Grey Eminence and the Sacrifice of the Personality

Following last Sunday's talk, yet another person recommended that I read Aldus Huxley's Grey Eminence. According to Alan, the recommender:

"It is a study of Father Joseph who was a monk, a mystic, and an advisor to Cardinal Richelieu during the Thirty Years war in France and persecution of miscellaneous protestants and heretics. Huxley was clearly intrigued by how a deeply religious man could have gone so far off track. He rejected the quick answer that Joseph could have just been using religion as a facade for manipulation, but looks deeper."

I read some excerpts and the material here does, indeed, resonate with the Enneagram. For instance:

"religion consists in the exact opposite of self-reliance and self-esteem -- in total self-surrender to a God... suffering himself to be experienced by those who are prepared to accept the conditions upon which that experience may be had: the sacrifice of all elements of their personality..."

and

"the real Satan is the element in every individual being which hinders that being from dying to its selfhood and becoming united with the reality from which it has been separated."

Compare these ideas to the following excerpt from the opening chapter of The Enneagram: A Journey of Self Discovery, by Maria Beesing, Robert Nogosek, and Patrick J. O'Leary:

"According to the Enneagram system, there are nine... types of human personality. Each personality type is is identified in a negative way though it also has positive characteristics. The identifying negativity stems from a specific compulsion ingrained in one's self-concept and having a great influence on one's behavior...

The journey into self offered by the Enneagram is not easy. To many it will turn out to be extremely threatening. It is unpleasant to think of one's basic personality as a 'sin type'. The compulsion serves to protect oneself and offers personal security. To seek to unveil it will be experienced as a kind of 'death' to oneself...

Through the discovery of one's Enneagram type there can be awakened a whole new sense of self-criticism. It will always give one something to repent, something to confess as sin... This self-criticism will in itself already be a basic step to that new freedom promised by the Enneagram, a freedom from being secretly led by the dark side of one's inner self.

The discovery of one's type will also point out a lack of faith on a deep level. Underlying the compulsion of each tye is a strategy for defending the self... As a strategy for self-protection it is a chosen way of 'self-salvation.' The personality has simply chosen a way to acheive security and fulfillment by its own efforts. This is, of course, a mistake. Through the discovery of one Enneagram type there can be awakened a whole new sense of needing salvation..."

Beesing, Nogosek, and O'Leary also offer this gem of insight:

"Although people are not generally proud of what they call their sins, they do tend to be proud of the compulsion characterizing their personality type. They think it makes them superior to those who do not have this compulsion."

In other words, that which we think of as our best trait is also our worst trait.

Let us return to the question of how a deeply religious Christian such as Father Joseph could be such a warmonger. (Check out this article that compares Father Joseph to Mahmoud Ahmadi-nejad.)

Huxley, in his examination of Father Joseph, discusses how nominally positive traits -- loyalty, passion, zeal, willingness to do God's will -- served evil purposes. He writes:

"Father Joseph... was intensely a patriot and a royalist. Born and brought up during the civil wars, he had conceived a veritable passion for national unity, for order and for what was then the sole guarantee of these two goods, the monarchy. This passion had been rationalized into a religious principle by means of the old crusading faith in the divine mission of France and the newly popularized doctrine of the divine right of kings... Hanotaux, the historian of Cardinal Richelieu, writes of [Father Joseph] that, 'he gave himself to two high causes, which absorbed his life, God and France, always ready to work and fight for either cause, but never separating one from the other, always responding to the call of an inner conviction, namely that France is the instrument of Providence and French greatness a providential thing.' Granted the validity of these doctrines - doctrines which he held with a burning intensity fo conviction - it was obviously Father Joseph's duty to undertake political work for king and country, when called upon to do so. It was his duty because, ex hypothesi, such political work was as truly the will of God as the work of teaching, preaching, and contemplation.

Father Josseph believed that the cause of God and the cause of France were inseparable. We must now inquire why he chose to harbor this belief... [One reason] is that the circumstances of his upbringing had created habits of thought and feeling which, in spite of his long-drawn effort to kill out the Old Adam in him, he had found it impossible to eliminate." (emphsis mine)

I diagnose a terminal case of 6-ishness.

Jesus is my Enneagram Teacher

Note: This was originally published on 12/1/07.
A simple comparison of The Enneagram Institute's "Chart 1 -- Personality Elements" (downloadable, for free, here) and Matthew 5:45-48 and 6:1-34 yields this rather pointed advice from Jesus:
To the perfectionistic, judging, in search of integrity, "I am right", identified with the superego - type: '[your Father in heaven] makes his sun rise on the evil and the on the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous... be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect."
To the proud, well-intentioned, "I have no needs", getting his/her sense of value from other people's reactions - type: "Beware of practicing your piety before other in order to be seen by them... whenever you give alms, do not sound a trumpet before you, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and the streets, so that they may be praised by others."
To the vain type who wants to be effective and who bases his or her value on performance and image: "Whenever you pray, do not be like the hypocrites; for they love to stand and pray in the synagogues and the street corners, so that they may be seen by others... do not heap up empty words as the Gentiles do; for they think that they will be heard because of their many words."
To the melancholy type who doesn't "fit in": "Whenever you fast, do not look dismal, like the hypocrites, for they disfigure their faces so as to show others that they are fasting... put oil on your head and wash your face so that your fasting may not be seen by others."
To the stingy, avaricious type who thinks he or she can understand by "witnessing" -- "Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth... if your eye is healthy, your whole body will be full of light, but if your eye is unhealthy, your body will be full of darkness... You cannot serve God and wealth."
To the worrying type who fears being without support: "Do not worry about your life, what you will eat or what you will drink, or about your body, what you will wear... Look at the birds of the air; they neither sow nor reap nor gather into barns, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them."
To the gluttonous, fixed on anticipated and planning - type who loses immediacy due to focusing on the future and thinks "if others gave me what I wanted, I'd be happier": "Do not [say] 'What will we eat?' or 'What will we drink?' or 'What will we wear?'... your heavenly Father knows that you need all these things. But strive first for the Kingdom of God and his righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well. So do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will bring worries of its own."
Jesus seems to have left out types 8 and 9, but Riso and Hudson did not.

Mario Sikora, the brain, and the 6's Inner Guidance

Note: This was originally published on 12/16/07, by Mary Beth, of all people.
If you've been following along extremely closely, you know I've been in Tallahassee for the past week. While in Tallahassee I did three things and three things only: work, gain weight, and read books and articles related to the Enneagram. Before I left I had printed out Enneagram Monthly for Nov. of 2006 (one of three issues available for free, here.) My favorite article from it is Notes and Melody #6: Composing the Tune by Mario Sikora. (As you might imagine it is the sixth article in a series; the entire series as well as many of his other articles are available on his website, here, and here is the link to his home page.)

Sikora captured my attention right out of the gate with this clause from his first sentence: "...and being by temperament indifferent to the gentle sound of rustling angels' feathers and earnest tones that accompany much of the talk about the Enneagram...." Hee! I feel the same way. More on that point in a few days.

The article as a whole focuses on coaching Sevens; the part I am going to discuss is about working with Point 5 (whether with Sevens, Fives, or whomever.) I am about to quote a massive amount of Sikora's text; read it here, or read it in the original article (then come back to see what my points are.) It 's the part of the article beginning with the bolded title Point Five. And here begins Mario Sikora's material:


Point Five

I don’t know what you mean when you say Big Mind and Little Mind. First of all there is the brain.
Jiddu Krishnamurti

