Here’s my take with all the dirt. An ENTP looks great from the outside because we make you laugh, we give you true insightful criticism, we know all about your interests, and really “understand” you -we know logically why you feel like you do, even if you don’t. We find creative “why didn’t I think of that” solutions to not only your life problems but your computer problems too. We can charm your grandparents, your parents, and your friends. We can party with the extraverts, and sit in silence with the introverts. We can talk Trek with nerds, and Baudelaire with artsy-fartsies. You probably didn’t notice us in high school because we were in our embryonic pseudo INTP/INTJ morph. But you got surprised when you saw us back from college break and though we looked different (aka more desirable). We seem now just oh so dreamy and exciting.
But all that takes a -lot- of energy. It’s a performance we put on tailor made, on the spot, just for you. Eventually we get tired and the mask slips off. That’s when you think we’re shallow or self-centered, but the truth is, you misunderstood our performance for personal interest. (And maybe we did too — it’s easy to lose yourself as a method actor.) But we’re just as cold and analytical ruthless as the other NTs: We don’t nitpick you apart like an INTJ, or categorize your usefulness like an ENTJ, or test your mental capacity like an INTP. We understand you by (subconsciously) pushing all your secret buttons…for good or bad. Maybe you fell in love with us, but now your angry and conflicted because you don’t understand why we’re suddenly being cold and distant. We’ve retreated — because while we’re good at faking emotion, and logically understanding why people feel a certain way, we’re really terrible at actually handling emotion. We get overpowered by it and annoyed by the illogicalness of it. ( Besides, we’ve already found a new shiny.) Now you hate us…but here is some consolation. We have a built-in nemesis and he’s a real bastard.
We turn that critical wide-ranging eye on ourselves. You can’t see it from the outside, but were utter perfectionists in our heads and we relentlessly measure ourselves against the realistically unachievable. Somehow we can’t find the same easy solutions to our problems as to everyone else’s, and we become mired in too many possibilities, haunted by how inadequate our own creative efforts seem to us. We at once believe our own hype, and ruthlessly condemn ourselves. We’ll may you our creations (probably something ½ finished). We secretly want your praise, like an 8 yo child. We don’t accept your garlands though (unless you’re an expert we respect) — because we’ve already judged ourself against Perfection and came out wanting. If you tell us you think it’s good, we won’t believe you. For what you mistook as bravado and arrogance, is really very wry, very sarcastic self-mortification.
We can stagnate in our mess of ideas, with no external system of organization to help us move forward. We have brief mad rushes of energy —back, forward, right, left, a random walk of ideas with a net movement of zero. If you’re really smart, being an ENTP is a double curse…because your ideas are loftier, your movements more wide-ranging, your internal critic all the more perniciously accurate. You stand on the shoulders of titans, glimpsing something wonderful across the jungle of possibilities, and sketch out a map.
But then it happens: SJ reality. They turn off your water because you forgot to pay the bill. A check bounces because you didn’t know how much money you had in the account. You burn dinner because you’re suddenly obsessed with typing out a manifesto on a blog. You tell a friend you’ll meet him at 7:00 and show up at 9:00. You forget to call your mother on her birthday. You put off simple annoyances (like depositing a check) for weeks. Your mighty creative intuition gets mostly employed to talk your way out of the stupid jams your procrastination landed you in. People with lesser talents, pass you by and you make excuses: (The internal critic says it’s because your stupid and lazy). You don’t get the promotion because while you have a lot of good ideas, you don’t follow through. You’re unreliable. You have no problems expressing your boredom with your job or critiquing your boss publicly in front of his superiors, not realizing the implications. SJ boss now -really- doesn’t like you. You get A’s in some college classes and F’s in others — but all your NT professors still think you’re intelligent, even the one’s giving your F’s, because they’ve fallen for your charms and excuses.
But people like you — they think your unique, clever and entertaining, because you are. They give you chances. So you pick yourself up, dust yourself off from your failures, and try again. Maybe you get your self another brilliant ENTP friend and start Apple Computer. Or write Candide. Or invent Quantum Electrodynamics. Or host the Daily Show. Maybe tomorrow. Or Next week. But what you’ll probably do, instead of working on finishing a paper your supposed to be readying for peer review, you’ll spend an hour typing out a cathartic blog post that’s maybe more about your own insecurities than being an ENTP.
