36 replies to this topic

[Jonathan]

I was noticing Ashton's recently erased page on wikisocion on various artistic movements based on quadras (Ashton, hope you don't mind my bringing this up; I realize you may not support what you wrote anymore since you erased it).

Quote

Some very tentative classifications, this list is nowhere near finalized. Some of these might change, and some of these movements could easily be considered cross-quadra. Indeed, this list is not to imply that any one movement should be considered the exclusive domain of any one quadra. These are only overall tendencies.


I'm reciting these artist names from memory. When I find my complete index of them, I'll add all of them I have.


Alpha
Artists: Josef Albers, M.C. Escher, Jackson Pollack, Wassily Kandinsky, Claude Monet, Vincent van Gogh, Andy Warhol, Vincent Gallo


Abstract Art
Abstract Expressionism
Abstract Impressionism
Constructivism
Dadaism
Impressionism
Les Nabis
Neo-Impressionism
Neoplasticism
Orphism
Pointillism
Pop Art
Post-Impressionism
Suprematism
Synchronism
Vorticism


Beta
Artists: Marina Abramovic, Vito Acconci, William Blake, Salvador Dali, Frank Frazetta, Henry Fuseli, Ernst Haas, Adolf Hitler, Pablo Picasso, Robert Mapplethorpe, Ron Mueck, Paula Rego, Auguste Rodin, Christian Schad


Conceptualism
Cubism
Expressionism
Fantastic Realism
Futurism
Heroic Realism
Neosurrealism
Op Art
Romanticism
Surrealism


Gamma
Artists: Camille Claudel, Georgia O'Keefe, Alfred Stieglitz, Robert Longo, Chuck Close, Diane Arbus, Edward Weston, Banksy, Leonardo DaVinci, Frank Lloyd Wright


Chiaroscuro
Cubist Realism
Hyperrealism
Magical Realism
Photorealism
Pictorialism
Precisionism
Sfumato
Superrealism


Delta
Artists: Ben Shahn, Duane Hanson, Frida Kahlo, Akiane Kramarik


Art Deco
Art Moderne
Baroque
Classicism
Contemporary Realism
Fauvism
Formalism
Kinetic Art
Mannerism
Neoclassicism
Purism
Regionalism
Renaissance
Rococo
Social Realism

This is my simplification/summary of what this seems to be saying:

Gamma: Realism (Te objective approach to Se life-like depiction)
Alpha: Anti-realistm (Fe subjective approach to non-Se abstraction)
Delta: Classicism (Te objective approach to non-Se abstraction)
Beta: Romanticism (Fe subjective approach to Se life-like depiction)

One minor point is that (within this particular set of assumptions), while surrealism and expressionism are listed under Alpha (probably because they focus on a particular way of differing from realism), it seems to me that depending on the source or intent, they could also be Beta. For example, a painting where the emphasis is on "look how much this differs from real life in interesting ways" might be Alpha, whereas if it's on some sort of emotional/psychological reinterpretation of life-like reality then it should be more Beta. To me, although I have no idea what their actual types were, the paintings of Edvark Munch seem to me NF, probably Beta, and similarly Di Chirico's work seems Beta to me.

On a larger level, I tend to see reasonable/resolute slightly differently, although I find the way it's understood here to be interesting and worth considering. One of the themes I see on this forum is that the resolute/reasonable dichotomy is roughly associated with real vs. imaginary (e.g., Ni/Se quadras being more into fantasy fiction, sci-fi, surrealism). I see things a little differently; while I associate Se with life-like depiction of static external reality and consequence, Ni seems to be the imaginative glue that holds this together;in other words, Se is the static frames, whereas Ni is the storyline. Viewed that way, it seems to me that Ni/Se art may focus on an imaginary quality to the extent that Ni is emphasized over Se, especially (but not exclusively) in the presence of Fe.