There is a famous medical case discussed in neuroscience literature in which a woman suffered brain damage that impaired her short-term memory. Much like the character in the film “Memento,” she was unable to form memories of events that occurred after the injury. Each time she visited her doctor, he would hold out his hand and introduce himself anew as if it was the first time they met. If he left the room, even momentarily, she would forget who he was and he would have to introduce himself all over again. One day, the doctor decided to try an experiment: He hid a thumb tack in his hand before entering the examination room. When she
shook his hand, she was pricked by the tack and recoiled in pain. The doctor apologized profusely and left the room after calming the patient. Upon returning a short while later, the patient again had no recollection of the doctor, but she refused to shake his hand. She refused to shake his hand at subsequent visits as well, but when asked why she would offer weak justifications, such as explaining that she feared she would spread a cold or catch germs from the doctor. She had no resistance to shaking other people’s hands, however.
The point of retelling this story is to show that the brain processes information in ways that we are not consciously aware of, either because we have habituated the behavior and no longer need to be consciously aware of it or because we do not have the capacity be consciously aware of it. The first situation happens through repetition. If you do something enough times it becomes automatic. The second situation occurs because of the way the brain evolved—giving us the capacity for mental function before giving us the capacity for consciousness of those functions. (See Part Two for more on this.) Therefore, we have the capacity to process information, store experiences, and manufacture responses in ways that are non-conscious. We “simply” do them, not really understanding why. There is a reason, but the reason is formed through cognitive functions that are not connected to the parts of the brain that we have conscious
access to.
This phenomenon—“knowing” something without being aware of how we know it— is Intuition, the core quality found at Point Five of the Enneagram. (Merriam- Webster Online defines “intuition” as “the power or faculty of attaining to direct knowledge or cognition without evident rational thought and inference.”)
Alec’s younger brother, Alexei, will be six months old when this article goes to print. He has recently begun to learn things—most importantly how to soothe himself to sleep at night by sticking his fingers in his mouth or reaching for the pacifier. Today, Alexei naturally and unconsciously soothes himself with his fingers, but he is still figuring out how to wrangle the pacifier. Manipulating an external object is a more-complex task than sucking on his fingers and he is figuring it out with some effort struggling to coordinate emerging mental skills with emerging manual dexterity. Soon, however, he will be popping the pacifier in and out, literally in his
sleep, as if it were an appendage.
As we grow, we develop the ability to intuitively process more complex situations or tasks. The oldest of the three Sikora boys, Adrian, is three and a half and can catch a ball thrown from a short distance. Last summer, a thrown ball would bounce off Adrian’s chest as his arms flailed together a beat too slowly. In a few years he will be chasing down pop-ups as effortlessly as you or I shoo away a mosquito.
While they are the easiest to describe, it is not only physical activities that we learn to perform intuitively; the brain is constantly habituating thinking processes and carrying them out below the surface of our awareness. We intuitively step away from a dark alley, resist getting onto an elevator with someone who looks “wrong,” and turn one direction rather than the other when lost. We all have the experience of “knowing” something without being sure why we know it.
Once again, however, the socialization process inhibits our trust in our intuition. As children we think we know what is best for us based on what we feel, but our parents—if we are lucky—do their best to keep us from hurting ourselves. The unintended consequence is that we learn to doubt ourselves when we shouldn’t. And the bigger the risk is, the more we doubt ourselves. We stop relying on our inner knowing and we begin to consciously analyze our circumstances and figure out our responses. Casual situations—catching a ball, driving a car on a familiar road, making small talk by the water cooler—are comfortably handled intuitively. Larger, more-critical situations—who should I marry, where should I live, what car should I buy, etc.—are pulled into consciousness for analysis and resolution.
Again, this is as it should be. The problem, which is typically one of efficacy rather than dire consequence, occurs when situations that can be handled intuitively are forced into the conscious: Decisions are delayed or deferred and opportunities are missed. In the business world this phenomenon is called “paralysis through analysis”: deadlines are missed, market opportunities come and go, time is wasted.
This is the central dilemma found at Point Five of the Enneagram. Again, it occurs for each of us, Ennea-type Five feels the disconnection from intuition most acutely. Rather than trusting inner knowing based on experience, they step back and analyze, weigh options, and cogitate. This stepping back, or detaching, leads to the Five’s not actually doing things, robbing them of opportunities to internalize actions and processes and further reinforcing the need to step back and analyze some
more.
Mature intuition, because it is based on internalized experience, takes time to nurture, just like the rest of the core qualities. One way to assist that development is through the accelerator of “conscious practice.”
The focus of the Five tends to be on observing from a distance rather than engaging and doing. They can nurture intuition by consciously practicing activities so that they develop the ability to do them naturally and unconsciously (that is, intuitively). When we practice something we carve neural pathways in our brain that allow for habituated behavior. While I’ve written in past articles about the danger of habitual behavior and how to overcome it, I am not against unconscious behavior. I
am against ineffective unconscious behavior. There are many times when
unconscious behavior works for us: when swerving the car to avoid a collision, snatching a child out of harm’s way, catching a ball.
Conscious practice allows us to create patterns of effective unconscious behavior.
Here’s how.
Learning follows four typical phases:
1. Unconscious incompetence (“I don’t even know that I don’t know how to do this”),
2. Conscious incompetence (“I now see that I don’t know how to do this”),
3. Conscious competence (“I now see that I know how to do this”), and
4. Unconscious competence (“I no longer pay attention to how I do this”).

Making this cycle conscious is what the accelerator of conscious practice is all about. It means not just “practicing” something, but practicing deliberately in a structured manner.(1) Here are two examples:
Beginning martial artists spend countless hours practicing their techniques individually, executing thousands of single kicks, punches, and blocks until they develop adequate coordination. Then they will string the individual techniques into sequences called “kata” or forms and practice pre-arranged combinations with an opponent. Eventually, they will practice free-style sparring. The martial artist who is new to sparring will be trapped in his head, constantly thinking about what his opponent is doing, might do, and how he will respond. This will cause his movement to be hesitant and stiff, and he will easily be defeated by a more experienced fighter. Eventually, however, with enough practice the martial artist will begin to unconsciously act out his training and experience. His movements will be natural and relaxed, he will find himself automatically executing the techniques he has practiced countless times at just the right moments. He has learned to fight intuitively.
Fives are often plagued by an inability to be decisive. They want one more piece of data to analyze, one more variable to factor, or one more day to consider the evidence before being ready to act. This capacity for patient analysis is a gift and has great potential benefit; it is also the source of frustration for many people who expect decisions from Fives and it is the most common behavioral inhibitor of Fives’ careers.
Fives (and others who struggle to be more decisive) benefit from consciously practicing making decisions, starting small and working up to larger matters. I sometimes urge Fives to pick a simple decision they have to make each day, such as what to have for breakfast, what kind of coffee to have, or what to wear to work, and put a short time limit on themselves. Rather than deliberate for the 30 seconds they may usually take at the Starbucks counter (at the risk of being thrashed by the large and irritated Eight behind them), they limit themselves to 10 seconds. Since the stakes are relatively small, the Five doesn’t lose much by making a decision he
later regrets. As time goes on, he can move to larger and more complicated
decisions to practice.
Despite our view of ourselves and rational creatures, most decisions are based on emotion, and there is a specific feeling that accompanies decisiveness. It is important to learn to recognize the feeling that accompanies this exercise. This feeling can then be deliberately recalled in the future as a useful aid in making more important decisions. What typically happens, however, is that practicing decisiveness eventually makes it an unconscious skill that no longer needs to be practiced.
The goal here is not to make anyone rush to decisions; there are many times when that is a mistake. The goal is to develop the ability to be more decisive when the situation requires. Practicing being decisive at Starbucks today helps one be more decisive in critical matters tomorrow.

Thus ends Mario Sikora's writing, and now back to me:

I love the clarity and specificity with which he lays out his points, and I particularly like his use of brain science (with references to popular cinema and observations of his son's development, too!)

The article also has a long section on working with a 7; as a 6, I identify with both 7 and 5 issues, so I found the article helpful. However, I was quite surprised that the difference between explicit and implicit knowledge is used to discuss point 5, rather than point 6. I associate 6 with needing and wanting more certainty before making decisions, rather than 5. I also associate 6 with the compulsive need to drag things into conscious awareness instead of just doing them.

Sikora's discussion of developing decisiveness and learning to trust to one's intuition reminds me of my task as a 6, which is to learn to trust my Inner Guidance. As a 6 (i.e. as the primary type in the thinking triad), I am supposed to be "most out of touch with" thinking. Riso and Hudson in The Wisdom of the Enneagram say "Sixes are the primary type in the Thinking Triad, meaning that they have the most trouble connecting to their own inner guidance. As a result, they do not have confidence in their own minds and judgment. This does not mean that they do not think. On the contrary, they think -- and worry -- a lot." Riso and Hudson discuss contact with Essence as what helps 6s realize that they are on a firm foundation with their own inner guidance: "When Sixes experience this truth, they feel solid, steady, and supported, as if they were standing on a massive bed of granite. They realize that this ground is the only real security in life, and it is what gives Sixes immense courage. This is the real meaning of faith, their particular Essential quality. Faith is not belief, but a real, immediate knowing that comes from experience. Faith without experience is belief. Faith with experience brings reliable guidance. Much of the personality of Sixes can be seen in an effort to imitate or recreate faith in terms of beliefs and to find a substitute for the certainty that they are already secure as an expression of the Divine."

I find this problematic. As a 6, my central sin is faithlessness (as Cindi and I teach it, anyway -- many others teach that the 6's sin is fear.) The 6's dilemma is how to get there from here? (That is, if you haven't had the kind of experiences Riso and Hudson describe.)