So is ENTP the best of all the types? Hell yes it is. =)”
i know this is character talk time.... but I would really love to hear more about your thoughts on the joe wright p&p adaption.
I think Wright’s adaptation is a superb one.
Joe Wright is always so skilled as subtlety : with true insight, he manages to express on screen, and without words, what has been written about the soul of his characters. In Pride and Prejudice, it relies primarily on symmetry, glances, and gazes.
He is very faithful to the book, and particularly to the constant and delightful humour of Austen : each scene is filled with such mirth, I’m always laughing out loud when I watch it; the awkwardness, especially, is delightful. Darcy, his gait, his tenseness, and Elizabeth perplexity are a delight.
To convey Austen’s elegant, controlled style, Joe Wright does a great job with cinematography and scenery : painting scenes, symmetric scenes, slow traveling of the camera on a picturesque yet very classical, very subdued detail. Pride and Prejudice is not baroque in the least : its simplicity, in the colours (dark green, dark blue, white, brown), in the costumes, in the repetitive and piano-filled soundtrack, echoes the tranquil and beautiful domesticity of the original story.
The characterisation is absolutely stellar and I think in that, Joe Wright really showed his respect and understanding of the book; as I said before, his Darcy is Austen Darcy : the stutter, the controlled yet passionate hand, the rare but sunny smiles, the awkward posture and early blindness to his surroundings, and then that new degree of softness and warmth when we come back to him at Pemberley; more than anything, the hidden vulnerability, the sudden pain and anger on his face when he is hurt, and the trembling eyelids when his gaze must absolutely escape Elizabeth’s.
The Bennett as well are great: Wright decided to make the Bennett parents a little closer than they are in the book, and M. Bennett a little more loving than he is in the book, and I think it’s a lovely addition; in any case, their constant giggling, occasional stupidity, the dynamics unfolding in the scenes where they are all in the parlour or at dinner is deeply satisfying: a whirlwind of laughter, smiles, conniving (and signification-filled) glances, true warmth and intimacy in their hand choreography (give me this, give me that, carried on so smoothly), their surroundings always found in the happy chaos of true living (contrasting with the cold, immobile Netherfield and Rosings).
Keira Knightley’s Elizabeth is a true delight; still full of innocence and impulse—her rapidity of expression and limpidity of gaze convey both her youth and her cleverness, her insolence and her warmth. She manages to express her thoughts without having to speak: in her rigid or supple gait, in the angle of her neck, lowering of her eyelids, in the very distinct movements of her mouth. Their is a magnetism between her and Macfadyen that is actually heart-seizing, isn’t there? From the start, Wright decides to show us how similar they are, how instinctively they are linked, and it works so well.
All the casting to me is satisfying, except for Bingley who I thought lacked in elegance and prince-like charm—but Kitty and Lydia’s mixture of impudence and gaiety, Wickham’s charisma and transparency (the cold elegance of a paper hero), Charlotte’s plain but reassuring persona, Collins’ hilarious and enraging pretentiousness, Miss Bingley’s rat-like pettiness, Jane’s peaceful, magnetic softness, and Georgiana youthful charm (although that is an invention —Georgiana is very Darcy herself in the book, awkward and shy and timid) are all perfect.
What Joe Wright has chosen to put aside from the book, I think, is a show of his talent as an adapter: he got rid only of what wasn’t mandatory to the story, letting himself linger on the faces of his protagonists, their interior turmoil palpable behind the mask of conventions. Mrs. Phillips, the Gardiner’s children, the whole London’s storyline, Mr. Bingley’s second sister, the dinners leading to Jane and Bingley’s engagement… these would have been empty additions to a well-paced, beautiful movie.
Where Joe Wright loses me a little, however, is when he tries to add drama to a very lovely yet very human-scaled story; of course the idea is justifiable. He’s appealing to a romantic audience, who might not be satisfied with only subdued and subtle signs of affection. But I do like Austen’s no-nonsense writing, and her credible (somewhat, although she’s not above easy, lucky coincidences) string of events. For example, Wright’s scene for the engagement of Elizabeth and Darcy is a bit wobbly: they both meet in a field, in the morning after Lady Catherine’s visit to Longbourn. How could Darcy have known so soon what Elizabeth had said? How can they be meeting here, in an unknown field, and know they would find each other? And above all, why is his shirt slightly open, and Elizabeth all the while wearing pyjamas? It’s the 1800′s, guys. Get dressed.
