MBTI #8: The Shadow and online resources

This last post will be much shorter because there are a wide variety of opinions out there about what one's "shadow" is, what it does, and when it's used. I'm going to focus on the one that makes the most sense to me.

John Beebe's shadow structure
Dr. Beebe's argument is that the shadow is comprised of the four functions that don't appear in your MBTI preferences list, in a particular order complete with spiffy names and a theoretical structure.

He has a point, I think, about those four other functions having their uses but being uncomfortable and, in some cases, downright upsetting. Particularly the "demon function", the opposite of your inferior MBTI function. For me, that's Si -- internal analysis of past events and situations -- which in me always takes the form of obsessive ruminating about some bad thing that happened, some opportunity missed.  Always depressing and pointless.

There's a nice, clear run-down of this idea over at cognitiveprocesses.com. It rings true to me: I do use my Ti to shoot people down ("here are the holes in your argument") and don't pay much attention to my Fe (other people's emotions are not my problem).

Your character's shadow
Of these, the "demon" may be the most useful in a story, as it can be a source of conflict and uncertainty for your character.

Online resources
If you poke around Google, you'll find tons of books, forums, videos -- and tons of different, sometimes conflicting, opinions about MBTI. Here are some that I've found useful.

Personality Cafe -- a lot of my links go to this chat board. I'm active there under a different name. MBTI is only one of the personality systems they use there, but it's a nice community where you can ask questions and get advice on specific MBTI types. I've used it to fine-tune my understanding of what my MCs would consider important, or stressful, in very complicated situations.

Personality Cafe on Youtube -- there have been various video challenges over the years and most of them are on Youtube somewhere.

Cognitive Types on Youtube -- a series of videos demonstrating how to "read" personality type from body language. Fascinating stuff. They post new ones every so often.

DaveSuperPowers did a series of videos on various types, but sadly he stopped.

A frequently referred-to book on PerC is Was That Really Me? by Naomi Quenk.

MBTI basics

Four dichotomies:
Intuitives/Sensors • Feelers/Thinkers • Introverts/Extroverts • Judgers/Perceivers

For writers: Sketching Characters • The Dark Side • Shadow & Resources

MBTI #7: The Dark Side

This is one part of MBTI that I've found especially useful: how different personality types respond to stress, and how what each one considers stressful varies.

There are different theories about types reacting to stress -- I suspect that's because it's still a highly individual thing and it's difficult to generalize. Personally, I find the idea of an inferior function takeover in times of stress fits reality well. It rings true to what I've experienced as an Se-inferior who suffered from bouts of emotional eating as a teenager.

Inferior function takeover
Below are a series of posts about the theory of being "in the grip of" one's inferior function when under stress. Since this is your weakest function, it's not your "normal" self. People will notice the change in behavior that results. It contributes to a sense of unease, of flailing against your problems (though some types completely shut out their problems as part of their reaction). You feel miserable, tired and trapped.

How this manifests depends on what your inferior function is; there are similarities and overlapping patterns, but each one has its own flavor of negative behaviors. These links also talk about how the primary function works, and how one recovers from wrestling with one's inferior, which are useful too.

Inferior Ti (ESFJ & ENFJ)	Inferior Fi (ENTJ & ESTJ)
Inferior Te (ISFP & INFP)	Inferior Fe (ISTP & INTP)
Inferior Ni (ESTP & ESFP)	Inferior Si (ENTP & ENFP)
Inferior Ne (ISTJ & ISFJ)	Inferior Se (INTJ & INFJ)

What caused this?
The things that stress one MBTI type may be no problem at all for another type (see my example below.) So to figure out what can trigger an inferior takeover in your character, some homework may be in order. In general, though, it's caused by situations which overwhelm the dominant functions, or cause you to severely doubt the accuracy of those functions -- traumatic, since those are your strengths -- or situations that prevent you from using your dominant functions effectively.

An example
I had a well-developed character in an extremely stressful situation. He's an ESTP, almost exactly my opposite (I'm an INTJ.) Because he's so different from me, I knew that what he found stressful about the situation would be different from what I found stressful -- and he'd react differently.

From the wonderful thread How you see the 16 types - in GIF form, a stereotype of ESTPs.