As for Sikora's prescription, frankly, I don't find the advice to practice making small decisions ALL THAT satisfying as a way to access one's intuition, but I do see how it would help, and I see why, and it has the added virtue of not making me extremely uncomfortable.

I am interested in reading more by Mario Sikora, for the reasons enumerated above, and I am in luck, because Cindi received his book, Awareness to Action, for Christmas.

Sikora's discussion of practice and martial arts reminds me of this idea about dreams as the dojo for waking life.

Equal Time for John McCain

Roughly 99.9999% of all people who find this blog do so by searching "Obama Enneagram", "personality type obama", or "egg, bacon, obama, and spam." No one ever gets here by searching for John McCain. Is it just because he's so obviously a 6 that it bears no discussion?
Recently, this article was brought to my attention. It talks about the candidates' relationships to ambivalence and decision-making. Here are the parts that make McCain seem especially sixy:

"McCain's oppositional dynamics seem to dominate the process he uses to make decisions and take action. They reveal themselves in his reflexive defiance of authority, his inability to control his temper, his aura of anger and his touchiness." (From Riso and Hudson's Personality Types, pgs. 218-219: "Of course, in one way or another, all nine personality types have some kind of relationship with authority figures and need some guidance and reassurance in life, but whether supporting authority, rebelling against it, or fearing it, Sixes seem to have the most issues in this area... The key to understanding Sixes is that they are ambivalent: the two distinct sides of their personalities oscillate between aggressive and dependent tendencies.")

"He has been known for nastiness as well. In a private school he attended, his peers called him ' McNasty" and "the Punk." Neither his Vietnam POW experience nor his adult life as a politician cured him of this nastiness, and he gained something of the same reputation among his fellow senators." The article goes on to mention some crude sexist remarks of McCain's. (In describing type Six in the low-average level of mental health, termed "The Authoritarian Rebel" by Riso and Hudson, page 241 of Personality Types reads, "One of the uglier aspects of Sixes at this stage is their need to have a person or group on whom they can release their pent-up anxieties. Their scapegoats are always assigned the basest of motives so that Sixes will feel justified in dealing with them in whatever way satisfies their emotional needs. This can occur in office politics, in a family system, between the sexes, or in national politics.")

As a member of the Senate POW committee, ""He browbeat expert witnesses who came with information about unreturned POWs. Family members who have personally faced McCain and pressed him to end the secrecy also have been treated to his legendary temper. He has screamed at them, insulted them, brought women to tears. Mostly his responses to them have been versions of: how dare you question my patriotism?'" ("... average Sixes are far from innocent. Counterphobia makes them overcompensate; they blame and berate whatever threatens them. They become rebellious and belligerent, harassing and obstructing others however they can to prove that they cannot be pushed around. Sixes at this stage are full of doubts about themselves and are desperate to latch onto a position or stance that will make them feel stronger and dispel their feelings of inferiority." -- PT 239-240.)

"McCain's frank awareness of his own dark inclinations has made him understandably endearing to both press and public. McCain's honesty can be disarming, as when he confessed in his 2003 biography, "Worth Fighting For," that he has "a tendency to overreact" to "slights" in a manner that is "little changed from the reactions to such provocations I had as a schoolboy.'" Although Sixes can be nasty, they are also often disarming and endearing. As Personality Types puts it, they are "sweet and sour."

"His biography suggests young McCain had deep reasons to rebel. He was expected to follow his father - who eventually made four-star admiral - into Annapolis and a Navy career. McCain's grandfather had been an admiral and key leader in the Pacific campaign during World War II. A McCain ancestor had served on George Washington's staff during the Revolutionary War. McCains had fought for the Confederacy in the Civil War. But young John McCain didn't want to attend the Academy and endure its regimentation. As McCain's biographer, Robert Timberg, dramatizes it in "John McCain, An American Odyssey," McCain "knew that if he said what he thought - hold it, screw Annapolis, the place sucks - shock waves would reverberate through countless generations of McCains, shaking a military tradition." So, instead, he went and acted passive aggressive. ("Passive-aggressive indirection shows up in all their social interactions, even in their humor, which now has an edgy sarcastic note. Passive-aggressive humor allows Sixes to get in a jab at people indirectly, by saying the opposite of what they mean ('Of course I respect you -- I treat you will all the respect you deserve.')")

According to the article, "At the Academy, McCain's insubordinate behavior with superior officers would have gotten any other cadet expelled. But he was a McCain. Ironically - an irony probably not lost on McCain - he could get away with such cheekiness precisely because of his father and the family history he was rebelling against."

" The public doesn't know much about what is in the psychiatric reports drawn up on McCain after he returned from Vietnam, but we do know that one psychiatrist concluded McCain had been in a long struggle to escape "the shadow of his father.'" ("Because they are connected to the protective figure, Sixes powerfully internalize their connection with that person, whether it is a loving, supportive one, or a difficult, destructive one. They continue to play out in their lives the relationship with the person who held authority in their early childhood years... if Sixes experienced their protective-figures as abusive, unfair, or controlling, they will internalize this relationship with authority and feel themselves always at odds with those who they believe have power over them. they walk through life fearing that they will be 'in trouble' and unjustly punished, and adopt a defensive, rebellious attitude from the cruel protective-figure they project into many of their relationships." -- PT, pgs. 224-225.)

The article also mentions McCain's choice of Sarah Palin as a running mate, saying:

"Palin is clearly more popular with most Republicans than he is, so that at times it appears that she is the top of the ticket and not he. He seems forced and secondary standing beside her. If McCain's first reflex in a charged situation is to rebel against whatever authority he perceives is in control, when he is the authority he engenders a problem" and then goes on to say: "At this point, the two sides of McCain's ambivalence - conforming versus rebellion - have become so inextricably confused that the Obama campaign and the press could accuse McCain of being "risky" and "erratic" as he lurched from one idea to its opposite, his obedient angels and his rebellious angels at war with each other. " -- a perfect metaphor for Six-ishness.

As for Obama, the article's emphasis on his mythologizing of his absent father makes him seem like a 4, its mention of his habit of watchfulness makes him seem like a 5, and its talk of his careful questioning makes him seem like a 6. What a tough nut to crack.

A Pair of 3s?

Way back when, Mary Beth typed politician John Edwards as a 3. Today's New York Times seems to corroborate. It contains an opinion piece by Gail Collins titled "Ken Doll in Lust" and is basically saying that after hearing about other politicians' sex scandals, Edwards should have used that knowledge to handle his own better. Despite the word "lust" in the title, the article is actually about deception, and contains plenty of evidence supporting the 3 theory.
Here it is, if you want to read it in its entirety:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/09/opinion/09collins.html.

Here's the first statement in the article that makes me think 3:

"As to why he did it, Edwards blamed 'an egotism, a narcissism that leads you to believe that you can do whatever you want.' ” This is apt, as type 3 is the type most associated with narcissism. Quoth Riso and Hudson's Personality Types: "Average Threes are the most narcissistic of the personality tpes.... Narcissists care principally about themselves -- and about other only to the degree that they reflect well upon themselves. They remain intensely self-centered, with a limited ability to empathize with anyone else's feelings or needs. That is why they have little capacity for love and why -- once they have become narcissistic -- average Threes have little capacity to form lasting, mutually satisfying relationships. Relationships are one-sided because both parties are in love with the same person -- the Three."

And then this, from the NYT piece:

"His 2 a.m. visit with the woman, Rielle Hunter, at a Beverly Hills hotel last month was a secret mission to keep her from going public about their liaison, the briefness and meaninglessness of which cannot be stressed too often. " (emphasis mine) I find this statement interesting because it indicates that the affair itself was a lie, since I suspect Edwards gave Hunter the impression that their relationship was, in fact, meaningful. Edwards seems to be defending himself by saying "I wasn't really lying to you -- public wife, etc. -- all that much; I was actually lying to her -- big time!"
Continuing with the article, "Edwards met Hunter in a bar in New York in 2006, and paid her $114,000 to follow him around, documenting his every move for campaign videos." How could a 3 reasonably be expected not to fall in love with a person employed to take pictures of him? And then, in the same paragraph:

"Said videos were posted, then mysteriously disappeared from the Edwards Web site, with officials muttering something about campaign finance rules." This might be a little dishonest.
As for the videos, "They exist today on YouTube, where you can see the candidate sitting on his plane, grinning like a hound dog in heat, while he tells Hunter that he doesn’t want to be 'some plastic Ken doll that you put in front of the audience,' and pokes himself in the chest while announcing, 'I actually want the country to see who I am — who I truly am.' " This just about speaks for itself, doesn't it?