In music, literature, or other arts that involve a sequence over time, it seems to me that Ni/Se is reflected in an emphasis on a narrative (long-term storyline) or formal quality (e.g., individual moments may seem bland except when seen as as building up towards something or playing a role within a larger architecture), whereas Si/Ne is reflected in more momentary emphasis (e.g., compelling sensuous details, interesting clever ideas, playing with language and surface more than with long-term form).

I'm curious though where the association on this forum of resolute/reasonable with real/imaginary (e.g., seeing fantasy / sci-fi function as more of an Si/Ne thing) comes from.

[ArchonAlarion]

Jonathan, on 17 October 2009 - 09:04 AM, said:

I'm curious though where the association on this forum of resolute/reasonable with real/imaginary (e.g., seeing fantasy / sci-fi function as more of an Si/Ne thing) comes from.

It's not necessarily, but there is an (somewhat annoying to try to explain again and again) explanation.

I'm going to speak in terms of behaviors and mental states, rather than the root mechanics of the IE's.


Si is a field (subjective) element. It simply does not depend on the presence of things and those exact physical qualities of things to process.

But then, due to complementariness, in what way is Si object dependent?

Wellllllllllllllllll, that's Ne's job.

Si does not care about the magnitude/intensity of the object (Se). Si is too "floaty" and behind the scenes for that. Se would "jar" Si out of its sleepy state and fuckin ruin it.

Imagine that you're sitting in front of campfire, smoking pot with your friends, and imagining some mystical fantastical realm...

and suddenly the fire pit explodes.

That's like what Se does to Si. Se snaps the focus from a dreamy, temporal (Si is DYNAMIC! Experiences of the past, present, and future blur into a flow of reminiscence kinda), unfocused state, to a discomforting, and sudden present state. Se disrupts the flow of Si (Se is discrete "object statics", whereas Si is a continuum "field dynamics")

So why does Si complement Ne?

Ne does not disrupt Si. It's internal, latent, essential. Ne is "detached" (abstract). Ne can fit within Si without disrupting the flow, because Ne is "intangible". Se is hard and rigid; making the flow accept its presence, whereas Ne is light and can easily move somewhere else if its necessary.


So, like I've said before Si/Ne are in an odd "limbo". The objects are Internal detached, and the fields are external involved. What part of Si/Ne stays still? What part is "real"? Does Si/Ne ever consider the present situation with any concrete analysis?

Si/Ne is like an endless churning cloud. Nothing within the cloud is permanent. The various hues of the gas pulsate, mix, dissipate. Objects crackle into existence with a spark of energy, and then vaporize.

Ne impregnates Si with conceptual seeds, which then fertilize within the Si and branch out into new concepts. These new concepts are harvested and sewn into yet more "fields" (no pun intended) of Si.

So Si/Ne has this feeling of infinite expansion. The Never Ending Story. What more can we create? What more can we dream up? It doesn't matter what things are actually "out there". What matters is the settings, experiences, and concepts we weave together in our minds to generate more material.

Se/Ni ends up as a bleak (imo), gritty, thematic story. Si/Ne ends up as worlds upon worlds upon worlds of adventures, landscapes, and creatures.

lol hope that had some worth...

[Tom]

lol That was so good and so biased at the same time I wanted to cry laughing.

Cereal, though.

[ArchonAlarion]

lol

*high fives Si/Ne-ers*

[Tom]

/HIGHfive! / -ers!

[borderline]

ArchonAlarion, on 18 October 2009 - 02:12 PM, said:

Si/Ne is like an endless churning cloud. Nothing within the cloud is permanent. The various hues of the gas pulsate, mix, dissipate. Objects crackle into existence with a spark of energy, and then vaporize.

Ne impregnates Si with conceptual seeds, which then fertilize within the Si and branch out into new concepts. These new concepts are harvested and sewn into yet more "fields" (no pun intended) of Si.

So Si/Ne has this feeling of infinite expansion. The Never Ending Story. What more can we create? What more can we dream up? It doesn't matter what things are actually "out there". What matters is the settings, experiences, and concepts we weave together in our minds to generate more material.

you write some seriously awkward and senseless metaphors. pregnant with conceptual seeds wtf


lol "the never ending story" was my brother's favorite movie for the longest time. he called it "big dog movie" and anyway, it really sucked.

