|
Post by Roshan on Dec 21, 2020 1:00:15 GMT -5
Yes, I know, I have been talking about sp Two as I have been floundering about on the Twos stacking thread, but now I've been asked about it and kind of we need to talk about sp Two very specifically. So for that the first thing we need to do is look at what first got me to think straight about this particular kind of person, and that was discovering Naranjo's 2004 talk on the subtypes. Sylvia and I had almost completed this thread on Naranjo's 2004 talk on the subtypes but the YouTube account the recording was on was removed for copyright infringement and the First Emanation of this forum likewise folded into itself and returned to the Void. And I know our summary is incomplete because Naranjo also talked about "the Fourish Two", about the Dickens character Little Dorrit standing waiting with her father's slippers and her "Ineffective Help", and about sp 2 playing with people like dolls and wanting to be a doll. But for now it's a start. I'm also linking this long post from perc on Beatrice Chestnut's sp Two. Chestnut was extremely influenced by Naranjo's 2004 talk on the subtypes.
|
|
|
Post by Roshan on Dec 21, 2020 1:14:14 GMT -5
Now what does all this mean? Obviously there are multiple factors at play in a complete type and every sp 2 who's 'using' childlikeness in some way as a form of seduction isn't going to be infantile (and every seductively infantile person isn't going to be an sp 2). But what happens is over time you look at a lot of people, you think a lot about the mechanisms, and something clicks. What recently clicked for me is that two very famous people now seem to me like really obvious sp Twos. Now winter asked me to refer her to materials so she could distinguish between sp Two (the Fourish Two) and the "ethereal 9w1s" and certain Fours. And that is "the 64 dollar question". And that's why I set up this thread. This is where the question came up and I'm going to try to explain some things, including some typing history, towhy this 'exemplar' seems to be an sp 2 and how to distinguish. There's a bit of awkwardness around this so please bear with me. For some people it's probably gonna get even weirder when I tackle the second exemplar.
|
|
|
Post by Roshan on Dec 21, 2020 1:28:18 GMT -5
Winter asks: "Is there anything I can read that would clarify the distinction I’m seeing of ethereal 9s vs ethereal 2s?" and the first awkwardness here is that when I first encountered Winter in a Facebook group it was I who was insisting she wasn't a 4 but a 9w1, and iirc I was comparing her to Audrey Hepburn (among others such as Bjork). And I'm quite sure it was I who used the word "ethereal" because I had coined the terms for what I then called high sx 9w1 and 9w8, The Grounded Ethereal, and the The Ethereal Ground. And well it sounded good and I do think there's a lot of truth in it (think Hendrix, Kiss The Sky, for the Ethereal Ground) but I also think I was mistyping Audrey Hepburn.
But where did I get that typing? I got it from eidb and especially David Gray. But I also remember asking what's her stacking and David was completely stumped. Because you cannot stack Audrey Hepburn as a 9. It just doesn't work. She doesn't have the sort of haziness of the higher sx Nines, the merginess, and she doesn't have the steadiness (sometimes stodginess) of the lower sx ones. She is crisp, to the point, and 'on point'. Where is sloth? What is 'unborn' about Audrey Hepburn? She seems to be very much an image type, basking in the light of lighting up your eyes.
|
|
|
Post by Roshan on Dec 21, 2020 1:40:44 GMT -5
2w3, RH's Hostess. Bestowing the sheer gift of her presence upon you. The lights of her eyes in yours. Audrey Hepburn is certainly winsome, and she is at times also wistful (because the "Fourish Two" is wistful for daddy), but she is not dreamy like 9. Instead, she 'is a dream'. She embodies a fairy princess but she doesn't dream the fairy tale. And there's barely an iota of push-pull, of resistance. What Audrey Hepburn projects is 'the gift that doesn't stop giving', her presence, and that's the self-bestowing of archetypal 2w3.
This is something you just don't fully get from 9 or from 4. There is an implicit recalcitrance to them; there is always some kind of holding back. 9 because of an inner compass that demands "homeostasis" not be perturbed by too many waves; 4 by an interiorized image that it looks at before it looks at you. And then when it looks at you you still feel its frustration--somewhere else will be better.