From Personality Types:

"Because Threes adapt themselves to the desires and expectations of others to validate themselves, they can lose a clear sense of who they actually are... because their sense of their authentic self becomes increasingly blocked, average Threes begin to engage in internal 'pep talks' to convince themselves that they actually are the outstanding person they are trying to become."

Back to the NYT article:

"If Edwards’s political career is toast, it will be because he has always seemed to be less than a sum of his parts: the position papers, the 'Two Americas,' the photogenic grin, the supersmart wife. The only piece of the package that consistently disappointed was the man himself. He wasn’t a very good running mate for John Kerry, and as a presidential candidate, he always struck me as being about 2 inches deep."

Personality Types on how Threes can appear to others:

"Fear of rejection causes average Threes to abandon themselves as they search for the 'right combination' of factors which they believe will enhance them and make them more acceptable... there is an element of slickness, an emotional hollowness about average Threes because much of what they say and do is not a true reflection of who they actually are. 'Who they are' is becoming ever more difficult to identify, both for others and for themselves."

And a final word from Collins:

"how much less damage would have been done if the offender had taken the inventive tactic of not lying."

And now, lest you think we don't know our audience and realize that what you really want is to know Barrack Obama's Enneagram type, I am ready to do some public speculating. Obama is something of an enigma. Mary Beth and I wonder whether he is a 3 or a 9. We also occasionally wonder whether he is a 1 or a 5. We feel that types 2, 4, 6, and 8 are right out.
Continuing with the tactic of using op-ed pieces from The New York Times, here's one by David Brooks about Obama:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/05/opinion/05brooks.html

While you can find plenty here that will support the 9 theory or the 5 theory, here's the stuff that seems like 3 to me:

"He became a state legislator, but he was in the Legislature, not of it. He had some accomplishments, but as Ryan Lizza of The New Yorker wrote, he was famously bored by the institution and used it as a stepping stone to higher things." (emphasis mine)

And this:

"He has not had the time nor the inclination to throw himself into Senate mores, or really get to know more than a handful of his colleagues. His Democratic supporters there speak of him fondly, but vaguely."
3s are famous for not having long-lasting relationships, despite their apparent popularity.

And, finally, this:
"Obama’s 'Dreams From My Father' is a journey forward, about a man who took the disparate parts of his past and constructed an identity of his own."
Identity formation is an issue of the heart triad.

Here's my question:

If 3s are shape-shifters who lose their identities trying to give people what they want; 9s are ghosts who merge with others' agendas trying to avoid conflict; and 5s are blanks screens reflecting others' desires, trying to not be seen, what is Obama? Anyone have a theory?

I will go on the record now as saying I think John McCain is a 6 -- counterphobic, 5 wing.

The Alex n' Audrey Show: Enneagram Autobiography Class 4 Recap

Class session 4 was lightly attended, but deeply felt. Here's what happened:

1. Those who were present (namely Alex and Audrey) shared extensively from their journals. And you missed it!
2. Mary Beth revealed that she had responded to all six of last week's journal questions. (!@#$%&*!!! overacheiver!)
3. In lieu of meditation, I imagined drop-kicking the cd player.
4. Mary Beth talked about 6s and the interplay of compliance and withdrawal in her own life.
5. We talked about how to break out of the type 6 pattern. There is a section called "Practices that Help Sixes Develop" on pages 253 - 255 of The Wisdom of the Enneagram.
6. We also talked about type 7, the habit of collecting experiences (and handshakes), and keeping the energy up when you're feeling down.
7. We suggested a few topics for the journal, including this one (as always, from The W of the E):

"Study what you are calling boredom. What does it feel like in your body? What is the sensation of boredom? As you are able to sense it, what associations or memories does it bring up?"

Next time, we'll discuss: If birds of a feather flock together, why do opposites attract? And types 8 and 9. (See pages 287 - 340 of our favorite book.) Hope to see you there.

Politics Round-Up

We did not start this blog to talk about politics nor are either of us political junkies, but I am finding this year's race much more interesting than usual. Also, the two most common search hits this blog gets are What is Obama's Enneagram (or MBTI) type? and What types are compatible?

Here is a collection of articles and observations relating politics and the enneagram that I've collected over the past week.

Here is David Brooks on How Voters Think, which is about the tail wagging the dog (in this case, that we make emotional judgments then come up with rational reasons afterwards.) The article speaks to why personality is one of the big things we are looking for when we consider the candidates.

IF you live in or near Nashville, and IF you want to see Bill Clinton, he's speaking tomorrow night (Monday, Jan. 21) at Fisk University at 6:15. Call this number: (615) 254-2200. I'd call it now because I imagine it will fill up. You have to RSVP with your name. There's a web link to sign up, also, although when I tried it wasn't working yet. Here it is: www.HillaryClinton.com/Nashville.

On the subject of Hillary Clinton, I saw a clip of her appearance on the Tyra Banks Show that highlighted her 1-ishness. Tyra (I'd say 3w2), on the subject of Hillary's role in the Lewinsky situation, asked "Were you embarassed? I would be embarassed." And Hillary said "Well, sure, all of that, but also, I was, I was praying so hard, and thinking so hard, about what was right to do." (This is one-ish because she's saying her primary reaction to the situation was a consideration of what was right.) Tyra asked her whether women who find their husbands are cheating ask H. Clinton for advice, and Hillary said, yes, all the time, and she tells them they have to do what is right for them. Which is a very healthy answer for a 1 (shows the focus on rightness without even a hint of black and white thinking or rigidity.)

In our very first blog post, Cindi predicted we'd rehash the Lewinsky scandal; it's only taken two months for the prediction to come true (ok, it's not a rehash per se.)

Which brings us to Bill Clinton. As you may know, while Riso and Hudson type him as a 3, others (Tom Condon, the Fauvres) consider him a 9. This article about his anger issues suggests 3. (The article discusses a Vesuvius of anger, and although the 9s anger is like lava underneath because it's so repressed and denied AND dissociated from, I haven't seen the 9s letting their anger out like a volcano, and I certainly have never known of a 9 who drove someone else to have to take antidepressants, which this article says happened with George Stephanopoulos as a reaction to Bill Clinton's anger.)

Mitt Romney's anger was also mentioned this week -- there is a clip of him expressing some anger towards a reporter who challenged Romney's rather legalistic (but correct) definition of whether any lobbyists "ran his campaign." There's been a lot of talking and writing about Romney's seeming fake -- he's not where most of the rest of us are on this continuum. Here's one from a guy who knows Romney personally and doesn't consider him fake; here's one speculating on what ABOUT Romney seems fake -- he suggests it might be, of all things, his hair. Nancy Giles wins the "not mincing words award" for just coming out with it and saying Romney seems like a sociopath. After calling Huckabee "freaky" (for trying to combine the Constitution and the Ten Commandments into the "Constimandments") and McCain "long in the tooth" and "frail," she is asked "Nancy, you admit that Mitt Romney looks pretty good right?" She responds "He does but I worry about him in deep ways; I almost think he's a sociopath; he flips with the wind. The only thing steady about Mitt Romney to me has been his faith; he believes in his faith but he's switched up on all his positions and staring people right in the face... I don't trust him farther than I can throw him." (I think she meant psychopath, at least in the way I usually think of it -- I think of psychopath as the very unhealthy 3, the American Psycho or Tom Ripley or Ted Bundy type, a really good faker, and the sociopath as more of the unhealthy 8, the antisocial type. These categories are confusing, not least because I don't think either of them is in the DSM-IV. Here is a discussion of the difference; good luck. I believe this is what qualifies as a "clear" discussion of the difference. That said, I don't think he's a psychopath, of course, and neither, really does Nancy Giles, I don't think. But I see what she means and I think most people do. Part of his problem is I think he's running on a message that he doesn't entirely believe. I don't think a person can be a popular governor of Massachusetts AND truly be conservative enough to win the Republican nomination. Or, maybe this year he could have, but too late, because he's already set his course.)

Still on politics but not about the candidates: Chris Matthews of Hardball. I've always loved him. He's a good example of a 6: the questioner or the devil's advocate. He loves asking questions and getting to the truth; and specifically, loves poking through any BS.

Also, and this is completely off-topic, but Ron Paul came in second in Nevada: completely unexpected, and yet it's getting no media attention that I can see.