[Riddy]

You'd make a horrible farmer, Allie.

[Ashton]

ArchonAlarion, on 18 October 2009 - 02:12 PM, said:

Si/Ne ends up as worlds upon worlds upon worlds of adventures, landscapes, and creatures.

That sounds gay as hell.

[Tom]

/sigh....

[Ashton]

Gamma Art

Se-ISFj

Fi-ISFj

Se-ESFp

Fi-ESFp

Ni-ENTj

Te-ENTj

Ni-INTp

Te-INTp

[Ajax]

Those beta ones Ashton choose seem about right except I really do not like surrealism much especially in its earliest forms. Something about most forms of surrealist art highly terrifies me and makes me feel quite insane at the same time. I think it is mainly a kind of Ne type art form. Abstract art totally divorced from any specific recognizable object and so can be interpreted how I see fit or not at all is appealing generally, like that first piece in your above post which looks to me to be a giant blue and green vagina. Dadaism seems most certainly alpha and Rococo seems delta. In addition I like many pieces of Russian constructivist art , it is just beautiful to me in a kind of bare, cold, highly structured way.

[Galen]

Why can't I get magic realism
or chiaroscuro

I'll take neoclassicism I suppose
socio-realism too



also whoever that Se-ESFp is, he and his art terrifies me.

[Tom]

lol Gamma is so uncreative. I like the ISFj art and the Da Vinci, but other than that it just seems so... uncreative and... Well I like the beauty in those I said I liked, but the rest just doesn't have it.

[Ashton]

Tom, on 22 October 2009 - 09:01 AM, said:

lol Gamma is so uncreative. I like the ISFj art and the Da Vinci, but other than that it just seems so... uncreative and... Well I like the beauty in those I said I liked, but the rest just doesn't have it.

“Creativity” is such an abused and overvalued notion. Why should we care if a piece is “creative” for the sake of being creative? Any fool can do that. What is more important is whether a piece is made with skill and has meaning+impact.

[Galen]

I am still in complete awe of photorealism

[ArchonAlarion]

Examples of art/images that I like:

[Riddy]

Ashton, on 22 October 2009 - 04:17 PM, said:

“Creativity” is such an abused and overvalued notion.  Why should we care if a piece is “creative” for the sake of being creative?  Any fool can do that.  What is more important is whether a piece is made with skill and has meaning+impact.

Creativity is abused, but not overvalued. People stretch the world to refer to many things that it doesn't really mean, and a lot of people get lauded for being creative when they really haven't created anything really at all. I would suggest that by definition, anything genuinely creative will have meaning and impact. Chuck Close is creative, even if the very strong photorealism would make it look like he wasn't. His creativity lies in the subtleties of how his subjects are cast and framed. His skill would be irrelevant and would not evoke any meaning or impact if there was no creativity in it.

[Tom]

Those pics are badass as fuck, jakeums.

[Ashton]

Ajax, on 21 October 2009 - 06:24 PM, said:

Those beta ones Ashton choose seem about right except I really do not like surrealism much especially in its earliest forms. Something about most forms of surrealist art highly terrifies me and makes me feel quite insane at the same time. I think it is mainly a kind of Ne type art form.

Dali is considered a surrealist, what do you think of his work?

Quote

Abstract art totally divorced from any specific recognizable object and so can be interpreted how I see fit or not at all is appealing generally, like that first piece in your above post which looks to me to be a giant blue and green vagina.

I believe that’s just supposed to be a flower, not a vagina.

[Ashton]

Arctures, on 21 October 2009 - 11:52 PM, said:

Why can't I get magic realism
or chiaroscuro

Both are rather broad fields that incorporate artists of all 4 quadras. I listed Magical Realism as Gamma because I think Franz Roh (considered the founder of Magical Realism) is an Ni-INTp.

