#badger secondary vs bird secondary | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

sevilemar · 1 year

Note

I think I realized I am a Bird with Lion secondary. It was difficult to figure out because not many things about Lion secondary resonated with me - when I read the description, I always had an image of a very straightforward, muscley kind of guy who goes 'No, this ain't right' and blasts off his enemies with guns, who is a truth speaker to a fault and is incapable of subtlety and who can only be more or less intense without shades. All this couldn't be farther away from the truth for me. So I and an idea... What if a secondary isn't about truth vs lies and isn't even about wearing a mask (bear with me, I know it's unusual reading). It's JUST about tailoring yourself to people and just that. A person may be a liar to a fault, and still manipulate people via their general perception of them (correct one) instead of 'tailoring' and a person may be a complete truth teller and tailor everything they say to an audience. Lion secondaries can be detached tricksters and liars but this tricksterness is cold and a bit aggressive. It challenges people instead of genuinely enjoying playing with people like a Snake secondary would. Many eccentrics actually Lion secondaries. Philosopher Diogenes comes to mind. Dude was smart and sarcastic and definitely a trickster but he challenged people and didn't tailor his message to anyone. I call this type 'Sphynx Lion' aka Deadpan Lion who isn't necessarily overly emotional or passionate or straightforward.

Congrats on finding your sorting, nonny! 👍

The image of lion secondary you had made me laugh, because I know a lion, and they are neither male nor muscly, nor do they own a gun as far as I know. They can do subtle, hate conflicts that are left unspoken, they can be intense, they can be playful, and so much more. They are also very kind and one of the most reflected people I know.

I don't think secondary has ever been about lie vs. truth; every secondary can lie. It's the primary who decides if it's OK or not. Masks are only a thing if you're an actor bird using roles/masks.

If I read it right, what you call tailoring yourself to people is essentially being fluid and fitting yourself to match the situation. I speak truth most of the time, yet I tailor everything. It's why I'm snake secondary. If you don't do that, you're probably very much a lion. And yes, lion secondaries can definitely be smart and sarcastic and deadpan and a trickster. So can birds, or badgers, or snakes. There's no trickster sorting, or smart sorting, or sarcastic sorting. There's also no sorting that's especially emotional or unemotional. All of this depends on the person, not on their sorting.

There are stereotypes, because shc was a system for sorting fictional characters first, and fictional characters are always stereotypes of some kind. But when you sort real people, you need to look beyond that as best you can. I'm glad you did, nonny, and found what fits you.

#sortinghatchats #ask answers #lion secondary

9 notes · View notes

amai-no-ura · 2 years

Note

I've been thinking about this lately, and I'm curious to know what you think: By definition, systems like sorting hat chats put something relatively simple (their structure) on something incredibly complicated and ever-changing (life). How do you use it to your advantage without ignoring the many pitfalls?

One thing I love about SHC is that it is observable and applicable in real life. You can see people being Lion primary, Snake primary and how they interact with their numerous skillsets. You can see all of that in action. I think my way of applying it is to use it as a template where I interpret experience and people I meet. I don't think everything has to fit into SHC structure, because people are complex. But something can be explained using the system.

Like, why do my aunt, mum and stepfather all think I'm selfish? Because they are hardline loyalists (Badger with Lion model, Snake and Badger with Bird model respectively). They couldn't understand how I could sacrifice people for my goals/career/life path because they would NEVER do it. But I also couldn't imagine myself putting people first over what is right for me (goals, ambition, ideals). I'm Lion primary, hence why I have always been drawn toward goals and personal choice. It is empowering to me the way my loyalist family will never understand.

I can see that play out in real time independent of personal experience coloring it (no biases, no emotional expectation, no cultural influence, just how they function as a person). Hence I believe this theory has merits.

Or about the secondary. I'm snake sec, meaning I always prefer adaptability and fluidity over brute force. My aunt is Lion secondary, so she will always prefer directness and transparency over any trickery. That's the underlying formula of these secondaries. For Lion, it is transparency and solidity. For Snake, it is fluidity and adaptability. Even if my aunt is diplomatic, very good at hiding her thoughts, she is still Lion secondary. Meanwhile, I'm very direct and open but underneath all of that, I'm still a fluid Snake.

My coworker is a bird sec. He relies on his organization skills, built knowledge and systematic learning to get things done. He does really well in structured environment because that's how his mind operates. I thrive on unpredictability. I don't do well in structured learning courses or something like that. I thrive on real experience where I can adapt and face them hands-on. It's the heady energy of bird vs raw, hands-on approach of snake.

Then, I will use all these information to my advantage by adapting my language and methods to match the people in question. My boss is double Lion (and also ESTJ 8w7, so even more directness), so I won't beat around the bush with him and be honest always. My coworker is Badger sec (also ESFJ 6w7), so I wait for her to do her badger thing instead of rushing through it. Another coworker of mine is snake sec (ESTP 7w6), so I play with him using my snake. Etc, etc. Or when I have to charm a Snake primary, I show them how much my family means to me (lies) and how much I care about my people (truth) because that's what they value. If I have to interact with fellow lion, then I'll just respect their goal and encourage them on their path (because that's what we crave).