So I did some homework on ESTPs and came to the conclusion that what would chafe him would be the physical restrictions and the isolation (things that I would have no problem with) rather than the implicit betrayals and uncertainty (things that would drive me up the wall.) The resulting depression in my ESTP would be the result of his inferior Ni taking over, making him broody and pessimistic.

Now, since Ni is my dominant function I naturally am broody and pessimistic :) so it was not obvious to me why this would be so scary and miserable for him. But it seemed appropriate that he'd lose his usual upbeat, active personality while under such stress, so I unleashed all the dark imaginings of Ni on my ESTP and let him turn self-destructive accordingly. He didn't have the defenses to deal with that kind of darkness because he doesn't have to, normally.

To recover from it, he needed a chance to bring his other functions to bear -- a chance to apply his logical Thinking -- and most importantly to get some physical activity and socializing back into his schedule.

MBTI basics

Four dichotomies:
Intuitives/Sensors • Feelers/Thinkers • Introverts/Extroverts • Judgers/Perceivers

For writers: Sketching Characters • The Dark Side • Shadow & Resources

MBTI #6: Sketching characters

The sixteen MBTI types fall into four groups of generally similar temperaments. When you have a vague sketch of a new character, these can help narrow down which type the character might be.

Intellectuals: the NTs
INTJ, INTP, ENTJ, ENTP. Kiersey's overview of the group.

Up side: NTs are idea- and logic-driven. Concepts, structure, and rationalizing come easy to them, and they apply their ideas practically to the world around them.

Down side: They can be socially inept, angsty, and arrogant. Often come across as chilly and indifferent. The more socially adept ones can be very manipulative of those around them. For women of this type, there's the extra challenge of being seen as a "cold-hearted bitch" because our culture expects women to be warm and nurturing.

Dreamers: the NFs
INFJ, INFP, ENFJ, ENFP. Kiersey's overview of the group.

Up side: The combination of Intuition and Feeling makes the NFs a sensitive and idealistic group. They want to communicate, understand, and empathize -- which can be difficult in an ugly world.

Down side: They can fall into their deep interior world of thoughts and feelings, and come across as spineless and out of touch. Men of this type can have an especially rough time, since our culture still frowns on men showing emotions, and they'll be told to "man up" and ignore their natural sensitivities.

Managers: the SJs
ISTJ, ISFJ, ESTJ, ESFJ, aka "the Guardians." Kiersey's overview of the group.

Up side: SJs are solid, reliable, ordinary folks. They get stuff done, they keep their promises, they don't rock the boat unless they feel they must.

Down side: They can be boring, boring, boring. At the extremes, they can be stiflingly straight-laced and dedicated to enforcing their brand of conformity on everyone.

Artisans: the SPs
ISTP, ISFP, ESTP, ESFP. Kiersey's overview of the group.

Up side: In general, the four SP types are people who like to work with their hands, do things, create things. They're practical, but they seek new ideas and fun. Lots of fun.

Down side: SPs can become shallow show-offs and thrill-seekers, either annoying the heck out of people or  leaving a swath of broken hearts in their wake -- because all that matters is their own pleasure.

Fleshing out
Most character-generating systems start with the surface appearance and behaviors -- their favorite things, their personal experiences, and such -- and works their way into the character from the outside. Using MBTI takes you in the opposite direction.

We're starting with what makes the character tick, here, and once that's been established you can start working out how a character's MBTI shaped how he experienced his personal history -- what parts of those events shaped him more than others -- why his favorite things are his favorite things.

In fleshing out my characters, I bring world-building and story plot into play here, weighing what the character needs to be with what my creative gut is telling me will be interesting. I try not to "assign" characters an MBTI, especially not major characters, but I narrow it down to two or three most likely and feel my way from there. As the character becomes real, they'll tell me what they are.

MBTI is innate. It's influenced by one's upbringing and maturity level, and if one doesn't have a strong preference in more than one dichotomy, one can be difficult to type -- but in general, your type sticks.

Age and function mastery 
As stated earlier, a character's two dominant functions will be the easiest, most comfortable modes of being for him. They are also the functions that manifest at a young age. There's a fair amount of discussion about how children "figure out" what type they are, but in general it's thought that the dominant function has settled in by the time you get to your teenage years.

The secondary function develops over the teen years, which then determines which are the tertiary and inferior functions. Since those two don't come easily to a person, how well they will be developed depends on what effort is put into them -- or not.