Key Defense Mechanisms for Type 6

Riso and Hudson, at the Enneagram Institute, have come out with a bunch of charts; some are free and some are for sale. Info here. Cindi and I have passed out copies of the first chart (the free one) at our class and our discussion group, and some people have commented that they have found the chart extremely helpful as a reference. Last night I noticed that the chart lists three key defense mechanisms for each type, and that I didn't know quite what they all meant. As we talked about yesterday, a suggestion for 6s is to figure out what cause you to project; so I thought this was a good time to research these defense mechanisms (I haven't eaten any candy today, and I have organized the pantry, too, by the way.)

The three for the 6 are identification, displacement, projection.

I have found a good website explaining them here.

Here is identification:
Similar to introjection, but of less intensity and completeness. The unconscious modeling of one's self upon another person. One may also identify with values and attitudes of a group. Examples: (1) without being aware that he is copying his teacher, a resident physician assumes a similar mode of dress and manner with patients. (2) a school girl wants her mother to buy her the same kind of shoes her classmates are wearing; she angrily rejects the idea that she is trying to be like the other girls and insists that the shoes are truly the best available and are the style she has always wanted. Conscious analogs of identification are intentional imitation of others and volitional efforts to conform to a group.

Here's displacement:
Displacement:
A change in the object by which an instinctual drive is to be satisfied; shifting the emotional component from one object or idea to another. Examples: (1) a woman is abandoned by her fiance’; she quickly finds another man about whom she develops the same feelings; (2) a salesman is angered by his superior but suppresses his anger; later, on return to his home, he punishes one of his children for misbehavior that would usually be tolerated or ignored.
Displacements are often quite satisfactory and workable mechanisms; if one cannot have steak, it is comforting to like hamburger equally well. As the March Hare observed, "I like what I have is the same as I have what I like." However, the example of displaced anger illustrates a situation which, if often repeated, could cause serious complications in the person’s life. Conscious acceptance of a substitute with full recognition that it is a substitute for something one wants is an analog of displacement.

And here is projection:

Projection:
Attributing one's thoughts or impulses to another person. In common use, this is limited to unacceptable or undesirable impulses. Examples: (1) a man, unable to accept that he has competitive or hostile feelings about an acquaintance, says, “He doesn’t like me.” (2) a woman, denying to herself that she has sexual feelings about a co-worker, accuses him, without basis, of flirt and described him as a “wolf.”
This defense mechanism is commonly over utilized by the paranoid.
A broader definition of projection includes certain operations that allow for empathy and understanding of others. Recognition that another person is lonely or sad may be based not upon having seen other examples of loneliness or sadness and learning the outward manifestations but upon having experienced the feelings and recognizing automatically that another person’s situation would evoke them. [projective identification]

OK. I can see, now, why identification for the 6 (taking on the attributes of a group) based on theories about 6s, although personally, that's not my thing. Identification is listed for the 2s, also.

Displacement? Well, I have noticed a pattern of 6s yelling at computers. Types 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 8 also have displacement listed.

Projection. This is considered a big one for the 6s: Hitler, for instance, is considered a 6. It's also listed under 3 and 5. I might be surprised by the association of projection with 3 had I not been the victim of this behavior from more than one 3. As for me, I recall a particular time where I engaged in project (I am not going to go into it on here though.) And I do think I've had a tendency to focus on the idea of people not liking me, when what I really meant was that I didn't like them.

While perusing the list, though, I found some other mechanisms that seem to fit the 6.

Affiliation:
The individual deals with emotional conflict or internal or external stressors by turning to others for help or support. This involves sharing problems with others but does not imply trying to make someone else responsible for them.

Not very sinister; doesn't sound unconscious, but that's what I do when I have a problem.

Aim inhibition:
Placing a limitation upon instinctual demands; accepting partial or modified fulfillment of desires. Examples: (1) a person is conscious of sexual desire but if finding it frustrating, "decides" that all that is really wanted in the relationship is companionship. (2) a student who originally wanted to be a physician decides to become a physician's assistant.
Aim inhibition, like the other mechanisms, is neither healthful nor pathological, desirable nor undesirable, in itself. It may be better to have half a loaf than no bread, but an unnecessary aim inhibition may rob one of otherwise attainable satisfactions.

Anticipation:
The individual deals with emotional conflict or internal or external stressors by experiencing emotional reactions in advance of, or anticipating consequences of, possible future events and considering realistic, alternative responses or solutions.

This one seem extremely 6-ish. The paragraph above makes it sound healthy; I don't think enneagram theory usually views this as healthy but as a problem for us.

Help-Rejecting Complaining:
The individual deals with emotional conflict or internal or external stressors by complaining or making repetitious requests for help that disguise covert feelings or hostility or reproach toward others, which are then expressed by rejecting the suggestions, advice, or help that others offer. The complaints or requests may involve physical or psychological symptoms or life problems.

This one's my favorite. (By which I mean, the one I love to hate.) I don't think I do too much of it myself, but I've observed other 6s doing this a lot.

Humor:
The individual deals with emotional conflict or external stressors by emphasizing the amusing or ironic aspects of the conflict or stressors.

Humor's a healthy one that some 6s (ex. Steven Colbert) use to good effect.

Incorporation:
The assimilation of the object into one's own ego and/or superego. This is one of the earliest mechanisms utilized. The parent becomes almost literally a part of the child. Parental values, preferences, and attitudes are acquired.

I suspect this one might be common for 6s (or maybe if it's one of the earliest mechanisms utilized it's common for everyone.) I feel this way at work sometime, like I am speaking for my boss' values. I think of the 6 who is just following orders. I also think that some people, including myself, have dated someone because we wanted to incorporate the other's values.

Intellectualization:
The individual deals with emotional conflict or internal or external stressors by the excessive use of abstract thinking or the making of generalizations to control or minimize disturbing feelings.

Passive Aggression:
The individual deals with emotional conflict or internal or external stressors by indirectly and unassertively expressing aggression toward others. There is a facade of overt compliance masking covert resistance, resentment, or hostility. Passive aggression often occurs in response to demands for independent action or performance or the lack of gratification of dependent wishes but may be adaptive for individuals in subordinate positions who have no other way to express assertiveness more avertly. (sic)

I've done this a lot, and seen it in other 6s, too.

Reaction Formation:
Going to the opposite extreme; overcompensation for unacceptable impulses.Examples: (1) a man violently dislikes an employee; without being aware of doing so, he "bends overbackwards" to not criticize the employee and gives him special privileges and advances. (2) a person with strong antisocial impulses leads a crusade against vice. (3) a married woman who is disturbed by feeling attracted to one of her husband's friends treats him rudely.
Intentional efforts to compensate for conscious dislikes and prejudices are sometimes analogous to this mechanism.

This is associated mainly with the 1, and the Riso/Hudson chart also ascribes it to the 2, but I as a 6 have done what the last sentence says, bending over backwards and promoting an employee dispite conscious dislike, in the interest of fairness.

Resolutions for Type 6, and My Resolutions, But Not in That Order

Here are my resolutions for the upcoming year:

1. Clean countertops twice a week. Take dishes out of dishwasher when they are done, and then put clean dishes in, or wash dishes by hand. Keep inside of sink clean. Watch tv from couch, and put away air mattress (in the interest of decreasing clutter.) Take out trash once a week or more often. Take unread magazines to work. Continue getting rid of unnecessary objects. Organize kitchen cabinets. Check oil twice a month. Write these goals (e.g. clean the countertops on Wednesday) in Franklin Planner. Get new pages for Franklin Planner.

2. Don't eat candy. Make one large, healthy food dish each weekend (that I am in town.) Keep weight at current level or lower. If weight gets to a certain line on the scale, ratchet it back.

As you can see from the specific nature of the above two resolutions, I don't believe in just saying "lose weight" or "clean the house more," but in focusing on how specifically I can accomplish it. I have also purchased some great smelling Method products to help me enjoy the cleaning.

3. See Kathy more often. Put in Franklin Planner.

4. Be more responsible about giving gifts. Put in Franklin Planner.

5. Ask the doctor about my sleepiness. Get a mammogram this year. Put making these appointments in Franklin Planner. Start drinking a little less coffee. Drink decaf every other cup, or switch to tea. More exercise might help with the sleepiness.

6. Take the time to blow-dry hair with round brush.

Here are some other things I intend to do, that for one reason or another are not exactly resolutions:

1. Paint finger- and toenails. Watch seasons 2-4 of The Wire. Take books back to the library so I can start getting books out again. Consider getting a cell phone. These aren't resolutions; more of a to-do list.