Quote

also whoever that Se-ESFp is, he and his art terrifies me.

Lol.

[Galen]

Ashton, on 23 October 2009 - 01:32 PM, said:

I believe that’s just supposed to be a flower, not a vagina.

Georgia O'Keefe's flowers are often said to look like vaginas.

[Ashton]

The stuff Jake posted just looks like shit you could look at in a video game or CGI renderer if you wanted. Completely artificial and devoid of substance.

[Ashton]

You might like stuff by Frank Frazetta (Ni-ENFj), Jake/Tom:

[ArchonAlarion]

Ashton, on 23 October 2009 - 01:53 PM, said:

You might like stuff by Frank Frazetta (Ni-ENFj), Jake/Tom:

Yeah that's pretty cool.

I like the pictures I posted because they are pretty imaginative, and inspire my imagination. The human ability to generate those scenes is pretty fascinating. Obviously Ne, though.

Tbh I get nothing from black and white photographs. Bland, boring, mundane, depressing. and dead.

[eunice]

Ashton, on 23 October 2009 - 01:32 PM, said:

I never like surrealism. It confuses me because I never know what is the message the artist is trying to convey.

[Jonathan]

Coming back after a bit of a hiatus. Very strange that I criticized surrealism as being under Alpha, and I see it was under Beta like I thought it should be all along. Weird. Ashton, I think you had Dali listed as Alpha though, right? (Maybe that's what got me confused.) I can see possibly Ne in the expansiveness of his work, so that could fit.

Archon, interesting explanation, I think there's something to that. I've generally seen Si as a sort of a sense of continuity of motion, like the story of ones life having this continuous sense, whereas in Ni one breaks out of it and disconnects from ones past physical states. The hangup I've had regarding your explanations, though, is that if Si is described in terms of dreamy imagination, free association, and vague reminiscences, and a sort of tendency to be removed from the present, to be sort of "not here now" but always in some distant place or non-place, that seems to be leading a way from Sensing. The stereotypical ISTp is supposed to be handy and good at crafts or fixing toilets. It's hard to reconcile that image with someone lost in a sea of other-worldly imagination. On the other hand, I've met some people who I think may be ISFp who seem to reminisce and project a sort of hazy sense to them, but when they talk it's still about somewhat concrete stuff. Actually, I've sometimes thought that there may be a continuum between Si and Ni, and when someone is moving away from concrete, sensing reality into imagination and abstraction, maybe there's sort of an "in-between" state. (Let's see what kind of reaction I get from stating that. ) Or if we think of Pi as dynamics of fields, maybe there's a point where it's so far from "external" that if it hasn't gotten into "internal" yet, maybe it's just kind of standing in the doorway.

To me, the pictures Archon posted really do convey the Ne sense of expansiveness, like it could keep going forever. Part of that is that I think they're movie images, so they're not really as unified as a focused "painting" painting a single artist, but I think they do convey that Ne sense.

I like the ISFj and the Te-INTp ones Ashton posted a lot....especially those Te-INTp photographs...actually they're kind of similar to my photographs. And of course DaVinci's great. I can see why he might be ENTj, but it's interesting so many people think he's Ip. Maybe it's because of his tendency not to bother to finish things and to focus more on his ideas and perfectionism.

I also like most of the images that Archon posted, especially that floating city in the cloud vortex thing.

One of the nice things about art is that if it's really good, one really can appreciate different quadras' work and see what's neat about all the different perspectives.

I don't care as much for the "Se-ESFp" photos, especially compared to the more Fi Gamma ones, although I can definitely see how the idea of taking some huge blowup of a face might be an expression of Se-ESFp. To me, it's a little hard to distinguish that from what Se-ESTp would be like though. To the extent that the focus is on this sort of objective, very bald "here's the face...here's what it looks like" with a sort of implied "myth of the artist" who is somehow being significant by making some sort of "statement" in doing that seems possibly Beta to me. I guess it depends on how one interprets the image.