Twenty-somethings and those who don't develop further can be stereotypes of their MBTI. NTs, the fumbling nerds. SPs, the party animals. NFs, the starry-eyed idealists. SJs, the goody two-shoes.

The other two functions develop "later in life" (most sources say) which is deliberately vague because there's an element of voluntary effort in there. But as a 41-year-old who has put in some effort, I think I can say I'm comfortable with my lesser functions as an INTJ, and that it happened over the course of my thirties.

MBTI basics

Four dichotomies:
Intuitives/Sensors • Feelers/Thinkers • Introverts/Extroverts • Judgers/Perceivers

For writers: Sketching Characters • The Dark Side • Shadow & Resources

MBTI #5: Judgers and Percievers

Judgers vs. Perceivers is the trickiest dichotomy, IMO, to explain. It could be argued that it has the least impact of the four letters. Generally, it's another directional pair, like Introvert vs. Extrovert, but it has to structure vs. spontenaiety.

Over-simplification
Judgers are organized, efficient and get stuff done. Perceivers... well... stuff gets done eventually...

Stereotypes
"You know you're a judger when..."
"You know you're a perceiver when..."

Description
Judgers have an internal need for goals, deadlines, organization, are uncomfortable having something incomplete, and like to have decisions made rather than keep their options open. Sure, everyone likes to have a goal in mind, even perceivers, but judgers have a need to create structure.

Perceivers like unstructured environments, tend to be more disorganized, sit on ideas until they are sure they've reached the correct decision, and like keeping their options open, often feeling unsettled by the idea that they may have come to a conclusion too early.

Further thoughts
J/P indicates which of the top two functions is dominant, of the middle two letters. For example, for an INTJ it indicates the N is dominant. For an INTP, the T. Exactly why Intuition is a "judging" function and Thinking is a "perceiving" function -- it seems to me that should be the other way around -- I'm not entirely clear on. It seems to me that my Ni is exactly what keeps me from being an organized, goal-driven J. My Ni keeps me noodling around and it's my Te that keeps me focused.

But that is just my experience. I test as a Judger, but it's not a strong preference. This thread at PersonalityCafe talks about some J/P stereotypes vs. reality.

In the general population, Judgers (54%) are on fairly equal footing with Percievers (46%).

MBTI basics

Four dichotomies:
Intuitives/Sensors • Feelers/Thinkers • Introverts/Extroverts • Judgers/Perceivers

For writers: Sketching Characters • The Dark Side • Shadow & Resources

MBTI #4: Introverts and Extroverts

It's important to point out that Introvert vs. Extrovert has nothing to do with shyness, confidence, or social skills. Introvert/Extrovert, here, refers to what energizes a person. Extroverts can be shy. Introverts can be great at parties. Read on...

Over-simplification
Introverts "recharge their batteries" by being alone. Extroverts "recharge" by being around other people.

Stereotypes
"You know you're an introvert when..."
"You know you're an extrovert when..."

Descriptions
Introverted attitudes view the outer world in terms of the self's subjective ideal, so they attempt to make the outer world more like the inner self. Their focus is deeper but less expansive--they can see all the implications of one idea at a time.

Extroverted attitudes view the inner world in terms of the non-self's objective ideal, so they attempt to make the inner self more like the outer world. Their focus is broader but more shallow--they can see a wide range of different information at once, but in less detail.

At a glance, those might not seem like they're talking about the same thing as my "over-simplification" above, but it's the same inward/outward dichotomy.

Further thoughts
Everybody needs a certain amount of socializing. We all want companionship, attention, and love. Some people need a lot. For others, a little goes a long way.

Introverts can be confident, bold, they can get up on stage and perform, spend hours at a party talking to strangers -- but at some point, they need alone time to recuperate. To recharge.

Extroverts can be shy and private. They can work alone, even enjoy solitude, but at some point they need people time to recuperate and recharge.

This is a heavy influence on one's dominant function, which is why the I/E in the MBTI label tells you which direction the dominant function points. Looking at the definitions in the T/F and N/S posts, you can see that the "e" versions all focus on the outside world and the "i" versions are inward-focused.

Your secondary function is always pointed in the opposite direction. However introverted you are, you still need to interact with the outside world. However extroverted, you're still an individual and not a collective.

