| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| linus |
Posted - 06 Jul 2010 : 6:19:51 PM
What type do u guys think Michael Scott is from the Office?
I was stuck between phobic 6w7 and 7w6
He isn't completely extroverted but he is histrionic. The reason i thought six though was cuz he's so worried about being liked and he can't make any important decision easily without a superior's (or help from dwight lol). |
| 25 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| tagua seeds |
Posted - 03 Feb 2011 : 12:04:48 AM
quote:
Originally posted by JoL
quote:
Originally posted by tagua seeds
[
I think the operative term is "stereotypical". I find Fred extremely entertaining, but there's really no depth if you compare him to a "realer" 6 comedy character such as Archie Bunker or Bob Newhart (I think his last name was Hartley in the show).
I disagree. Practically every episode was about Fred's average-lower level of health 6ness.
Why would a character's stereo-typicalness make him NOT a type? Characters aren't real people, but often they can be typed.
Regarding Michael Scott, I think the character is mostly (i)like(/i) a highly so(.....sx/sp) 3/2-9.
-----------------------
[/quote]
I threw Fred Sanford in as an afterthought. He's probably at least a step above the others as far as being a "cartoon". However, while I agree with you about each episode showing low-average sixishness, I think there are other sixish sitcom characters that have a lot more dynamism enneagramatically speaking. Give Redd Foxx credit for constantly giving life to this one-trick pony. |
| sunny |
Posted - 02 Feb 2011 : 1:50:35 PM
quote:
Originally posted by tagua seeds
[
I think the operative term is "stereotypical". I find Fred extremely entertaining, but there's really no depth if you compare him to a "realer" 6 comedy character such as Archie Bunker or Bob Newhart (I think his last name was Hartley in the show).
[/quote]
I disagree. Practically every episode was about Fred's average-lower level of health 6ness.
Why would a character's stereo-typicalness make him NOT a type? Characters aren't real people, but often they can be typed.
Regarding Michael Scott, I think the character is mostly (i)like(/i) a highly so(.....sx/sp) 3/2-9.
-----------------------
|
| tagua seeds |
Posted - 31 Jan 2011 : 11:43:33 PM
quote:
Originally posted by JoL
quote:
Originally posted by tagua seeds
quote:
Originally posted by dfgray44
quote:
Originally posted by tagua seeds
Most comedies have at least one of these; if you go inside, nothing's there.
Yo, that's what I'm sayin', ya'll.
Some of my favorites: JJ ("Good Times"), The Fonz, Corporal Klinger, the tall bailiff from "Night Court" (I've heard that the guy who portrayed him is a Shakespearean actor), maybe even Fred Sanford
I was watching Sanford and Son a couple of months ago, and was thinking Fred seemed a lot like a stereotypical 6 and Lamont was 1ish.
-----------------------
I think the operative term is "stereotypical". I find Fred extremely entertaining, but there's really no depth if you compare him to a "realer" 6 comedy character such as Archie Bunker or Bob Newhart (I think his last name was Hartley in the show). |
| 4wants8 |
Posted - 31 Jan 2011 : 10:05:26 PM
(Are they really gonna stick Michael with Holly?
After all the romantic searching that the guy has done, and all the heartbreak he's experienced, he deserves to be with someone who's really head-over-heels for him.)
-------------------------
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GYhWqKng39s |
| sunny |
Posted - 31 Jan 2011 : 7:04:46 PM
quote:
Originally posted by tagua seeds
quote:
Originally posted by dfgray44
quote:
Originally posted by tagua seeds
Most comedies have at least one of these; if you go inside, nothing's there.
Yo, that's what I'm sayin', ya'll.
Some of my favorites: JJ ("Good Times"), The Fonz, Corporal Klinger, the tall bailiff from "Night Court" (I've heard that the guy who portrayed him is a Shakespearean actor), maybe even Fred Sanford
I was watching Sanford and Son a couple of months ago, and was thinking Fred seemed a lot like a stereotypical 6 and Lamont was 1ish.