2. Continue my studies and blogging. Teach Enneagram class. Continue current dating practices (i.e., Willing to go out; Willing to tell someone to take a hike, Not being attached to a particular outcome; Being happy to be alone.) Continuing current good practices is important, but clearly doesn't fall under the rubric of resolutions.

3. There are a couple work-related changes that are being made. These aren't resolutions because they've already been planned for some time.

4. Undoubtably I will flirt with various physical exercise regimens throughout the year. This is not a resolution because I do not have a particular plan in mind.

OK, now let's turn to Riso and Hudson, and see what they have to say for 6's. Will it be cleaning the countertops?

1. Learn to be more present to your anxiety, to explore it, and to come to terms with it. Work creatively with your tensions without turning to excessive amounts of alcohol or other drugs to allay them. In fact, if you are present and breathing fully, anxiety can be energizing, a kind of tonic that can help make you more productive and aware of what you are doing.

2. You tend to get edgy or testy when you are upset or angry, and you can even turn on others and blame them for things you have done or brought on yourself. Be aware of your pessimism: it results in dark moods and negative thought patterns that you tend to project on reality.

3. Sixes tend to overreact when they are under stress and feeling anxious. Learn to identify what makes you overreact. Also realize that almost none of the things you have feared so much has actually come true.

4. Even if things are as bad as you think, your fearful thoughts weaken you and your ability to change things for the better. You can't always manage external events, but you can manage your own thoughts.

5. Work on becoming more trusting. There are doubtless several people in your life you can turn to who care about you and who are trustworthy. If not, go out of your way to find someone trustworthy, and allow yourself to get close to that person.

6. Others probably think better of you than you realize, and few people are really out to get you. In fact, your fears tell you more about your attitudes toward others than they indicate about others' attitudes toward you.

7. You are highly responsible in many areas, but you can be afraid of accepting responsibility for mistakes. You may fear others will jump down your throat, but most people respect those who take responsibility for their actions, especially if they have made a mistake.

8. You want to feel secure, but this will never be possible unless you are secure with yourself. You need to focus on becoming more self-affirming -- developing a realistic belief in yourself and your own abilities. A good way to do this is by getting more grounded in your body and allowing your fretting mind to become more quiet. When this happens, you will naturally feel more confident and supported by life.

9. Examine your attitudes toward authority. Do you reflexively rebel and resist authority? Do you seek it out, hiding behind an "I was only following orders" attitude? For most Sixes, issues with authority are highly charged. The greater your awareness is of your unconscious attitudes in this department, the more you will be able to recognize the authority of your own inner wisdom.

10. Be fair with others and tell them what is on your mind, lest you appear indecisive or defensive. Any of the alternatives cause conflicts and tensions in your relationships.

11. Most of your issues have to do with finding reliable sources of guidance and support outside of yourself. It is good to remember that many of these sources can be useful up to a point, but none of them can provide the kind of unwavering stability and unerring wisdom you want. Only your true nature can give you a deep sense of solidity and capacity in the world, because only the spontaneous intelligence of your own soul can respond to each unique situation freshly. So be grateful for the many sources of support in your life, but lean on them less. You have within you everything you need to move through life with dignity and grace.

Wow, I'm really not feeling most of 'em. I trust others; I take responsibility for my mistakes. Becoming aware of projection and knowing what situations make me overreact are good ideas. I think that meditation (and other forms of spirituality) is the subtext for some of these (having read Riso/Hudson and met Hudson) and I am trying it, but I classify it under "continuing Enneagram studies" rather than an actual resolution.

But let's look at my actual resolutions. Two of them are, I think, related to 6 issues. I wonder sometimes why at my age I have not developed better cleaning habits. I have started to think it is related to the "you can't make me" theme of type 6, and it's pretty obviously related to type 6 dependency issues (i.e. I shouldn't have to do this for myself.) Also, the gift-giving: I have anxiety about gift-giving... I worry what if the person doesn't like it, and then it's a waste of money? (I have a 6-ish terror of wasting money sometimes.) Also, sometimes I worry that my gift won't be good enough for the other person. I also have a similar anxiety about receiving gifts... possibly even more anxiety, because if you don't like a gift you might have to pretend you do, and I hate to have to pretend. I have memories dating back to age 5 in which I got gifts I didn't like and felt sick about it. This Christmas I was feeling anxiety during the gift exchange, mainly about receiving them, because all my gifts this year were surprises. (I ended up liking them all -- luckily! They were great, actually.) So right there during the gift exchange, I did something Riso and Hudson suggest -- observe your reactions rather than "get on the train." And what I observed was something I've read in various places (including, I think, The Wisdom of the Enneagram) that one will observe, that right below the fear was sadness.

Another important aspect of resolutions is accountability; I will keep you updated on how I do. And yet another aspect is starting back when you inevitably fail (if, for example, you eat candy!)

TV Round-up

As Cindi has mentioned previously, we gather with friends each Monday night for the ongoing project of watching the Buffy the Vampire Slayer series in its entirety. We're now about halfway through season 4. One common thread that runs through a lot of Buffy the Vampire Slayer episodes is metaphor made flesh; for example, a female teacher who preys sexually on teenage male students turns into a human-size praying mantis, and a mother who pushes too hard for her daughter to succeed is portrayed as literally a witch. (Thanks to our friend Rick, both for making this observation when we were way back in Season 1 and also for organizing the Buffyfest in the first place.) Our most recent episode, Superstar, reifies the narcissism of the unhealthy 3. The split between the two parts of the personality (the idealized image and the impoverished and rejected true self within) are acted out a la The Picture of Dorian Gray, Dr. Jeckyll and Mr. Hyde, and Forbidden Planet. Superstar may have been my favorite episode so far; it's certainly one of my top few. And Cindi has written about the episode in detail here.

Another show I've been watching a lot of lately is Monk, and I've seen some Enneagram styles portrayed in that. In case you're not familiar, Monk is a detective with obsessive-compulsive disorder. He was thrown off the police force for psychiatric problems, but is still a great detective, maintains a warm relationship with the force, works as a consultant for them, and hopes to be reinstated one day. He's riddled with fears: of germs, heights, glaciers, spiders, and, as is often mentioned, milk, among many others. His 1-ishness is portrayed as giving him an edge because he's able to walk into a crime scene, survey it, and see what "doesn't fit," i.e., inconsistencies. At the same time, his germophobia, hand-washing, and compulsive need for order are played for laughs. It is my impression that a real-life person with as many of the unhealthy 1 traits as Monk has would in no way be as sheerly LOVABLE as Mr. Monk is. (I have very little expertise or experience with OCD, so read the last comment with a grain of salt.) I read Monk's character more as an amalgam of 1-ish obsession with order and 5-ish avoidance than as straight 1. Judith Searle discusses The Police Story as an example of a 1 narrative in this excellent essay on Story Genres and Enneagram Types. She writes: "Related One genres are ... the police story, in which the law enforcement professional is the hero who tries to restore the moral order to society. Examples of the police story include The Silence of the Lambs, The French Connection, Serpico, and Prince of the City." There's also a Great Detective archetype who's 5-ish (Sherlock Holmes) and 6-ish (Columbo): a head-type figuring things out. (Many Monk episodes even start by showing the viewer how the crime was done, borrowing a page from the Columbo playbook.) Returning to Monk: two other characters represent clear Enneagram styles: the Captain, Leland Stottlemeyer is an average-to-healthy 8 (gruff and forthright), while another homicide detective, Randy, is a phobic 6 (self-doubting, insecure, submissive) and plays a typical 6 role, the sidekick. [In one episode, Mr. Monk Goes to the Dentist, Randy drops off the force because the Captain doesn't believe he actually witnessed a murder while under sedation in the dentist's office. Randy goes back to playing in the band (The Randy Disher Project) he formed in seventh grade and makes a music video of the song Don't Need a Badge. In the video, you can see Randy acting counterphobically, singing "I don't need a gun to make me feel strong; I don't need a captain shooting me down all day long; I don't need your mustache, don't you condescend to me; I don't need a badge, cause baby, I am free." In that same episode, the Captain tells someone on the phone that Randy is the single most annoying human being he knows... then he sees Monk walk by gargling because of his fear of the dentist, and says "except, of course, for him."] The other main character, Monk's assistant Natalie, has no apparent Enneagram type. She plays an Everywoman role.