The general population is just about evenly split between Extroverts (49%) and Introverts (51%).

MBTI basics

Four dichotomies:
Intuitives/Sensors • Feelers/Thinkers • Introverts/Extroverts • Judgers/Perceivers

For writers: Sketching Characters • The Dark Side • Shadow & Resources

MBTI #3: Feelers and Thinkers

Today, a closer look at the second of the dichotomies in the MBTI types: feeler vs. thinker. These two control the third slot in a four-letter type. To continue using myself as an example, this is the T in my INTJ designation.

Over-simplification
Thinkers apply impersonal logic and analysis. Feelers prioritize relationships and connections. Spock-types vs. the hippy-dippies, at the extremes.

Stereotypes
"You know you're a thinker when..."
"You know you're a feeler when..."

Descriptions
These are short descriptions. Longer ones in the first post here below the first "-------" line.

Extroverted Thinking (Te): Segmenting; organizing for efficiency; systematizing; applying logic; structuring; checking for consequences; monitoring for standards or specifications being met; setting boundaries, guidelines, and parameters; deciding if something is working or not. Sorting out different colors and styles; thinking about the consequences.

Introverted Thinking (Ti): Analyzing; categorizing; evaluating according to principles and whether something fits the framework or model; figuring out the principles on which something works; checking for inconsistencies; clarifying definitions to get more precision. Analyzing your options using principles.

Extroverted Feeling (Fe): Connecting, considering others and the group, organizing to meet their needs and honor their values and feelings, maintaining societal, organizational, or group values, adjusting to and accommodating others, deciding if something is appropriate or acceptable to others. Considering what would be appropriate for the situation

Introverted Feeling (Fi): Valuing; considering importance and worth; reviewing for incongruity; evaluating something based on the truths on which it is based; clarifying values to achieve accord; deciding if something is of significance and worth standing up for.

Further thoughts 
Spocks vs. hippies -- this is a dichotomy that can easily turn contentious. Because of our cultural biases, it's easy to paint logical Thinkers as reasonable and connective Feelers as silly, but that's not accurate. Everyone uses reason; it's their priorities that vary. Both approaches are valuable.

T and F illustrate the priorities applied to the information that N/S brought in. T/F also gets into how a person interacts with the outside world, especially in the Extroverted versions of T and F.

Feeling-dominant people are very in tune with emotions and can seem to pull information from nowhere, to Thinkers who have trouble reading body language and other social cues. On the other hand, Thinkers are great at organizing and analyzing -- which Feelers can find cold and impersonal, but it does get stuff done.

In the general population, there's a closer parity between Thinkers (40%) and Feelers (60%) than in the S/N dichotomy.

MBTI basics

Four dichotomies:
Intuitives/Sensors • Feelers/Thinkers • Introverts/Extroverts • Judgers/Perceivers

For writers: Sketching Characters • The Dark Side • Shadow & Resources

MBTI #2: Intuitives and Sensors

Today, a closer look at the first of the dichotomies in the MBTI types: intuitive vs. sensor. These two control the second slot in a four-letter type. To continue using myself as an example, this is the N in my INTJ designation. My main character in Disciple, Kate, tests as an ISTJ.

Over-simplification
Sensors deal in collected data: things they see and feel, or memories of things they've seen and felt. Intuitors deal in abstractions: ideas from within, or seeing the conceptual connections between things around them.

Stereotypes
"You know you're an intuitive when..."
"You know you're a sensor when..."

Descriptions
These are short descriptions. Longer ones in the first post here below the first "-------" line.

Extroverted Sensing (Se): Experiencing the immediate context; taking action in the physical world; noticing changes and opportunities for action; accumulating experiences; scanning for visible reactions and relevant data; recognizing what is relevant.

Introverted Sensing (Si): Reviewing past experiences, evoking what was, seeking detailed information and links to what is known, recalling stored impressions; accumulating data, recognizing the way things have always been. Connecting current experiences to past experiences and emotions.

Extroverted iNtuiting (Ne): Interpreting situations and relationships; picking up meanings and interconnections; being drawn to change what is and what could possibly be, noticing what is not said and threads of meaning emerging across multiple contexts.

