|
|
Post by Roshan on Jun 12, 2021 8:26:07 GMT -5
|
|
anthony
Terra9Incognita
Posts: 1,537
Enneagram Core Fix: 9w1
|
Post by anthony on Jun 12, 2021 16:14:23 GMT -5
Tony BURROWS
|
|
jastyne
Hummingbird
Posts: 106 
Enneagram Core Fix: 9w1
|
Post by jastyne on Jun 13, 2021 11:39:55 GMT -5
Been thinking of this all week-- haven't looked into much additional materials besides everything listed here, but I'm still thinking sp/so (thinking it might be SP/SO or SP/so; less likely sp/SO). Good on the 9 fix and 3 fix with previously stated/agreed upon subwings, and also have been leaning into 7w6 as the last fix. Open to hearing other arguments from anyone here, of course, but unless I see something new, I think this is where I'm parking for now Roshan , I actually think that sometimes a strong SP/so moving into SX/SP can come off... stronger? More intense, fiery, energetically-- that sp/so 'forward', secure bluntness moving into that social-last 'watch me strut and burn intensely and unapologetically' vs the ' softer' so/sx... I know so/sx isn't usually thought of as being 'soft', but I'm seeing the softness more and more-- synflow, yes, but without that self-protective boundary/cover [not without, that is misspeaking, but... well, depending on range and other factors, with significantly _less_]. So perhaps what I mean by 'soft' would be better articulated as less-defended and more open. And theoretically, someone in the so/sx space would be more 'tuned in' to others around them, yes? Making them arguably less likely to have that sort of... vacant, disconnected, detached thing Sir Burrows seems to have going on. Do you think that 'zany' you're seeing could be originating in a move into sx/sp? |
|
|
|
Post by Roshan on Jun 13, 2021 13:47:24 GMT -5
Been thinking of this all week-- haven't looked into much additional materials besides everything listed here, but I'm still thinking sp/so (thinking it might be SP/SO or SP/so; less likely sp/SO). Good on the 9 fix and 3 fix with previously stated/agreed upon subwings, and also have been leaning into 7w6 as the last fix. We've been using these notations up to now: sp/so (midstream), SP/so (single variant), and sp/SO (double variant). By SP/SO I guess you mean midstream jastyne ? Open to hearing other arguments from anyone here, of course, but unless I see something new, I think this is where I'm parking for now √Roshan , I actually think that sometimes a strong SP/so moving into SX/SP can come off... stronger? More intense, fiery, energetically-- that sp/so 'forward', secure bluntness moving into that social-last 'watch me strut and burn intensely and unapologetically' vs the ' softer' so/sx... I know so/sx isn't usually thought of as being 'soft', Who says not? so/sx is overall pretty soft. What I have an issue with here is the usual--speaking loosely, sx/so struts unapologetically, not sx/sp. Madonna, Jagger, Elvis, Ann Margret, Dolly Parton sx/so. sx/sp is closer to the vest- Hendrix, Angelina Jolie, Lauren Bacall, Dietrich, Clark Gable. Both burn. sx/so rather radiates; sx/sp rather smolders. Solar v. lunar. sx/sp can't be a 'hungry ghost' and strut unapologetically as archetypal base metabolism.
Also a lot of social lasts are just very withdrawn.but I'm seeing the softness more and more-- synflow, yes, but without that self-protective boundary/cover [not without, that is misspeaking, but... well, depending on range and other factors, with significantly _less_]. So perhaps what I mean by 'soft' would be better articulated as less-defended and more open. And theoretically, someone in the so/sx space would be more 'tuned in' to others around them, yes?
Yes, so/sx is tuned in to others. Gray's Big Butterfly for sx/so and Little Butterfly for so/sx (at least midstream) works pretty well. so/sx 'cross-pollinates'. A stream of small fusions with the people in the environment and the environment itself.Making them arguably less likely to have that sort of... vacant, disconnected, detached thing Sir Burrows seems to have going on. I don't think Sir Crocus is so/sx, I don't even think he's double variant sp/SO. I think he's quite low (but not EXTREMELY low) social. Do you think that 'zany' you're seeing could be originating in a move into sx/sp? It could be a component, yes. But in that case, I would want to call it something other than 'zany'. 