-----------------------
|
| tagua seeds |
Posted - 27 Jan 2011 : 11:53:28 PM
quote:
Originally posted by dfgray44
quote:
Originally posted by tagua seeds
Most comedies have at least one of these; if you go inside, nothing's there.
Yo, that's what I'm sayin', ya'll.
Some of my favorites: JJ ("Good Times"), The Fonz, Corporal Klinger, the tall bailiff from "Night Court" (I've heard that the guy who portrayed him is a Shakespearean actor), maybe even Fred Sanford |
| dfgray44 |
Posted - 27 Jan 2011 : 11:46:20 PM
quote:
Originally posted by tagua seeds
Most comedies have at least one of these; if you go inside, nothing's there.
Yo, that's what I'm sayin', ya'll.
|
| tagua seeds |
Posted - 27 Jan 2011 : 11:36:08 PM
quote:
Originally posted by dfgray44
He's like Kramer: a cartoon - not bound by a psychic structure. You can get close, typewise, but it's never gonna congeal.
Most comedies have at least one of these; if you go inside, nothing's there. |
| dfgray44 |
Posted - 27 Jan 2011 : 9:18:15 PM
He's like Kramer: a cartoon - not bound by a psychic structure. You can get close, typewise, but it's never gonna congeal.
|
| sunny |
Posted - 27 Jan 2011 : 9:01:23 PM
quote:
Originally posted by irregulus
Michael Scott is naive. He inhabits a fantasy world where everyone gets along. He accentuates the positive. He's inappropriately aggressive. He has no idea how to read people or how they actually feel. Stubborn as a mule and scared to death people won't like him or that he won't fit in. Wholly un-self conscious but completely reliant on the input from people around him. Woefully off the mark when he does actually try to self-actualize and make a decision. It's a caricature, but he seems like a 9w8 to me.
(Also think Steve Carrell is a 9)
I've also thought about that, but it's hard to see "withdrawing" or sloth or lust in the character. I could possibly see Steve Carrell as a 9-3.
I'll have to think about that one for a while.
-----------------------
|
| irregulus |
Posted - 27 Jan 2011 : 8:04:44 PM
Michael Scott is naive. He inhabits a fantasy world where everyone gets along. He accentuates the positive. He's inappropriately aggressive. He has no idea how to read people or how they actually feel. Stubborn as a mule and scared to death people won't like him or that he won't fit in. Wholly un-self conscious but completely reliant on the input from people around him. Woefully off the mark when he does actually try to self-actualize and make a decision. It's a caricature, but he seems like a 9w8 to me.
(Also think Steve Carrell is a 9) |
| tagua seeds |
Posted - 27 Jan 2011 : 09:49:44 AM
quote:
Originally posted by JoL
I've read that the best acting happens when an actor plays his/her own type or an attached type because it will seem natural.
I'm thinking that comedy might be a different story. Comedians can play other types with hilarious results.
-----------------------
I agree with this. The more over-the-top the comedy, the farther afield you can go with the character representations. This, of course, presupposes you have talented actors. |
| sunny |
Posted - 26 Jan 2011 : 11:54:39 PM
I was watching episodes of this tonight, thinking that the character Michael is a 2/3so/sx played by a 7/6so/sx actor (Steve Carell).
I've read that the best acting happens when an actor plays his/her own type or an attached type because it will seem natural.
I'm thinking that comedy might be a different story. Comedians can play other types with hilarious results.
-----------------------
|
| 4wants8 |
Posted - 08 Dec 2010 : 12:12:42 AM
Gabe Lewis? |
| linus |
Posted - 30 Sep 2010 : 9:45:29 PM
quote:
Originally posted by 4wants8
A favorite Michael quote:
"Do I need to be liked? Absolutely not. I like to be liked. I enjoy being liked. I have to be liked. But it's not like this compulsive need to be liked, like my need to be praised."