Introverted iNtuiting (Ni): Foreseeing implications and likely effects without external data, conceptualizing new ways of seeing things, envisioning transformations, getting an image of profound meaning or far-reaching symbols.

Further thoughts
These two functions deal with "incoming information" for a person, both in what form that information takes (data or abstractions) and what direction it comes from (introverted or extroverted.)

Sensor-dominants come across as very "grounded" people, because they're completely in touch with reality, whereas intuitives are more distracted, dreamy, or cerebral. It's the intuitives who accidentally walk into doors because they were thinking about something. Sensors are the ones who sigh and shake their heads every time that happens.

In the general population, Sensors (73%) greatly outnumber Intuitives (27%).

MBTI basics

Four dichotomies:
Intuitives/Sensors • Feelers/Thinkers • Introverts/Extroverts • Judgers/Perceivers

For writers: Sketching Characters • The Dark Side • Shadow & Resources

MBTI #1: the basics

I wrote a brief intro to using the Myers-Briggs Type Indicatior (MBTI) in character development for my April blog tour. It's available at Sharon Bayliss' blog.

This series of posts will try to introduce the basics of Myers-Briggs functions and personality types, with an eye toward using them to develop characters for fiction. Bear in mind that while two people may be the same MBTI type, their upbringing, experiences, culture, etc., will make them express their type in different ways. Maybe they'll get along famously. Maybe they'll just get on each other's nerves.

What they will have in common is what sorts of information they gather most easily, what they prioritize, how they make decisions, and the easiest ways for them to interact with other people.

There are many tests available online, but I'm recommending this one.

Four basic functions
Myers-Briggs defines four basic functions human use to gather, process, and act on information. "Information" can be anything -- data, sensory input, emotions -- and "process" and "act on" can take many different forms as well.

Important point: everyone uses all of their functions. There are no "better" or "worse" functions. What separates the personality types is which functions come naturally, and which are difficult for an individual to work with.

The four functions are: thinking, feeling, sensing and intuition. Abbreviated as: T, F, S, N.

Two orientations
Functions can be Introverted (i) or Extroverted (e), which indicates whether the function looks inward to the self or outward toward other people and the world. Therefore, the four functions become eight: Ti, Te, Fi, Fe, Si, Se, Ni, Ne.

Each of these has a specific definition, which I will go into more detail about in later posts.

Arrays by preference
If everyone uses four functions in a specific order from most preferred (coming the most naturally to that person) to least (those functions that don't come easy) then there are sixteen personality types. Chart of all sixteen and their preferences.

There are four dichotomies in this system -- you're either an I or E, an N or S, an F or T, a J or P. Each of those is actually a continuum between the two extremes. For example, I test as a strong Introvert with very little Extroversion. It's entirely possible to be "borderline" in any of the dichotomies and not have a strong preference for one or the other.

Dominant, secondary, tertiary and inferior
One's dominant function is the one that comes easiest. You're very comfortable using that function, you trust it. It's rarely "wrong." The secondary function supports and reinforces the dominant -- it's also very comfortable and reliable, for you.

For example, as an INTJ (hi, I'm an INTJ) I am very comfortable with my Ni and Te -- working with the abstract ideas that well up inside and translating them into external reality.

The third and fourth functions in one's array -- the tertiary and inferior functions -- don't come so easy. You don't feel so sure about what they bring you, they can be confusing, and you need to work at mastering them.

For INTJs like me, that's my Fi and Se. Since I'm a bit older and I've put in the practice working with my two inferior functions (so that I can use them in writing stories) I am more comfortable with my roiling internal feelings (Fi) and the wealth of sensory details (Se) I can tap into. When I was younger, I was much more angsty and timid in situations full of sensory overload.

What about the other four? 
If there are four-times-two functions and each type is an array of four, what about the other four? Definitions vary, but IMO those missing four functions make up what's called the shadow. Some theories call those your "demons," especially the opposite of your most inferior function. The missing four functions do not come easy to a given personality type, but they can still be used.

As an INTJ, for me those four are Ne, Ti, Fe and Si. This is a good place to repeat: everyone uses all the functions. I have been known to glean things using Ne and Ti, though I have to work at it. I'm still not so good at Fe (tend to use my Se and Ni to approximate.) And I agree, my Si is very much my "demon." Wrestling with that is never a happy thing.