One thing I like about this time of year is the End-of-Year Best-of Lists. In the TV category of MY End-of-Year Best-of List, one show would have crushed all competition, had there been any competition to speak of. That show is Mad Men, an AMC original series that aired for 13 episodes over the summer. It's been renewed for a second season that will start next summer (or that was the plan before the writer's strike, anyway.) It's set in 1960 in a Madison Avenue ad agency. Each episode is set in a different month of 1960. (It occurs to me that that's impossible since there are 13 episodes and 12 months but... close enough.) There are two MAJOR themes in the show: one is how different life was in 1960. Everybody smokes constantly, and they drink at work, and all the married men fool around and chase women, and sex roles are very rigid, and the sexism is extremely overt, and all black characters are in subsurvient roles. The other major theme is character, and specifically, the mysteriousness of character. Our main character (both hero and villain), Don Draper, is a 3, and not just any 3, but an imposter literally pretending to be someone he's not. Another of the main characters, Pete, is also a 3, and in fact, even the characters who aren't 3s have a 3-ish feel, partially because surface traits are very valued in this world (that they're in advertising is no accident.) I don't know the Enneatypes of the two main female characters, Peggy (Don's secretary) and Betty (Don's wife), but neither is healthy and both are very internally contradictory. (Peggy is sympathetic and the viewer roots for her, but we don't feel that we understand her. There are some seriously odd behaviors there, including a huge chunk of denial. Betty is a little less sympathetic: she's a Seven Sisters grad, a former model, a beauty, and a housewife to philandering imposter Don. Personality-wise, she's in despair: a regressed little girl inside a brittle shell. She undergoes Freudian analysis, which is doing her no good whatsoever, especially since her analyst tells her husband Don what she talks about in therapy! Both characters are poised for big change as we move more deeply into the 60s: they are about to encounter Sex and the Single Girl and The Feminine Mystique, respectively.) The big boss, Bertram Cooper, is an Ayn Rand-loving 8; Roger Sterling, the other partner in the Sterling-Cooper ad agency, is another 3; Salvatore (the closeted gay creative director) is most likely a 4; Harry (my sweet, straightforward Mad Men tv boyfriend) might be a 6 (or could be 9, or 5 -- he doesn't get a lot of screen time). It's an ensemble show: episodes focus on various characters, and minor characters are developed with specific details, and great writing and costumes and set design support the whole thing. And Amy Winehouse's "You Know I'm No Good" plays in all the ads for the show. I imagine AMC is still showing it to build an audience for season 2; yes, the website says it's still being shown Thursday nights at 10 Eastern, 9 Central. Check it out!

The archetypal 3 narrative is the social climbing and imposter narrative (for example, The Talented Mr. Ripley, Vanity Fair, Gone With the Wind). I love the 3 imposter narrative (it's no wonder we root for Don Draper in Mad Men -- don't we always root for this character when he's the protagonist?), and I also love the story of the narcissistic 3 who starts to get in touch with real feeling (Groundhog Day, Tom Cruise's role in Rain Man.) To read more about enneatypes in movies and books, see Tom Condon's The Enneagram Movie and Video Guide and Judith Searle's The Literary Enneagram: Characters from the Inside Out. I highly recommend them both.

I said Mad Men had little competition for show of the year, and you'll really see what I mean when I tell you that my second favorite show of the year was VH1's The Pick-Up Artist. Even I admit that it wasn't all that good. Didn't matter; I liked it anyway. It's an imposter-by-proxy story; instead of watching a 3 acting like something he's not for personal gain and/or kicks, you're watching a 3 (Mystery) who's broken his technique down into a set of rules in order to teach it to a bunch of head types. (They weren't literally all head types; I'm speaking archetypally.) You can watch all episodes online at VH-1's site. I would also recommend the book The Game by Neil Strauss, in which our hero Neil Strauss, aka "Style," a journalist, poses as a civilian, infiltrates the pick-up community, learns to pick up girls, moves in with Mystery and a bunch of fellow pick-up artists, observes a lot of dysfunctional behavior including more than one breakdown by Mystery, becomes disenchanted with the whole thing and quits the community, then ends the book, but the story doesn't end there --because he now teaches pick-up himself here.

I have a few more tv shows to discuss, but am going to save them for another post or posts.

"It's a Lie": 3-ish Themes in an episode of Buffy

Studying the Enneagram is not the only hobby Mary Beth and I have in common; we are also watching the entire run of Buffy the Vampire Slayer on dvd. This post concerns the 3-sh themes in the 4th season episode "Superstar" (click here for a thorough synopsis), which aired in 2000.

As the episode opens, Buffy, Xander, Willow, and Anya are fighting vampires. When they discover there are five them, Buffy asserts that maybe she could take on two, but the others tell her that the remaining three would kill her. The gang decides they need help. As a viewer, I think this is odd, because Buffy has saved the world from much worse many times before.

The group goes to a mansion. Once inside, they approach a huge, intimidating desk. The chair behind the desk is turned way from the camera so we can't see the occupant. Buffy says something like, "We need your help." The chair turns, and we see that it's Jonathan, who is, basically, this dude that Buffy went to high school with, only now he's looking all James Bond suave/ Dr. Evil smug. He agrees to help.

They all meet up at Giles' place. Willow is on her laptop, studying an image of the crypt where the vampires stay. She is having trouble finding a good way for the gang to sneak in, but Jonathan immediately sees one, and it is agreed that he and Buffy will go to fight the vamps together. As the meeting adjourns, Jonathan passes a chessboard, moves a piece, and announces that he has checkmated Giles (again).

Jonathan and Buffy proceed to kick vampire butt. A vampire gets by Buffy, but Jonathan takes it out. Buffy is a little upset that one got by her, but Jonathan consoles her by telling her she did her best. Buffy expresses doubt, saying it didn't feel like her best at all. Then, paparazzi appear to take pictures of Jonathan, who is, apparently, a huge celebrity.

As the episode goes on, we see various pieces of evidence -- like a poster of Jonathan as a professional basketball player and Willow and Tara making a huge shrine to Jonathan -- that Jonathan is, in fact, simply the best human being, in all categories, that there is. Coincidentally, this was also my (as yet unrealized) childhood ambition. It also resonates strongly with Enneagram type 3, who at their best, "often become outstanding, a kind of human ideal, embodying widely admired qualities." (Riso and Hudson, Personality Types, 95) At their worst, of course, they only mimic these qualities by creating a false image.

Meanwhile, Buffy and Riley are having trouble in their relationship because Buffy is still upset that he slept with Faith (albeit when Faith was in Buffy's body.) Jonathan advises her to forgive him and says that she and Riley have a special relationship that is worth the hard work they will have to put into it. He goes on to say, "If you really want it, you can make anything happen." 3s are often described as "pragmatic and calculating... able to get what they want." (PT, 99) Later on, Jonathan will also advise Riley to make amends with Buffy by assuring her that she is the only one for him.

Back at initiative headquarters, the soldiers are being debriefed about their mission to destroy Adam. Jonathan is introduced as the group's new tactical consultant.

There is also a new monster in town. It has a strange symbol on its forehead and attacks a girl.

That night, at the Bronze, Jonathan is on stage, singing with a jazz band. Our heroes are there to watch the show, and they are enthralled. Xander accuses Anya of calling out Jonathan's name while they were having sex. Jonathan dedicates a song to Buffy and Riley. As they dance together, they sort of make up. Then, the girl who was attacked by the monster comes in and tells Jonathan what happened.

Everybody goes to Jonathan's mansion. There, the girl describes the monster and draws the symbol that was on its forehead. Seeing it, Jonathan dismisses the group's concern and compares the monster to a scared animal, assuring them that it's nothing to worry about. Buffy thinks she should patrol, but Jonathan says it's not necessary.

Next, we see Adam and one of his minions looking at several television monitors. Jonathan is on all of them, being fabulous in various capacities. Adam asks, "Who is that?" and the minion is like, "Are you kidding me?" and then Adam cuts right to the heart of everything, saying, "It's a lie." (Deceit is the passion, or sin, associated with type 3.)

Back at Jonathan's place, we see two blonde twins beckoning Jonathan to come to bed. While no one is trying to track down the monster, it attacks Tara. When Willow finds out, she is very confused because she had total faith in Jonathan, who said the monster wasn't dangerous. "But, Jonathan said it," she states.

Buffy drops by Xander's to look at his collection of Jonathan-themed comics and trading cards. Anya is there, reading Jonathan's autobiography. She is right at the part where he "invents the internet." This is a reference to a rather famous alleged lie/ exaggeration. Describing a 3's descent into unhealthy behaviors, Riso and Hudson write, "Threes begin to oversell themselves, making extraordinary claims about their achievements." (PT, 116) But, of course, in the world of this episode, to paraphrase Michael Jackson, the lie has become the truth.