[Ashton]

Jonathan, on 24 October 2009 - 08:20 AM, said:

Coming back after a bit of a hiatus. Very strange that I criticized surrealism as being under Alpha, and I see it was under Beta like I thought it should be all along. Weird. Ashton, I think you had Dali listed as Alpha though, right? (Maybe that's what got me confused.) I can see possibly Ne in the expansiveness of his work, so that could fit.

I’ve always typed Dali as Ni-ENFj.

Quote

Archon, interesting explanation, I think there's something to that. I've generally seen Si as a sort of a sense of continuity of motion, like the story of ones life having this continuous sense, whereas in Ni one breaks out of it and disconnects from ones past physical states. The hangup I've had regarding your explanations, though, is that if Si is described in terms of dreamy imagination, free association, and vague reminiscences, and a sort of tendency to be removed from the present, to be sort of "not here now" but always in some distant place or non-place, that seems to be leading a way from Sensing. The stereotypical ISTp is supposed to be handy and good at crafts or fixing toilets. It's hard to reconcile that image with someone lost in a sea of other-worldly imagination. On the other hand, I've met some people who I think may be ISFp who seem to reminisce and project a sort of hazy sense to them, but when they talk it's still about somewhat concrete stuff. Actually, I've sometimes thought that there may be a continuum between Si and Ni, and when someone is moving away from concrete, sensing reality into imagination and abstraction, maybe there's sort of an "in-between" state. (Let's see what kind of reaction I get from stating that. ) Or if we think of Pi as dynamics of fields, maybe there's a point where it's so far from "external" that if it hasn't gotten into "internal" yet, maybe it's just kind of standing in the doorway.

Some of the Archon’s talking about may be more true of Alpha than it is Delta. Though I don’t think that in either quadra necessarily induces a sharp “here and now” kind of attitude. That kind of acute situational awareness seems more related IME..

Quote

I like the ISFj and the Te-INTp ones Ashton posted a lot....especially those Te-INTp photographs...actually they're kind of similar to my photographs. And of course DaVinci's great. I can see why he might be ENTj, but it's interesting so many people think he's Ip. Maybe it's because of his tendency not to bother to finish things and to focus more on his ideas and perfectionism.

He was an extremely prolific artist/inventor/scientist/etc. Despite not finishing a few pieces supposedly, he was extremely active and productive in many different endeavors throughout the extent of his life. Far more than I’d expect from a typical IP.

Quote

I don't care as much for the "Se-ESFp" photos, especially compared to the more Fi Gamma ones, although I can definitely see how the idea of taking some huge blowup of a face might be an expression of Se-ESFp. To me, it's a little hard to distinguish that from what Se-ESTp would be like though. To the extent that the focus is on this sort of objective, very bald "here's the face...here's what it looks like" with a sort of implied "myth of the artist" who is somehow being significant by making some sort of "statement" in doing that seems possibly Beta to me. I guess it depends on how one interprets the image.

Odd. I don’t see Close as being someone who cultivates an “artist mythos” at all. In interviews he’s very modest, kind of reserved, down to Earth. I’d imagine being confined to a wheelchair and everything else he went through is a rather humbling experience. Very much not an image-driven person.

[Jonathan]

Ashton, on 24 October 2009 - 11:55 AM, said:

Odd. I don’t see Close as being someone who cultivates an “artist mythos” at all. In interviews he’s very modest, kind of reserved, down to Earth. I’d imagine being confined to a wheelchair and everything else he went through is a rather humbling experience. Very much not an image-driven person.

I was just reacting to the images the way they look in the post. I don't know anything about Chuck Close as a person. I see that these are actually paintings, not photographs. Sometimes the impression of a painting in person is different from what it looks like online.

[Galen]

The art discussion in stickam today makes me feel that bumping this thread is necessary.

Here's some Bierstadt, my favorite artist that I can remember. Kinda leaning ISTp on him

[April]

As I mentioned on Stickam, my favorite artist is Wassily Kandinsky.


One of my favorite paintings is below, though, by James Ensor.