Can you see he's being incredibly defensive about it? And whats the distinction between praise and being liked? |
| 4wants8 |
Posted - 06 Sep 2010 : 01:35:48 AM
A favorite Michael quote:
"Do I need to be liked? Absolutely not. I like to be liked. I enjoy being liked. I have to be liked. But it's not like this compulsive need to be liked, like my need to be praised." |
| BroNerd |
Posted - 05 Sep 2010 : 12:21:32 PM
I think Michael Scott is a 2w3. He's always butting his way into people's lives with good intentions. He's hilariously incompetent and awkward.
Dwight is an obvious Six.
3w4 sp/so
ENTP |
| Classic Oompa-Loompa |
Posted - 31 Aug 2010 : 12:09:51 AM
Sure 7s can be relationship oriented. Especially fun relationships. But that's not Kelly, She isn't relationship oriented--she's relationship based. Allow me to quote from her wiki's depiction: "Kelly is the office chatterbox, usually on topics that a teenager might discuss, such as boys, dating, and celebrity gossip. She also admits wanting to get married and that she "can't wait to get pregnant and have babies"."
Both Kelly and Michael's identites are centered around and their lives are consumed by their respective lovers.
quote:
Originally posted by Desdemona
This doesn't strike me as particularly twoish stuff, though. It still doesn't seem like giving to get or trying to help people.
Why must the 2 always give? What about instances in life where giving is not required, or not acceptable--how does the 2 navigate those?
The hallmark of the 2 is people-pleasing, and basing one's identity off relationships' dynamics.
BTW remember when Kelly couldn't understand what game her then-boyfriend Darryl was playing by just honestly speaking his mind to her? What? No manipulation? Just lucid self-awareness and expression? What's his deal!
Michael's childlike innocence and naiveté is not reflective of any type--it's just to make the audience like him and feel smart.
Think Jim Carry. Robin Williams. Now think Michael Scott. Is his shenanigans like theirs? Granted there's lots of slapstick comedy in both, but his issues are so different than theirs. His issues are heart issues with people, pride and shame and humility and humiliation. Their stuff is head issues with wacky scenarios and manic escapism.
quote:
Originally posted by Desdemona
As for him saying it wouldn't be fair to Pam for him to continue dating her mother.....he's just making an excuse. He doesn't want to keep dating her, he's not really trying to help Pam in any way. He has descovered some things that dimmed her lustre in his eyes, and he's trying to weasel out of a relationship he'd previously been pursuing very aggressively.
Precisely, you've brought my point home with an analysis of the sitch. Now just add "and this illustrates succinctly the definitive quality of the the 2w3 to be devastating to others emotionally through manipulation--oblivious to their causing the roller coaster, or of any bad intentions on their part whatsoever".
Michael's pursuing in relationships is the seduction of the 2--not the 7. It's fueled by the personal validation from the person--not the excitement of the experience. Also, he lacks the 7's genuine charm, and their innate assuredness of the superiority of everything that is them--his superiority is easily deflated pride--not the 7's genuine belief in themselves.
quote:
Originally posted by Desdemona
Btw, Courney Love used to give other little kids money to be her friends, but I don't think many would type her as a 2.
Neither do I. To me that just means she utilized her realization that money = power. (I gave my 8w7 niece $20 spending money for camp, and it basically reversed our relationship into one of best friends--with nothing changing on my part to facilitate this reversal save for giving her money!) But what if Courtney offered them money she didn't have for them to go to college--just to get to be the one who brings them good news!
Then Courtney would be Michael Scott, a 2w3. |
| Desdemona |
Posted - 30 Aug 2010 : 3:34:12 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Classic Oompa-Loompa
Hi Desdemona,
Kelly doesn't have the quick, agile mind of the 7, and she's way too relationship-based to be a 7.