When the group next meets at Giles' apartment, Buffy, putting her type 6 skepticism to good use (I see her as a type 6 reluctant hero, whereas this page types her as a 4), alleges that Jonathan is just a little too perfect. After all, he's better at slaying than she is, and she's the Slayer, and isn't that supposed to mean something? She also points out some logical flaws -- like, how could Jonathan have graduated from medical school while he was still in high school? As Riso and Hudson say of some Threes, "although they are desperate to convince themselves and others that they are outstanding, others may begin to sense that they are too good to be true: much of what they say about themselves just does not add up." (PT, 116)

To counter Buffy's remarks, Xander asserts that Jonathan is just perfect enough. Buffy asks if Giles has a Jonathan swimsuit calendar. When he produces it, the gang flips through it and sees that Jonathan's shoulder bears the same mark as the monster's forehead.

Just then, Jonathan arrives. He explains that there is a connection between him and the monster. He has fought it before and becomes confused in its presence. He had its mark put on his shoulder as a reminder not to underestimate it. Buffy and Jonathan agree to track down the monster together.

When they go, the rest of the gang looks up the symbol in one of their fabulous reference books. They find out that it is part of a spell that can be used to turn a person into "a paragon -- the best of everything, everyone's ideal."

The only caveat is that using the spell also creates a counterbalance -- "everyone's worst nightmare." That's what the monster is.

By this time, Buffy and Jonathan are searching a cave. Suddenly the monster jumps out at them and knocks Jonathan out.

Back at Giles' place, everyone is speculating about how the world would change if Buffy kills the monster and Jonathan returns to normal. Clearly, they are not wholeheartedly in favor of the change. Giles says that the only thing that would really change is Jonathan. The rest is real.

In truth, though, even though only Jonathan is any different from how things usually are, his change has changed everything for the worst. He has displaced everyone from their roles -- by being the smartest one, he has taken Willow's place as researcher and Giles' place as strategist. He has displaced Buffy as the natural leader of the group, destroying her confidence and stunting her potential. By being the most attractive man, he has eroded the intimacy between Xander and Anya. By being a paragon, he has brought about the worst kind of misplacement of faith -- in Xander, who misguidedly looks up to him, and in Willow, who trusts him so much that she doesn't protect her friend. But Jonathan doesn't really care who gets hurt; his lie that the monster was not a threat is a lie that is "far from insignificant, causing others enormous harm." (PT, 122)

When Jonathan comes to, he sees the monster starting to overpower Buffy. He rushes to help, but doesn't seem to be able to hurt it. Buffy asks Jonathan what she should do, but he says she is going to have to handle it by herself. She seems afraid, but manages to fight valiantly against the creature. The monster knocks Buffy down near the edge of an open pit and it seems like it's going to push her in, but Jonathan tackles it, and he and the monster fall in instead. Buffy grabs Jonathan's foot, saving him, but the monster falls to its death.

On campus, the next day, Buffy spots Jonathan, who is now back to normal. He says everyone seems to be forgetting about what happened, but some people are still mad. He reveals that, after his suicide attempt (a 3's narcissism is fueled by feelings of worthlessness), he met a kid in counseling who taught him how to do the spell. He says the kid really downplayed the evil monster part.

Buffy tells him that that's not the only reason people are angry with him. They didn't like "being sock puppets in his world," she says. People don't like being manipulated. They didn't like living a lie.

Jonathan counters, untruthfully, although he may really believe it, that they weren't sock puppets; they were friends. Here we see the unhealthy 3's difficulty with real relationships. As Riso and Hudson write in Personality Types, "Unhealthy Threes are unable... to have empathy for others. Because they do not see other people as real or as having value without reference to themselves, others become merely providers of attention and admiration, what are called 'narcissistic suppliers', as objects to be used to aggrandize themselves." We saw this tendency toward one-sided, shallow "relationships" in Jonathan also in his choice to have a sexual relationship with a pair of twins, rather than a real girlfriend, when he could presumably have any woman he wants.

Jonathan then remembers the bit of advice he gave Buffy about a relationship taking hard work, and he says that he thinks the advice was right. This shows growth for Jonathan, because it is in direct contrast to the 3's tendency to "begin to coast through life, relying on sex appeal and charm", and, as they become less healthy, to have "whatever energy they may have extended in cultivating relationships stop." (PT, 118)

And yes, I realize that Oz (pictured above) isn't even in this episode, but his was the only action figure I could readily locate. Plus, a little birdie (http://www.buffyguide.com/) tells me we haven't quite seen the last of him yet.

Katherine Chernick Fauvre on Type 6

I am pleased to note that Katherine Chernick Fauvre has made her way to our humble blog. (Granted, I pointed it out to her, but still...) Here's what she had to say about the blog, the difficulty of typing 6s, and her Enneacards Tests:

"Thank you, I appreciate your reference. Typing is an intriguing process. I I loved the 6 observation. Friendly, funny and nervous certainly is 6 from the outside...... I'm sure that is why 6s make great comedians. In my experience, the phobic 6 tends to know that they are a 6 earlier that the counter-phobic 6. [From the Enneagram Institute website: "Sixes tend to use two different methods of coping with their anxiety: a phobic response or a counterphobic response. Sixes who are more phobic often deal with their fears through a dependent stance. They are more aware of their anxiety and turn quickly to others, particularly authority figures, for support...Sixes who are more counterphobic are much more likely to question, or even rebel against authorities. They are quicker to confront others and are more prone to suspiciousness than phobic Sixes. They are more determined to be independent and resist turning to others for support. " -- Cindi] The one that has the most difficulty is the social 6."

[If you don't know what a "social 6" is, check out this link on instincts. -- C]

More from Katherine:

"Both 6 and 9 struggle with identifying themselves in testing instruments as doubt is built into the defense strategy. As you know, 6s seek certainty and 9s have the believer/doubter dichotomy. They also both tend to seek balance. In the complete Enneacards Test, only the 6 (and sometimes 9) will choose one card in one selection and another in the second sort. When interviewed they say that they are trying to be fair and it depends on the situation, knowing that they can be either. They do best taking the sampler test 3 times as they relax and feel more comfortable choosing the 6 cards. Since it is free, I recommend it to everyone as it is a process in and of itself.
I have found that the 6 might relate to the responsibility of the type 1, the helpfulness and giving of type 2, the professionalism of type 3, the romantic nature of the type 4, the reserve of the 5, the flexibility and optimism of type 7, the fight for justice of the type 8, and the humbleness of type 9 with the cautiousness and/or rebelliousness type 6. The social 6 is the only type that uses all of these words. The social 6 also has tremendous difficulty confirming their type as they can be any of these qualities... because for them, it truly does depend of the situation.
The 9 tends to identify with aspects of many of the types as well. I find that 3, 6 and 9 all seek this balance as they are the primary types [central types of each emotional triad -- C] and out of touch with the focus of their center i.e., the 3 modulates feeling to keep doing, the 6 doubts what they know and the 9 is passive-aggressive rather than showing their anger. The 3 seeks balance by trying to adapt to people and situations so as to be seen in a positive light. The 3, however, is strongly identified with being successful so they do not struggle as much as the 6 and the 9 in confirming their type.
The Enneagram is a wonderful system and I never tire of learning more about the subtle distinctions within type. The Trifix [according to the Enneagram Explorations site, a person's trifix is his or her "dominant Enneagram type in each of the three centers: head, heart, and gut." -- C] research has yielded incredible data about out we see ourselves. Since the potential Trifix is given in the complete Enneacards Test, I am able to correlate the data with the Enneaspread. It is in the Enneaspread that we can see the 6 even if they do not choose 6 as their final card. In all fairness to the 6s, their defense strategy is to be evasive to stay safe. The 6 Enneaspread will have a 'poker' hand of cards that are consistently inconsistent. The inconsistency is the pattern. For example, their last two cards may be 5 and 7 which are their wings. The Enneaspread and Trifix will have the 6 in it but not necessarily as their first choices. Usually, in the Trifix it is the third choice. The combination of information is very revealing. For example, a 6 that has the 694 Trifix tends to be even more doubting and reserved as a 6 than the 683 which is more assertive and confident. The social 694 is often shy even if extroverted. And, if they are a ENFP they are often quite romantic and 7ish, the INTJ is more 5ish and withdrawn. Add the instincts and it yields a lot of information.
Good luck with your blog,
Katherine Chernick Fauvre"

[If you are interested in more correlations between the Enneagram and Myers-Briggs typology, check out "The Enneagram and the MBTI: an Electronic Journal." There is a wealth of info available there. -- C]