|
|
|
|
Post by Roshan on Jun 14, 2021 7:23:43 GMT -5
Roshan , I actually think that sometimes a strong SP/so moving into SX/SP can come off... stronger? More intense, fiery, energetically-- that sp/so 'forward', secure bluntness moving into that social-last 'watch me strut and burn intensely and unapologetically' vs the ' softer' so/sx... I know so/sx isn't usually thought of as being 'soft', Who says not? so/sx is overall pretty soft. What I have an issue with here is the usual--speaking loosely, sx/so struts unapologetically, not sx/sp. Madonna, Jagger, Elvis, Ann Margret, Dolly Parton sx/so. sx/sp is closer to the vest- Hendrix, Angelina Jolie, Lauren Bacall, Dietrich, Clark Gable. Both burn. sx/so rather radiates; sx/sp rather smolders. Solar v. lunar. sx/sp can't be a 'hungry ghost' and strut unapologetically as archetypal base metabolism.
tbc this harkens back to ongoing discussions jastyne and I have had about the stackings offsite. And if I look at what google tells me for 'strut': "'1. walk with a stiff, erect, and apparently arrogant or conceited gait.'peacocks strut through the grounds'", you could say that most of the people I reeled off as sx/sp do strut (and fair enough! ). The issue is that Jastyne seemed to feel overall this was more sx/sp than sx/so. And since we're obviously going to get into nuances of the stacking ranges, I want us to attempt clarifying now. So, I guess if you kind of have in mind something like 'google's' 'stiffness' of strutting, okay for sx/sp > sx/so. Though it isn't really stiffness, but the smoldering in contrast to radiating; sx/sp is much more self-contained than sx/so. What sx/sp has is a vortex energy that draws people in, it's centripetal > centrifugal (sx/so). Anyway, 'strutting confidently', certainly could be sx/sp. It's just that it can't be sx/sp more than sx/so, because sx/so really tends to be unabashedly more of a peacock. And vulgarly, too. sx/sp is much more 'classy'. |
|
|
|
Post by Roshan on Jun 14, 2021 7:36:14 GMT -5
Also as to 'stiffness', when we come to the SX/so's, the firesides (low social, lower sp) can be quite stiff as they tend to come off similar to sp/sx, so social last (e.g. Jim Morrison). There may be an analogue. SX/sp may come off sp last. The astute observer may have noticed I did not mention Marilyn Monroe above, and she is generally considered the classic sx/so 6 (with heavy 2w3 vibe). This is because both jastyne and typewatch say she's sx/sp, with Typewatch saying sx/sp 'seducer' range--heavy sx, low sp, lower social--is mistyped as sx/so. Their 'seducer' being our SX/sp, 'single variant. I don't really think Marilyn was a range of sx/sp rather than sx/so but that's why I didn't bring her up before, and I also don't disagree enough to think it's not worth a discussion. |
|
|
|
Post by Roshan on Jun 14, 2021 7:48:34 GMT -5
In any case, to get back to Burrows, for those who don't know: STAY TUNED. I AM WORKING ON SOME KIND OF EXPLANATION OF HOW STACKING RANGE THEORY APPLIES TO HIM HERE SO PEOPLE WHO DON'T KNOW ABOUT IT CAN FOLLOW ALONG.
(See immediately below vvv)
ahmed , this might make it easier if you want to follow these more detailed e-threads. |
|
|
|
Post by Roshan on Jun 14, 2021 8:06:21 GMT -5
Tony Burrows and Stacking Ranges
Part 1
The three instincts are:
- self-preservation (sp) boundary
- social (so) contact
- sexual (sx) fusion
They combine into six stackings
- sp/so
- so/sx
- sx/sp
- sp/sx
- sx/so
- so/sp
A group called typewatch broke the stackings down into three ranges and we use their tripartite system for purposes of heuristics but we don't agree, at least not fully, with a lot of their names (and descriptors). So atm we just break all the stackings down into: - midstream (typewatch term)
- single variant
- double variant
And we have a simple notation*, so using the so/sx stacking as an example--since that's what we thought Tony Burrows was initially based on his mature OP interview--there are: - midstream so/sx--the base so/sx range. High social, medium sx, low sp
- single variant SO/sx--high social, low sx, lower sp
- double variant so/SX--high social, competing high sx, relatively low sp
We thought Tony was a high sx social/sexual, so so/SX. This is a very common stacking for an entertainer btw. But upon inspection of younger materials, a perception emerged that Tony Burrows is not any sort of so/sx but is actually sp/so (and like many people, he's just changed a lot with age). It was natural to assume, coming out of the so/sx typing, that Tony would be 'double variant' sp/SO, so social competing with self-preservation instinct, high social 'sp first'. But then the perception started complaining that the sp was more dominant after all. ____________ * there is a flaw in this notation because we have been using, say, so/sx to refer both to the stacking in general AND to the midstream variant. I believe jastyne is using SO/SX for the midstream variant. (?) Some way to differentiate does need to be agreed upon.