This will all make more sense when I explain the eight functions in more detail. I will also lay out some of the theories about the shadow when I talk about stress.

MBTI basics

Four dichotomies:
Intuitives/Sensors • Feelers/Thinkers • Introverts/Extroverts • Judgers/Perceivers

For writers: Sketching Characters • The Dark Side • Shadow & Resources

Characters as Myers-Briggs types

So, I've put my characters in a complicated, emotionally challenging situation. I know exactly what I would do, if all of this happened to me. I'd find a cave and hide in it. Probably write a book while I'm in there.

Fortunately, my characters are not me and their responses are far more interesting than that. 

It's always a challenge to
bring characters into focus.
Photo by Holger Dieterich,
available at sxc.hu

I try to treat my characters as independent entities, even though they're inside my head and all contain elements of my personality. (I am legion, for I contain multitudes.) I try to predict how they will react in a situation, rather than tell them how they'll react. People are hard to understand, though, so naturally I go looking for real-people reactions to situations and use them to improve my predicting ability.

The Myers-Briggs personality types came up in two earlier blogs I wrote (first one, second one) and lately I've been using them some more to gauge my characters' responses.

Briefly, the sixteen Myers-Briggs personality types group people by their internal workings -- the interplay of intuition, thinking, feeling and sensing, and how they interact with the outside world -- and describe them in four letters. It's not a perfect system. Nothing is. But it can be useful.

You can find free MBTI quizzes online, and you can find descriptions of each of the types in Wikipedia and elsewhere. Figuring out which type fits your character best is a challenging process in itself, and it's a good excuse to sit down and get to know him/her better.

Some descriptions geared toward workplace abilities, some toward romantic compatibilities. They all tend to use neutral language, though. They focus more on the positives than the negatives. And they're very much generalizations.

So I've been hanging out at the Personality Cafe, (they have free MB quizzes & descriptions there) where each MBTI has its own forum and chat about both MBTI issues and real-world situations. In reading through threads of particular types giving each other advice -- and trying to explain themselves to other types -- I picked up a lot of useful insight into what's important to my characters. Then I tried to translate those things into the context of the world they live in.

Because they're not like me. Which is good.

Bonus: A while back, The Character Therapist polled writers about their MB types and posted the intriguing results here.

Online personality tests, part 2

Continued from Part 1, in which I channeled the three main characters of Disciple in taking an online personality test to determine their Myers-Briggs personality types.

One of the monkey wrenches in Kate and Kiefan's relationship is Anders. His relationship with Kate moves much more gradually and faces a number of hurdles, but he's got an in with the readers (so far) so it keeps things interesting. 


Anders' profile

He's an ESTP, which is almost completely my opposite and one might think it's difficult to write a character who is completely different from yourself. In truth, Anders has been... well, not only easy to write but difficult to let go of. All three of these characters have been in my head for a long, long time and even when the other two have faded into the background Anders... never does. Psychologists, feel free to extrapolate and hypothesize. :)

Anyway, again, an accurate sketch of him. Kate and Anders will have their disagreements -- they've already begun, in the part I'm currently finishing up -- but they come from differing expectations and things left to rankle... not head-on collisions as between Kate and Kiefan. Intriguingly, the website's analysis backs me up again.

What 41Q says about their relationship (edited down a bit):

Your relationship type: "Symbolic"

This symbolic relationship is identifiable by one partner being exactly what the other partner sees when he looks into a mirror. It is not referring to a mirror of the physical self as much as mirroring the best qualities in each partner. While the good qualities are present in each, a different focus is placed on each quality. One partner is dominant in each quality. [...] In the early days of the relationship each will try to do what the other wants. Over time, this can become something that is not always agreeable. [...] If the stable partner tries to stifle the unpredictable one too much, the romance between them will flicker and die. On the other hand, if the unpredictable partner refuses to follow any practical plan for the relationship, the practical partner will grow disgusted with that refusal. That may destroy the relationship.

This is interesting for me because I had not thought in terms of Kate "stifling" Anders -- it could be that their relationship may not get to that stage in the context of the story, as stifling is a long-range, gradual thing, It's also a good question of how much of Anders' "unpredictability" Kate is going to put up with -- tying directly in to "how unpredictable is he, really?" In this re-incarnation of the story he did pick up a bit more bad-boy persona and the implications of that can be sneaky.