Wright sometimes overlooks the rules of propriety and modesty in Pride and Prejudice, again for the sake of drama. It’s not a problem and to the neophyte spectator, it’s certainly not memorable; but it did irk me at times. Darcy entering Elizabeth’s bedroom to give him the letter, although she is alone and again, in her nightdress; Lady Catherine forcing herself into the Bennett’s household at night; Darcy running after Elizabeth; Elizabeth and Darcy being again and again thrown alone in a room, although the book always has them chaperoned.
What is beautifully done, however, is the slow discovery of Elizabeth’s own mind; the intensity of the feelings. It’s subtle, you know, both in the book and in the movie: otherwise the audience and readers could think Elizabeth changed her mind when she saw Pemberley, for example. But no —her fascination for Darcy starts just a little earlier than her visit, and gnaws at her steadily; at first, she cannot explain it; when she can, she’s horrified that she has lost his esteem forever. Her silence when Jane asks her about Rosings (which a departure from the book: she confesses Darcy’s proposal to Jane there), her single tear at night when Jane talks of Darcy and Bingley; her sole, heart-breaking admission in front of the mirror: I have been so wrong. Silently, slowly, passion has been growing on her side as well.
All in all, I think it’s a true, faithful, respectful hymn to Jane Austen’s work, and what Wright had to bring to the table in his adaptation is generally very successful, very thoughtful, and delightfully carved. He did such a good job.
Elia/Rhaegar: An Analysis of their Doomed Romance(Part 1)
Hello! So this is the analysis that I had promised! This will be addressing the reasoning behind my belief that Rhaegar loved Elia romantically through analysis of what little we know about them. I know that it is a rather unpopular opinion so I just felt like I wanted to share my reasoning behind it.
I have decided to split up the analysis into different posts because otherwise it would just be way too long.
Part 2 is here: [x] and my response to @murderwifed, a massive and hugely biased hypocrite, can be found here : [x]
This first part will be addressing the arguments most commonly used to deny the romance between Elia and Rhaegar. I decided to address this first just to get it out of the way so that when I do address reasons for romance between Elia and Rhaegar the train of thought will not be “yeah but ….. [insert argument that I will hopefully address in this post].”
The biggest most common arguments that I have heard are:
1) If Rhaegar really loved Elia then Barristan would have told Dany. Instead Barristan used the word “fond.” And of course Dany thinks that Rhaegar did not love Elia.
2) If Rhaegar really loved Elia then he wouldn’t have run away with Lyanna.
3) Rhaegar supposedly said Lyanna’s name when he died.
What has been achieved in Germany for more than a century by the imperceptible work of scientific education, the wisdom of princes and their love of justice, the English nation has not acquired from its popular representation; and in the new Bill there are just not contained those special features which would provide a preponderance to profound insight, and true knowledge, over the crass ignorance of fox-hunters and landed gentry, over an education acquired simply in social gatherings, or through newspapers and parliamentary debates, or over the adroitness of lawyers… Nowhere more than in England is the prejudice so fixed and so naive that [many believe that] if birth and wealth give a man office [& power] they also give him brains.
Brian: I’m a fuckin’ idiot because I can’t make a lamp?
Bender: No. you’re a genius cause you can’t make a lamp.
This is a very important interaction in The Breakfast Club. It’s important because it touches on the fact that just because you have good grades, does not mean you have good/useful life skills and vice versa. What matters is what is important to you and what YOU choose to spend your time on.
How To Lose A Guy In 10 Days AU - Part 2 (Bucky X Reader)
Synopsis:This is a fluffy AU based on the movie How To Lose A Guy In 10 Days. This is part of @stories-from-stark-tower Stark Tower’s 3k Celebration Movie AU Challenge! You work at Radiance magazine and have been assigned the task to find a man to date and ‘lose him’ within the span of 10 days making the typical mistakes women tend to make, writing it up for your article. Easy right? Bucky Barnes is your ever so charming victim and it turns out he has his own 10 day task and may prove to be more of a challenge than you thought.
Pairing:Bucky x Reader
Warnings: None. Although there is some cheesy flirting.
A/N:This part was soooo much fun to write. I’m absolutely loving writing Bucky as this cocky and flirty charmer. Sorry i didn’t have this done yesterday - I was running off 2 hours sleep. Anyway I hope you enjoy. Sorry if this part isn’t very good (it will get better - promise!)