|
|
|
|
Post by Roshan on Jun 14, 2021 8:24:14 GMT -5
Tony RangesPart 2
The current discussion is whether, as some range of self-preservation/ social*, Tony is actually 'midstream' sp/so, or might he actually be a single variant SP/so.
I'm proposing Tony is midstream, but just on the heavier sp side of it. jastyne is proposing Tony is actually a 'single-variant' SP/so, meaning high sp with low social and lower sx.
The discussion may sound unbelievably, even obtusely nitpicky and quite possibly fantastical, but just understand that this is the discussion and assume hypothetically that it may be worth having. Also remember I said we divide the stackings into three ranges for heuristic purposes.
Obviously there can't really just be three ranges unless you think God has a cookie cutter and stamps us with it at birth. There should be far more than three ranges for eight billion people (plus all the dead and to be born). What we are really conceptualizing (unlike typewatch last we heard) is a spectrum.
In my spectrum, Tony still falls in the midstream. In jastyne 's, he falls in the single variant.
Pretty simple, right? Assuming he's some kind of "sp/so" range, he has pretty heavy sp, but how heavy?
Well, yes, and no.
There's a complication coming, so tbcd.
____
*assuming that's what he is; there may be holdouts for some range of so/sx.
|
|
jastyne
Hummingbird
Posts: 106
Enneagram Core Fix: 9w1
|
Post by jastyne on Jun 15, 2021 2:26:54 GMT -5
Also as to 'stiffness', when we come to the SX/so's, the firesides (low social, lower sp) can be quite stiff as they tend to come off similar to sp/sx, so social last (e.g. Jim Morrison). There may be an analogue. SX/sp may come off sp last. The astute observer may have noticed I did not mention Marilyn Monroe above, and she is generally considered the classic sx/so 6 (with heavy 2w3 vibe). This is because both jastyne and typewatch say she's sx/sp, with Typewatch saying sx/sp 'seducer' range--heavy sx, low sp, lower social--is mistyped as sx/so. Their 'seducer' being our SX/sp, 'single variant. I don't really think Marilyn was a range of sx/sp rather than sx/so but that's why I didn't bring her up before, and I also don't disagree enough to think it's not worth a discussion. To clarify one point quickly: I don't actually type MM as sx/sp. It's definitely possible I said that at some point, but I don't maintain that opinion nor do I recall doing so-- for now, I have no type for her and don't recall trying... ... But I do type Madonna as sx/sp, and feel strongly about it |
|
jastyne
Hummingbird
Posts: 106
Enneagram Core Fix: 9w1
|
Post by jastyne on Jun 15, 2021 2:28:39 GMT -5
Ah, and also for the record: SP/so was a 'current best guess', but I'm in no way feeling inflexible about it, and think midrange is perfectly plausible-- upon hearing your case, I could very likely join you  |
|
|
|
Post by Roshan on Jun 15, 2021 6:13:09 GMT -5
To clarify one point quickly: I don't actually type MM as sx/sp. It's definitely possible I said that at some point, but I don't maintain that opinion nor do I recall doing so-- for now, I have no type for her and don't recall trying... ... But I do type Madonna as sx/sp, and feel strongly about it Ah, I guess I conflated them because they were so often given as the first examples of female sx/so (and because Madonna at times 'emulated' Marilyn. Let me know when you're up for it and I'll start a thread about this jastyne. |
|
|
|
Post by Roshan on Jun 15, 2021 6:15:27 GMT -5
Ah, and also for the record: SP/so was a 'current best guess', but I'm in no way feeling inflexible about it, and think midrange is perfectly plausible-- upon hearing your case, I could very likely join you True, you weren't really proposing, you were suggesting. |
|
