i'm sorry, i think i have to apologize , because i may have confused you with another INFP who has the picture of a black woman as profile...what's her name? i thought it was you and that you'd changed your profile picture to tilda swindon. that means i don't know anymore how to tell the two of you apart, and i have no idea if the feelings i'd collected from reading your posts over time were actually directed to her or you....so please forgive me and pretend like i never made comments about your type.
but i still dont get an INFP vibe from tilda swindon (and i do from fiona apple, btw). it's not something i can explain!? she seems quite cold and detached but at the same time that her emotions are focused outwards.
You mean [MENTION=5871]Southern Kross[/MENTION] ? Well I feel a similarity to her, but I would say I am markedly more temperamental. Lately I've taken to writing less formally as well, for various reasons, but I think my more edited style was similar to hers at times.
I love Fiona and can definitely see Fi-dom in her, but I literally relate to everything she says about music and her social feelings. I literally do the same things and am motivated the same way with music. It is the only way I make connections with people and I set up improvisations that have complete social ease. The main difference for myself is that I had more plans about what I wanted to be in the future.
Is there any chance she is an ISFP? She talks so much about being in the moment with sound and feeling, that she feels like she must have some strong Se in her much moreso than Ne and Si. I'm around a lot of Si-dom musicians and they feel different. They tend to be perfectionists in sound and have some trouble with improvisation because it can turn out to be a mess sometimes and it's harder to recreate an internal standard unless you have done it for years.
Her demeanor also has that relaxed, gentle quality, but she is energized by what she loves. I don't see any edgyness like in the Tilda video clips, but instead with Fiona it is enthusiasm. I agree with the e4 sx/sp descriptions.
Ne is in the moment (I go into that more below), just not so much in a physical sense. Ne types are not often "planners" because they don't have singular visions. They suss out potential & possibilities as they go along, so their life can go on exploratory tangents like their speech does. Se types do this in a way also, mentally ready for some unexpected thing that could happen. It's a sign of being a P type, IMO, when someone says they stumbled into what they are doing, not when they have some vision & set goals they steadily worked towards.
Her heavy use of metaphor in speech & sort of going off on tangents & then bringing all back around to tie it all together at the end also reminds me more of an NFP than an SFP also. Her description of the family music thing just sounds like an F-dom - which is that they are happiest when feeling a genuine connection with others, and in these moments Fi-dom are described as coming to life, being animated, and having a warmth not suspected of them in other situations. People ascribe way too much Si to INFPs - what does a Si-dom style have to do with an INFP? It just emphasizes to me they are likely mistyping ISFJs as INFP.
I find Fiona edgy in many interviews, and by that I mean I can see her getting pissy a lot easier than many INFP examples used in the videos in the OP. There's more of an intense emotional energy than a pleasantly gentle one, and the same with Tilda. Again, I think this is a 4 thing. I've seen 9s get mad (they certainly can have force), but they're not as overtly temperamental, which is how Fiona reads to me.
There are interviews with Tilda which show her as more animated. If Tilda is not INFP, then I think she might be INTP but I have a hard time seeing her as NOT being a Fi type. Descriptions of her life, behaviors & attitudes sounds much more Pe, and I think it's her frequent type-casting as a Thinking type with a cold/masculine demeanor, her androgynous appearance, and voice depth that makes her seem less stereotypical INFP (she's no "spritely" Audrey Hepburn, yet the content of their speech is much more similar than you might imagine if you put their physical images aside).
[MENTION=6561]OrangeAppled[/MENTION], thanks so much! The only thing I did not identify with 100 percent in those two Fiona Apple videos is the content of the essays she used to write -- she said she would write what she believed Love is, etc., like, statement papers, or personal articles of faith. I wrote constantly in high school but it was more my private opinions about things that had happened to me, people around me, observations about interactions, and then, of course, poetry. The music stuff I understand absolutely what she's talking about, and several times got shocks of recognition and chills, briefly, from what she said. I talk just like that when I'm very excited about the content of what I'm saying.