Not Audrey. Audrey Hepburn is really, really 'right there'. She is effusive.
|
|
|
Post by Roshan on Dec 21, 2020 2:09:47 GMT -5
I would say that with 9s there is always some sense that they may slip back into the All from which they emerged, with 2s there is the sense they are just going to keep emerging.
The drama of 9 is 'should I be fully born'? The drama of 2 is "now that I am given life, should I become a life giver?' So 9 embryo or born; 2 child or mother. Naranjo can wield a very blunt instrument and be quite absolutist; I think (like Eli) that you find shades of all the subtypes within the type. Because each type has a dialectic to resolve. So Two has a dialectic around not so much 'help' (anyone can be helpful) as offering or taking nurturance, sustenance.
Now the Chestnut link says pride isn't as obvious in sp Twos but I don't really agree with this. I think you'll see this pride in little ways--a cocking of the chin, a certain coy self-satisfaction in the face or in the bearing. With Audrey Hepburn when not in full blown Moon River mode I think pride is actually quite obvious. With 9 you will see a certain self-effacement. Not Audrey! Again, Audrey is effusive. She exudes, she radiates. 9 will sink back into itself in some way.
Audrey doesn't at all.
|
|
|
Post by Roshan on Dec 21, 2020 2:55:21 GMT -5
So Two has a dialectic to resolve around offering or taking nurturance, sustenance; this is why Eve offers (and takes) an apple. With the dialectic "to be or not to be born" to resolve, 9 will not become nurturer per se. 9 will become supportive presence, fully embodied, but not full bestower. 9 will also become fully merged, yes, but to merge is to lose, not to bestow, oneself.
Also, an energy that is archetypally fully merged or fully embodied cannot become archetypal nurturer parent. Because to give birth requires both having a body (which merge doesn't) and giving part of it away (which full embodiment can't or it loses fullness). For 9 the issue is to feed off of or to sever the umbilicus. For 2 it's to offer you the apple or eat it itself.
And that's what makes the child woman Audrey Hepburn so compelling. Everyone wants to take care of her, but it's in offering you that desire that she bestows herself. She is the apple of your eye because she wills it so. Every moment Audrey is birthing your desire to parent her. That's the favor, and you owe her--everything.
In my book (my new book), she epitomizes the child facet of the Motherchild,Two.
|
|
|
Post by winter on Dec 21, 2020 10:09:40 GMT -5
The way she assumes she can sleep with ‘fred’ in breakfast at Tiffany’s is to me the most stand out clip
The ‘entitlement’ to just ask like that Obviously it’s a film but, still.
|
|
|
Post by Roshan on Dec 26, 2020 18:58:57 GMT -5
Tori Amos materials are here.atm I would type her sp/so 2w1(3w2)-7w6(6w5)-9w1(1w2).She will need to be compared to Jewel, who seems very close to this complete type. I have been saying for a long time that sp/so 2 is the fairy tale princess. When Tori was given a large budget by a classical music label to do whatever she wanted, she made "Night of Hunters", a fairy tale lp. This is the title song. I'll put the rest about her on the other thread.
|
|
jastyne
Hummingbird
Posts: 106
Enneagram Core Fix: 9w1
|
Post by jastyne on Jan 12, 2021 2:31:22 GMT -5
Roshan-- yes, taking another look at the Tori materials, 4 lead doesn't really seem plausible. But something about her is still seeming distinct from the other sp 2 examples for me-- I'm seeing her as significantly less child-like'/ 'seducing power through helplessness, and not so inviting of care. Do you think what I'm seeing is all from the 1 wing, or could so/sx still be within the realm of possibility, and this is what a social-lead 2w1 looks like? I honestly barely have any examples of 2w1s or sp/so 4w3 that I feel solid on at this point, and I've found myself getting a bit lost in the 1-2-4 connection loop. I'd love to look at more examples to get a better feel for 1 vs. 3 wings and how they impact the type... any suggestions?
|
|
hiddenglass
Swallow
lay me to rest, take me to sea // read my mind… let me be.