Though I have often argued against the stereotype of the airhead 7, I do realize that a certain segment of the type is like that. Some are quite relationship-oriented, too. Why do you imagine 7's can't be relationship-oriented?
quote:
As for Michael Scott, I'll just pick a few out of the box. Remember when as a kid he was on television saying he wants to grow up to have 100 kids so he'll have to have friends. Because as his children they'll have to be his friends? Or in "St. Patrick's Day" when he misinterprets Jo's routine southern warmth for genuine attraction and starts with plans to visit etc. until she ends it abruptly and angrily? Then at the end of the episode he realizes how he was so intent on getting her to like him that he didn't get a chance to think whether he liked her? Or how about his obliviousness to brutally emotionally devastating Pam when he dates her mother, saying something like "doesn't Pam want me to find romantic happiness? I support her seeking romantic happiness!"? What about when he ends the relationship by saying it wouldn't be fair to Pam for them to continue" (--Pam by this time already having no problem with their relationship.)
This doesn't strike me as particularly twoish stuff, though. It still doesn't seem like giving to get or trying to help people. Wanting people to like him, imo, comes from his phobic 6 wing and so/sx stacking. He has a childlike innocence, but I don't especially equate that with type 2. As for him saying it wouldn't be fair to Pam for him to continue dating her mother.....he's just making an excuse. He doesn't want to keep dating her, he's not really trying to help Pam in any way. He has descovered some things that dimmed her lustre in his eyes, and he's trying to weasel out of a relationship he'd previously been pursuing very aggressively.
quote:
I could go on. For Michael I can probably pull 2w3 put of every single last episode.
I'm just not sure why you see these things as 2w3. Remember, 6 is a very people-oriented type too, and social firsts are people-oriented as well, regardless of type. It sounds like you might be looking at all moving towards people (or even being naive) as twoish.
Btw, Courney Love used to give other little kids money to be her friends, but I don't think many would type her as a 2.
I am not a stereotype!
7w6cp
Sx/sp
ENFP
Dramatic/Mercurial/Adventurous/Idiosyncratic Style
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2EIeUlvHAiM&a=EP1qRnozdGw&playnext_from=ML
|
| Classic Oompa-Loompa |
Posted - 30 Aug 2010 : 2:38:17 PM
Hi Desdemona,
Kelly doesn't have the quick, agile mind of the 7, and she's way too relationship-based to be a 7.
As for Michael Scott, I'll just pick a few out of the box. Remember when as a kid he was on television saying he wants to grow up to have 100 kids so he'll have to have friends. Because as his children they'll have to be his friends? Or in "St. Patrick's Day" when he misinterprets Jo's routine southern warmth for genuine attraction and starts with plans to visit etc. until she ends it abruptly and angrily? Then at the end of the episode he realizes how he was so intent on getting her to like him that he didn't get a chance to think whether he liked her? Or how about his obliviousness to brutally emotionally devastating Pam when he dates her mother, saying something like "doesn't Pam want me to find romantic happiness? I support her seeking romantic happiness!"? What about when he ends the relationship by saying it wouldn't be fair to Pam for them to continue" (--Pam by this time already having no problem with their relationship.)
I could go on. For Michael I can probably pull 2w3 put of every single last episode.
|
| Desdemona |
Posted - 30 Aug 2010 : 10:33:03 AM
One thing I keep seeing is Michael and Kelly labelled 2w3's. I think they're clear 7w6 ESFP's. Where are they giving to get? Where do you see them trying to be super helpful?
I am not a stereotype!
7w6cp
Sx/sp
ENFP
Dramatic/Mercurial/Adventurous/Idiosyncratic Style
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2EIeUlvHAiM&a=EP1qRnozdGw&playnext_from=ML
|
| Classic Oompa-Loompa |
Posted - 29 Aug 2010 : 12:44:30 AM
quote:
Jim Halpert · 9w8 (I think 7w8-fixed)
Jim would never attempt his shenanigans if he were a 9. Also, he's way too assertive and socially a force of rationality to be a 9. His preference for routine and the straight and narrow can go either way. It's (healthy) 1s who challenge their boss's irrationality (or at least complain about it behind the boss's back) and bully bully-magnets like Dwight.
