developing them further and allowing them to guide my behavior. It's choosing to trust your lesser-preferred functions that's hard, but at some point, we all need to take risks.

I would imagine that pretty much every artist uses his or her intuition, including all the artists who prefer Sensing. I've experienced intuition in the form of pictures that all of a sudden pop in my mind fully-formed of what I want things to look like or be like in the future and how I want to say things visually (often symbolically), and yet I know that I rely on sensing to inform me for most of what I do normally, and I trust in my own flexibility and awareness of what's happening in the here-and-now to be able to change that vision if I see a need to, as I work with the media. I haven't learned to to trust my intuition like I trust my sensing, but I'm working on trying to understand how they can be used in tandem for even better results. This is what I'm currently reading right now:

Cognitive Processes and Tandem Dynamics

I love the idea of Se and Ni working in tandem, and I'm trying to see ways I can consciously use both together in my own art Whoohooo!

If you believe that type has any kind of validity, I don't see how you can stop yourself from exploring how type could influence a person's personal art preferences. I'm sure the discussion could be more engaging if we were to talk about the functions (Se, Si, Ne, and Ni) in terms of art, but I would have to ponder that some more.

Yeah, I think that would be a great topic for discussion. Unfortunately at this point I'm not at all certain I know which function I'm actually looking at with regards to other people's behavior. I'm more confident of my own behavior because I can sense when I'm tuning out of what is to ponder what could be, if you know what I mean.

I think what was possibly throwing you off in my previous post is that I speak in "maybes" and hypothetical statements. I'm not really trying to argue one way or another; I argue for the possibility.

I totally understand. :)

Sarah
ISFP
 

cafe

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
9,827
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
9w1
I'm not particularly good at the fine arts, nor am I very discerning about their appreciation in a technical sense, so I don't really think of Ns as being fine artists moreso than Ss. I guess if anything, I would think of Se/Ne and Fi as being artistic functions.
 
Top