Posts: 179
Enneagram Core Fix: 5⁴
Relationship Status: searching
Occupation(s): idling
Education: ongoing
Interests: growing
Country/Region: chicago
|
Post by hiddenglass on Jan 12, 2021 3:09:19 GMT -5
Roshan -- yes, taking another look at the Tori materials, 4 lead doesn't really seem plausible. But something about her is still seeming distinct from the other sp 2 examples for me-- I'm seeing her as significantly less child-like'/ 'seducing power through helplessness, and not so inviting of care. Do you think what I'm seeing is all from the 1 wing, or could so/sx still be within the realm of possibility, and this is what a social-lead 2w1 looks like? I honestly barely have any examples of 2w1s or sp/so 4w3 that I feel solid on at this point, and I've found myself getting a bit lost in the 1-2-4 connection loop. I'd love to look at more examples to get a better feel for 1 vs. 3 wings and how they impact the type... any suggestions? Jenny Hval is 2w1 fixed, David Lynch, Sofia Coppola is a 2w1
I think you're right that it's the w1 you're seeing
|
|
hiddenglass
Swallow
lay me to rest, take me to sea // read my mind… let me be.
Posts: 179
Enneagram Core Fix: 5⁴
Relationship Status: searching
Occupation(s): idling
Education: ongoing
Interests: growing
Country/Region: chicago
|
Post by hiddenglass on Jan 12, 2021 3:10:51 GMT -5
Tori Amos materials are here.atm I would type her sp/so 2w1(3w2)-7w6(6w5)-9w1(1w2).She will need to be compared to Jewel, who seems very close to this complete type. I have been saying for a long time that sp/so 2 is the fairy tale princess. When Tori was given a large budget by a classical music label to do whatever she wanted, she made "Night of Hunters", a fairy tale lp. This is the title song. I'll put the rest about her on the other thread. that typing sits right by me. I wasn't sure if it was 9w11w2, and my initial supposition was 7w6 last, but your config works for me. I agree spsc.
|
|
|
Post by Roshan on Jan 13, 2021 2:21:41 GMT -5
hiddenglass, the order of the second and third fixes could go either way. It's possible I had somewhat of a knee-jerk tendency to put the 7 second because before I thought to even question 4 fix for her, the only lead type that made sense to me was 7w6. tbcd
|
|
|
Post by Roshan on Jan 13, 2021 2:44:21 GMT -5
Roshan -- yes, taking another look at the Tori materials, 4 lead doesn't really seem plausible. No, it's really not. The lyrics to "Crucify" are very not 'core 4'. I could live with the 4 fix on a 7 lead but really these lyrics are about 'integrating 4' from...a different vantage point, starting off with "I feel like everyone is pointing at me" and moving on to "I am SUCH a masochist"...plus the very formulation "Why do WE crucify ourselves?"...and you will just start to see it jump out at you from all over her lyrics...Also there is the issue of her singing about dark things joyously while humping the piano bench...But something about her is still seeming distinct from the other sp 2 examples for me-- I'm seeing her as significantly less child-like'/ 'seducing power through helplessness, and not so inviting of care.
But 2w1 is "The Servant". It can't admit it's inviting of care. Also, Tori is pretty healthy. That said, what about the official video to Silent All These Years?Do you think what I'm seeing is all from the 1 wing, or could so/sx still be within the realm of possibility, and this is what a social-lead 2w1 looks like? I think social 2w1 is unlikely to portray itself dressed in little girl's clothes and jumping up and down with cheerleader's pom poms while singing "Why do we crucify ourselves?" Also she often seems to have a quite heavy sp wall.I honestly barely have any examples of 2w1s or sp/so 4w3 that I feel solid on at this point, and I've found myself getting a bit lost in the 1-2-4 connection loop. I'd love to look at more examples to get a better feel for 1 vs. 3 wings and how they impact the type... any suggestions? Yes but let me double check first.
|
|
anthony
Terra9Incognita
Posts: 1,537
Enneagram Core Fix: 9w1
|
Post by anthony on Jan 20, 2021 20:53:53 GMT -5
I THINK I found another Sp 2.
Cheryl Hines sp/so 2w3(1w2)-9w1(1w2)-7w6(6w5)?
|
|
|
Post by winter on Jan 31, 2021 3:35:59 GMT -5
Yeah this seems correct to me For some reason an easier guess for me personally than some of the others
|
|