‘The practice of mindful breathing brings us back to the four foundations of our being, so we can take care of them and bring about healing and transformation. The first foundation of our being is our body. The practice of mindful breathing is to bring us back home to our body, to reconcile ourselves with our body, to take care of our body, to look deeply into our body, to understand our body, and to allow transformation and healing to take place.
The second foundation of our being is our feelings. Very often we leave our feelings unattended. Mindful breathing helps us go back to our feelings to recognize them, and to look deeply into their nature so that understanding is possible. By practicing mindful breathing, we take good care of our feelings; we can calm them, transform them, and heal them. Our feelings are very much interconnected with our body. We cannot take our feelings out of our body, and we cannot take our body out of our feelings. They inter-are.
The third foundation of our being is our mental formations. Formation means a thing that is conditioned by different kinds of elements. A flower is a physical formation. It is made of several elements. Among the elements, we can see sunshine. If we touch the being of a flower deeply, we touch the sunshine. We know that we cannot take the sunshine out of a flower. If we did, the flower would collapse. There would be no flower. The flower and the sunshine inter-are. When we touch a flower deeply, we also touch a cloud. There is a cloud in the heart of a flower, and we cannot take the cloud out of the flower. The cloud and the flower inter-are. If we continue to look deeply, we can see the earth, the minerals, the air, and everything in a flower. All these elements have come together to bring about the formation called “flower”. All formations are impermanent. When one of the conditions is no longer sufficient, the formation dissolves. There is no flower.
There are other kinds of formations that are not physical, like fear. Fear is a mental formation; it is made of several elements, including the elements of ignorance. Despair, anguish, attachment, love, and mindfulness are all mental formations. In the teaching of my tradition, there are fifty-one categories of mental formations. Mindful breathing brings us close to our mental formations as they manifest within ourselves. Sometimes fear manifests, and our mindful breathing brings us back to our fear so that we can embrace it. We look deeply into the nature of our fear to reconcile ourselves with it. If we do well, we can calm our fear, look deeply into it and discover its true nature. Insight into our fear helps us transform it. This is true of all mental formations - such as anger, despair, agitation, and restlessness. Sometimes restlessness is present as a form of energy, and it prevents us from being peaceful. It prevents well-being. When restlessness manifests itself within us, we can practice mindful breathing in order to come back to it, to hold it mindfully, tenderly, and lovingly. The practice consists of two parts: the first practice consists of two parts: the first part is calming; the second part is looking deeply. We clam down our mental formations, look deeply into it, and see its deep roots.
As soon as you use the energy of mindfulness to hold your mental formation there is a tendency in that mental formation to calm down. As you continue holding your mental formation, you are capable of looking into it, and you begin to have the insight you need regarding what kinds of conditions have brought that mental formation to you. This is the practice of looking deeply, which we call vipassana in Pali, or vipashyana in Sanskrit.
The fourth foundation of our being is our perception. Most of our suffering comes from our wrong perceptions. We do not have correct insight about the nature of reality. Mindful breathing brings us back to ourselves to investigate the nature of our perceptions. Looking deeply into the nature of our perceptions, we discover the reasons why we suffer, or why our fear or despair are born. If we know how to practice looking deeply into the nature of our perceptions, the insight we get liberates us from our suffering, grief, and fear. We practice looking deeply into the true nature of reality, the true nature of a flower, the true nature of our body, of our feelings, or of our mental formations. Form, feelings, and mental formations are all the objects of our perceptions.
We have seen that form and feelings inter-are. We cannot take form out of feelings nor take feelings out of form. The same is true of mental formations and perceptions. These four foundations of our being - form, feelings, mental formations, and perceptions - inter-are. We cannot take one out of the other three. If we know the art of looking deeply, we will discover reality as it really is. By doing so, we remove all errors and wrong perceptions. This is liberation through understanding, salvation by knowledge. If we speak in terms of grace, grace is understood here as wisdom, as knowledge, as understanding. We know that we sometimes we suffer because of our ignorance, jealousy, and anger. At the base of our jealousy and anger is ignorance, because we don’t understand why we suffer. The moment we begin to understand our jealousy, our anger begins to dissolve. That is why understanding is the liberating factor, and the aim of the practice of meditation is to get this liberating insight. That is why our perceptions are so important. We have to go back to them and inquire about their nature.’
- Thich Nhat Hanh, The Path of Emancipation: Talks from a 21-Day Mindfulness Retreat.