quote:
Pam Halpert · 6
Pam's too calming--and not aggressive, anxious, and proactive enough for a 6. Remember at the beach when she needed the rush of walking on coals to get her to finally air her pent-up grievances with her co's?
quote:
Ryan Howard · 3w4 (5w6 fix)
You're right--he's too calm and calculating to be a 7 as I thought.
quote:
Stanley Hudson · 8w7 (the sp-sx stacking makes him superficially seem 9-wing)
Where's his overwhelming energy? His mania? His ambition--big ideas and big follow-through? He's low key, but with anger flareups in spurts of rudeness--classic 9w8.
quote:
Meredith Palmer · 7wcp6
She's doesn't have the manic quality of the 6 wing, and couldn't care less when others think what she considers fun is out of hand, so I'm sticking with 7w8 for her.
quote:
Charles Miner · 8w7 (5w6 fix?)
Not manically aggressive enough to warrant a 7-wing. And he was too patient with Michael before threatening violence to be an 8w7.
I also think you should reconsider your take on Oscar , Phyllis, Karen, Todd Packer, Roy, and Holly Flax. |
| 4wants8 |
Posted - 28 Aug 2010 : 12:03:57 AM
I'm tired and not feeling well, so I am just going to give my first-instinct answers, quick-and-dirty.
Michael Scott · 2w3
Dwight Schrute · 6w5
Jim Halpert · 9w8 (I think 7w8-fixed)
Pam Halpert · 6
Ryan Howard · 3w4 (5w6 fix)
Stanley Hudson · 8w7 (the sp-sx stacking makes him superficially seem 9-wing)
Toby Flenderson · 9
Kevin Malone · 9w8
Creed Bratton · 6w5
Bob Vance, Vance Refrigeration · 8w7 (strong cp6 in fix)
Meredith Palmer · 7wcp6
Oscar Martinez · cp6w5 (3w4 or 4w3 fix)
Kelly Kapoor · 2w3 (6w7 fix)
Erin Hannon · 9
Angela Martin · 1w2
Phyllis Lapin-Vance · I don't know. Maybe 6w7 and 2w3 in fix.
Jan Levinson · 3w4
Karen Filippelli · I don't know. Maybe 9. 7 in fix.
Todd Packer · 6w7
Roy Anderson · 8w7
Holly Flax · 1w2
Billy Merchant · 5w6 (8w7 fixed)
David Wallace · 9 (phobic 6-fixed)
Charles Miner · 8w7 (5w6 fix?)
Jan reminds me somewhat of Emma Bovary. ("It costs what it costs!" Shudder.) |
| Classic Oompa-Loompa |
Posted - 27 Aug 2010 : 06:24:59 AM
These are the show's characters who the writers have developed enough to come to any surmise re their types:
Michael Scott · 2w3
Dwight Schrute · Counter-phobic 6w5
Jim Halpert · 1w9
Pam Halpert · 9
Ryan Howard · 7
Stanley Hudson · 9w8.
Kevin Malone · 9w8
Creed Bratton · 7w6
Meredith Palmer · 7w8
Kelly Kapoor · 2w3
Erin Hannon · 9
Angela Martin · 1w2
Phyllis Lapin-Vance · 9w8
Jan Levinson · 3w4
Karen Filippelli · 3w4
Todd Packer · 3w2
Roy Anderson · 8w9
Holly Flax · 7w6
Jo Bennett · 8w7
Yup, that's my take. |
| linus |
Posted - 12 Jul 2010 : 8:09:57 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Stormy
quote:
Originally posted by linus
I think pam would be the two and jim a 9. She seems very compliant to me and 2s are the most compliant.
E9s are compliant par excellence - it's unfortunate that R&H's "Compliant Triad" does not reflect this.
[Stormy]
well they're self effacing but its not a reciprical compliance. all the compliant types want something in return, but 9s are just trying to avoid conlict. 2s communicate mainly with their feelings and 9s numb themselves so that it doesn't really matter if its their true feelings or not. |
