Writing style preferences based on functions

[ruminator]

I noticed that when I read books, I hate extensive physical descriptions, but I don't mind descriptions of feelings/emotional states. I realized maybe it's because I'm not an Se.

Different functions probably enjoy reading about certain things/in certain styles. If we could put together a list, we could then build recommendations of authors who write in that style, so we could all find perfect reading materials.

Here's what I think so far (please chime in with more suggestions):

Se: preference for detailed physical descriptions (setting, clothing, physical characteristics, etc) Authors?
Si: books that romanticize the past. Authors?
Fe: preference for more description of emotion, books that make you feel what the characters are feeling. Authors?
Fi: books that have a moral message, parables, teach lessons. Authors?
Te: not sure
Ti: books that try to understand things, solve puzzles, mysteries, figure out solutions. Authors: Doyle, ...
Ne: not sure. maybe books that explore multiple different stories/characters at once, rather than focus on one plotline?
Ni: not sure. maybe books where you have to find a hidden meaning. where it is ambiguous and left up to the reader. Books: Turn of the Screw?

As I get suggestions, I'll edit this original post to reflect the new information.

 

[Alias]

If that's your definition for Fe, ok. That means Agatha Christie novels fall under Fe and Ti. That also means the entire Tommy and Tuppence books are INTP. Ti: Problem solving detective novel Ne: Follows multiple characters, usually Tommy and Tuppence Si: They take place in WWI and WWII and stuff Fe: The book is very engaging.

 

[Brontosaurie]

I think you're right on Si, Fe and Fi.

Te: Books with little known facts (Te-Si) or theories (Te-Ni)

Ne: Books that are about weird people (Ne-Fi) or are just weird books (Ne-Ti)

Ni: Books that evoke a subtle psychedelic map over time by interacting with the mind of the reader. These readers really enjoy investing time and effort, and the idea of idle consumption or one-way communication is foreign to them. Their books are friends. A strong preference for peculiar metaphors (Ni-Fe) or concepts (Ni-Te)

 

[paradoxparadigm7]

Tom Robbins books seem to capture Ne. Quirky and funny plots. Characters that are on the fringe of society, rebellious and irreverent topics. NF's and NT's would appreciate this type.

 

[Pizzabeak]

Don't think Doyle was necessarily Ti, sort of always seemed Si, Se, Fi, and Fe, at least partially based off the offered definitions. There is some Ti but it may not be the leading attribute regardless if he heavily used it in his cognition throughout his life. For that personally, I couldn't help but get an ESFP or ISFJ vibe from him. Besides his most popular stuff they usually feel more like an Ni guessing to see what happened type of scenarios rather than Ti oriented. Even when he did some sci-fi it was more Si based than anything else. Nonetheless his stuff can still appeal to Ti users somewhat.

 

[Ex-User (8886)]

Te dominants like reading about history and all stories which step by step follow pattern:
Cause, event, effect

My Ti likes intellectual dialogues.
Ne likes oddity, strange things and crazy theories
Ni reads everything between the lines

 

[redbaron]

J Some authors would conceivably cover nearly all of these definitions. I'll try and do Asimov and Clarke

Arthur C. Clarke: Ji and Pe axes definitely. Ti and Se are the most immediately apparent, usually with an Ne injection at certain intervals throughout, tied into Fi at some crucial point as well. He's pretty big on physical descriptions and I think people who have trouble with visualization would find it hard to follow majority of his novels. The plotlines often hinge on some recently discovered (at the time of writing) theory or scientific proposition not yet fully explored as well. So Te there.

I'd conclude that he should appeal predominantly to Ti and Se, with a decent amount of Ne. Adds in Fi and Te at appropriate intervals.

He doesn't really display anything for Si, Fe or Ni as set out by the definitions in this thread. He rarely goes into the sort of emotional detail that many writers do and at some points is almost shallow in that department. He'll spend two sentences describing the emotional state of someone in a never-before-experienced situation, followed by two chapters describing a stairwell.

Cares little for history too and his books are usually neatly tied up by the end. Although he does include metaphors, they're not usually directed in an Ni capacity. Usually it's for descriptive purposes.

Clarke analysis in order of preference: Ti, Se, Ne, Fi, Te / the rest.

Quick analysis of Asimov in order of preference: Ni, Ti, Fe, Ne / the rest.

I'll analyse Asimov in more depth later and try highlight my points with some excerpts from Clarke/Asimov. Great idea for thread btw