And now for the hilarious part: I plugged in Anders' profile with Kiefan's. They aren't "in love" with each other, but if you strip out that context the results still surprised me. 

What 41Q says about their relationship (edited down a fair amount):

Your relationship type: "Nominal-Congruity"

The nominal-congruity romance is made up of two partners who think of themselves as very different and individualized. However, others do not see much difference in them. It is true that they share the same interests and that is what draws them together as a couple. [...] Although this couple shares many interests and activities, each one has a different reason for doing so. They seem to adjust and accept the superficiality of their understanding of each other. [...] They do have great respect for each other and the romance they share and it is not unusual for them to go through life together, happily.

At the beginning of the story -- before Kate became an issue between them -- my gut kept telling me that Anders and Kiefan had a polite, rather "professional" relationship despite the fact that there were a dozen reasons for them to hate and/or avoid each other. I had no explanation for this. I worried that it would seem artificial. And I also had a sneaking suspicion that once Kate became an issue all those reasons would bubble up and make it very easy for Kiefan and Anders to get murderous about each other.

Maybe it's not so artificial after all. 

I'm not blogging this to say "Look how good I'm doing!" and I hope it doesn't come across that way. These are characters I've known a long time and I plugged them in because they're currently on the front burner. And I still got some interesting pointers out of it.

I should do this with my science fiction crew, too, because they are much "younger" characters than the fantasy gang. And now that I'm wrapping up Part III of the monstrosity, it's probably time to look at Orbital Shifts again...  

Online personality tests

Over on The Blog That Helps You Diagnose Your Characters (which I read, because I do diagnose my characters) there was a link posted to an online personality test -- it's a version of the Myers-Briggs personality test, which is a handy link to have.

IMO, the best way to develop characters is to talk to them, carry them around in your head all day, make them do things, let them argue with me, and most importantly write about them... personality tests like this are handy as feedback on how well fleshed out they are (how much pondering it takes to figure out the character's answers clues me in to that) and to get additional insights/ideas about them.

And their relationships. 41Q is interesting in that it will let you compare two profiles once you've created them, so I did that for my trio of characters in Disciple -- yeah, it's another love triangle, how un-original -- and was intrigued by what came up.

Kate's profile

Kate comes up as an ISTJ, which is one letter off how I test in these things. That isn't too surprising, as the line between me and Kate has always been a bit blurry and I probably identify with her way too much. Other characters grow away from me more.

One might think this makes Kate an easy character for me to write, but I find myself second-guessing a lot. As well as pushing her away from me and encouraging her to be herself. Not me. (Though all characters are, in essence, a piece of yourself... writers are vast, they contain multitudes... that's a whole different blog post, though.)

Prince Kiefan's profile

Kiefan diverges a bit more: ESTJ. Two letters off me; this is a good thing. The description they give here is pretty close to how he's developed in my head. He's good prince material, just throw in "handsome," "likes to read," and "handy with swords" and... a few flaws, so he isn't too perfect. I've tried to keep him skating along the edge of arrogance and possessiveness.  

At first glance, it's pretty obvious that Kate and Kiefan have a lot of personality traits in common. They fell for each other pretty quickly on that basis.

What 41Q says about their relationship (edited down a bit):

Your relationship type: "Invalidation"

The state of invalidation cannot survive as a romance unless one partner is willing to take a subordinate position. One will be a stronger personality and will transmit orders to the other. The second partner is the receiver and is expected to carry out the orders. [...] This works out as a good romance and long-standing relationship if (one of them) accepts being subordinate in return for being supported and protected. [...] Each partner in this relationship is playing a role that benefits both of them. If both are satisfied, invalidation may remain a workable relationship and last through life.

The amusing part here is that I read this the morning after Kate and Kiefan first butted heads. It didn't turn into a big disagreement, but it could have. I hadn't planned for it to happen, either, they were just going with the sketched scene and Kiefan said one thing, Kate said no and... well, I guess now we know where the honeymoon ended.

How will this influence their relationship in the longer run? Could they escalate to some sort of emotional nuclear war? (Well, sure they could. There are some potential hot buttons on hand.) How will that impact the other aspects of my plot -- the kingdom's war, their personal development?

Tune in on Thursday for the third point in the triangle.