[Ashton]

April, on 31 May 2010 - 11:56 PM, said:

One of my favorite paintings is below, though, by James Ensor.

There's a creepy undertone to it. It's interesting.

[Galen]

It's just weird to me, I'm not sure what I'm supposed to understand from it. Although the Tinman-otter with the birthday candle is kinda funny.

[April]

I have to admit, the first time I saw it, I cracked the fuck up. But Ashton is right about the creepy undertones. I think it's unnatural, like they're being forced to play and be something that they're not.

[poli]

Not that I think most of Archon's various pictures are incredibly amazing or anything, as I do like the third one and a few other ones a lot, however I like art that seems sort of generated, simple, and essenseless, because it lets my inherent impressionism and imagination fill in what's going on, and I'm able to fit my own story into that and see the detailed dynamics evolve more subtley, and most importantly I don't feel like I have to try to understand or relate to something else. Any art form should be expressing me, and if I don't like it then it doesn't express me, and I don't listen to it or look at it.

Most of the pictures I really like replay in my mind and are from my dreams. One for instance is a kind of scary-adventure scene where the firstperson is looking out the window of this house in the midst of nowhere, the land is dark and dry, rather orange-brown-gray if you will, with bits of dark red and purple. The backyard is quite petitely fenced, there with a sort of empty garbage dirt and a large pipe extending out the back and down to a dirty creek, perhaps some dead trees and gray sky. Nothing really around, so a long walk generally. This is supposed to be the "origin" of the story, where you can no longer return once you leave. A lot of these nowhere places in my dreams are seen as essentially origins to my stories.

Most of what I dream, which I'm sure some of you do to, and which is why I like them, of are essentially tricks of physics that cannot be duplicated in real life. In one shot, I had the sky and ocean basically reach on forever, ocean in lateral distance, and sky in height. Rather black-to-bright-pink and starry, on a bright night steep island with a small boat and dock. Lava pouring out the side, making the water red and black. Rather hard to imagine exactly how I saw it, the intensity of it. Then on the other side of the island was daytime, with an unimaginably roaring and hectic ocean, where the level of activity was not marked by the height or intensity of the waves or any kind of storm, it was mostly all potential energy stored in these detailed waves seen in a sort of vibrational white glow. So very tricky to capture physically, like mentioned. You have a complete difference over water and under. Over, in the distance lies a visible straight with impossibly high dark green mountain cliffs reach up with no slope in ever perceiving detail on the other side, and never seem to fade off into the clouds. Specs of birds, flying salts, and fog sparkle throughout the distance. The sky falls around it to the north and south, and is bright and lifegiving as ever. A large ship appears tiny as it sails by in the distance, and under the water of the ship, in the depths lurks a giant monster lazing at its perch. Can't really explain the details, but I feel as though these are what really stick out in my mind.

Another were spaced out houses on canyon towers, basically "official city streets" that were spread across these leafy-vine and bamboo like structures of road, that perked high above the desert floor. Jungle mixed with desert if you will, at a basic level, however you have to really understand to the context and emotional potential of the story to get it, like most of these things of mine. Another was a lake on another planet with these aliens. In fact my favorite scene can not be explained to you at this point in time, because the structure of it is so intricate and has various viewpoints, it would be difficult and pointless, generally because it is among various worlds at the same time.

Uh, I don't really save pictures and art I like, but here are some things I came across which I liked. I didn't really look for long, I know there are much better ones I've seen. Real life art seems rather boring to me, not that it can't be good or evocative. I think movies or video games could better capture my style of art and ideal perceptions of life, if I ever became a graphic designer.

Essentially different parts of the same place, and rather boring without an imagination.

[Galen]

I just rediscovered an artist I don't like lol

Yayoi Kusama: Se-ESTp

[Galen]

Just discovered Caspar David Friedrich, wondering if he was INTp.

[poli]

Galen, on 26 June 2010 - 07:43 PM, said:

I just rediscovered an artist I don't like lol

Ditto!

Maybe some other delta like kassie likes it.