I think one of the main things I disagree with in the Fi/Fe wars is the idea that a formulaic way of speaking or interacting is a priori fake, like, not seeing the value of Fe ways of social interacting in that they're a shorthand that enables you to express something without being too personal, like, they're a symbol, which works really well as a bridge so you can communicate with people who are not in your inner circle and don't really want to know/would not be comfortable if you spilled your guts with the specifics and the details of how you felt as an individual, your personal experience, etc., if that makes sense. Social rituals are a way to keep a light connection but still maintain a comfortable distance from people who are not in your inner circle. That concept in general seems antithetical to Fi and makes INFPs kick and scream about phonies. But I was talking with my friend about this -- while I appreciate Fe ways to some extent, I don't actually employ them. I don't do anything social, I don't belong to any groups, don't go to church, don't belong to clubs, don't talk to anyone to whom I can't speak in a personal way or share personally about a subject, that's how much I hate impersonal interaction -- I just don't do it -- I would rather not interact at all. I dunno, that seems as much INFJ as INFP, come to think of it, maybe I'm rambling.
ETA: The other main difference has to do with time -- being in the moment, or carrying history while being in the moment and projecting into the future. INFPs here tend (as well as I have understood it, anyway) to see every interaction as a new thing, while I see every interaction as a development of an already established thing, further proof of a certain mechanism, rather than a brand new revelation. So I have developed this idea about connectedness being absent from INFP, that events and interactions appear as random iterations that have to be figured out new every time, rather than their being exhibitions of a pattern already understood.
Anyway, thanks for that example.
The bolded referring to what Fiona does reminds me more of myself. I tend to write about general concepts & how I feel, not specific things that happened to me, although experiences can inspire some mulling over of what I generally feel. The experience itself is less interesting to me, especially its details.
Fi is about forming feeling/value-concepts which exist outside the current contexts, which is why they take on a universal aspect at times (where as Fe is more about current context, like all E attitudes - for example, it often uses external gauges such as cultural norms). Fi is sort of working to refine a grasps of basic ideas of value - ie. "what is love?" or "what does good mean?", as opposed to assigning valuations to external things (application of judgment & action on it is more of a Je attitude). The inner world is the gauge for this - the combination of memory, fantasy, emotion, thoughts, and other aspects of the mind. More than using a value system to judge, Fi types CREATE value concepts & seek to harmonize them in a way that makes sense (in terms of being a living being, not impersonal logical order), which makes them something like a system. The individual mainly applies this to themselves - how they live life, their own choices, and perhaps on occasion in offering insight to others (helping them figure out their own needs & how to keep integrity). You mostly see them reveal a smidgen of these value-concepts when there's a violation of a fundamental aspect of them, and this can be a universal or more personally felt value.
Pe sort of connects Fi to the outside world; you begin see how ideals can manifest in a real way & you pursue those possibilities or opportunities, as opposed to judging things directly & making clear decisive plans. In this sense, Ne is "real time" exploration. But it also brings in different contexts & it improvises based on that wider context than just what is physically or literally there. This is certainly pattern forming, but it's non-linear (Pi types tend to speak of dot connecting in orderly, methodical fashion), and the pattern kind of emerges as bursts in the moment as inspired by some piece of the pattern, not some slow forming hunch.
INFPs tend to think "This could lead to X, which is something close to an ideal" whereas an ISFP may think "This current thing is the closest to an ideal at hand". ISFPs struggle more with seeing how to improve things & INFPs with contentment in the moment, but this is limited Pe & perhaps too much Pi. ISFPs choose complacency in the moment because of Ni paranoia about how the future will be (poor Ni), and INFPs are feeling the past & present to be a cage (poor Si) that doesn't allow for exploring potential. But when they up their Pe, then I think both are freer mentally to improvise in the moment.
But what you speak of sounds like a Pi attitude, yes. What you write sounds a lot like that document you linked, where it describes Pi-doms. It's not unusual for people to struggle with "applying" their auxiliary even if they like it, because it's opposite their preferred attitude (ie. extroverting for an introvert). This is why INPs get stuck in theorizing more than acting on possibilities & potential they see.