Another thing to note is I supplement SHC with other systems like MBTI and Enneagram. So all of them play a part in my application in real life. Like ... my boss is ESTJ 8w7 so/sp and Double Lion meaning he has a LOT of directness, strength and protective tendency. I know instantly he respects strength (8w7 + Double Lion), competency (Te-dom in general, as well as his personal values) and fair character (his Fi-inferior values + being so/sp). So I cater to all of that by not performing too much, just be frank with him in almost everything. Speak up for myself and everyone else, showing up for work. Always bettering myself and make sure to become a better person. That's how I get on his good side (and it benefits me too, since I become a better person).

So, I think that's how I apply it in real life. But what about you? Do you do the same thing as I do? Or is it something else entirely?

And for anyone seeing this, do share how you use SHC in real life! I'd love to read them all.

#sortinghatchats #typology #ask answers #enneagram #mbti

13 notes · View notes

mooglesorts · 3 years

Text

went out for a long walk earlier, had a lot of Snake Secondary Thoughts i was excited to post/reply when i got home. accidentally took a wrong turn on the way back and ended up taking a VERY LONG walk, ran out of energy to actually write down the things for the moment fshdfklhsdfsdf

#moogle hat talks #the double edged sword of going out for a walk to Think #you will get lots of productive thinking done right up to the point where you decide you're done walking #and get exhausted on the way back #i meant to walk for like 20 minutes and ended up being out for an hour and a half rip me #most of it was bird primary vs lion primary; the bleedover between snake and badger secondary #how i think some snakes are actually very easy to manipulate ourselves #because we're all about redirecting momentum; ours and other people's #and it's easy to pull a reverse uno card on a young entertainer snake in particular and swing us in the direction you want us to go #i feel like this is probably different from the way some badger secondaries can be Easily Swayed #although very closely adjacent #because a lot of the time we'll be very aware that we're being redirected from our goal #and screaming internally each time we get swung wide of it again #(i think a lot of our socialization is very goal-oriented tbh)#(it's just that a lot of the time it's something like 'make a nice conversation happen')#(but sometimes it'll be to convince someone of something etc etc)#related to which i love woody from psych very much and i'm starting to think it's because he's a very badgery entertainer snake #snake secondary #entertainer snake #badger model #psych tag #woody strode #'rest your brain' i say and then proceed to write a bunch in the tags #anyway i got some neat responses and i am excited to answer them #and also am blessed by kurt fuller and all of the characters he plays

13 notes · View notes

missbrunettebarbie · 2 years

Note

Hi! Do you know the maurderers era students hogwarts houses? I read that Snape was a Snake/Bird and Peter Pettigrew is a Lion/Badger but what would the rest be in your opinion? I think James is a double lion, Lily a lion/bird, Remus a lion/bird with a badger model, and Sirius a Snake/Lion. Bonus!: I think regulus black was a snake/bird or a double bird with a snake model for his family.

Hello, nonnie. I have to confess, the Marauders were never my favourites characters, but I'll try to do my best. Iirc, I think @awinterrain and @the-phoenix-heart have talked about them befoere, but I am going to throw in my two cents.

Peter Pettigrew - He was sorted here by @wisteria-lodge I find the arguments very compelling, so yeah, I agree on Lion Badger for him.

Remus Lupin - Probably the hardest to sort, because I don't really care about him, like, at all. I agree Bird secondary seems likely. I could also see Bookkeeper Badger, but eh, let's say Bird. I disagree on him being an Idealist because the most memorable of scenes for me was in book 7, when he wanted to joing the trio and Harry accuses of him of running away from his family because he's scared of failling as a father. I think an Idealist would have pointed out that helping defeat Valdemort is the best thing he could do for his family, but he doesn't. We are left with the sense that Harry was right. And indeed, running away in order to protect people seems to be his MO. He was absent from Harry's life for 12 years and then disappeared again in Year 4. And as much joy as he gets from teaching, he doesn't fight for it when he's fired. IMO, he's a burned Badger primary that dehumanizes himself and doesn't allow himself a community.

Sirius Black - I think it would be impossible to sort him as anything but a Snake Lion. Clearly His Person was James and after he died, he focused on Harry and I think that's what kept his primary relatively healthy. Also what motivates Sirius in book 3 is revenge on Pettigrew. Very Snake-y of him. As for his secondary, it looked like both James and Sirius were Improvisers and I could never see this guy as anything but a Lion.

James Potter - The thing about James is that a lot of people have a very, very good impression about him and for 4.5 books the reader also sees him in a good light. But then we see Snape's flashback in book 5 and find out he was actually a bully. Which makes us wonder how literally everyone but Snape -who is biased bc of other reasons- had such a high opinion of him. IMO, it was because James was a veeeery Snake secondary. Compare him for just a moment with Sirius, who was mostly like James, but people, including people close to him, had no problem believing he was a murderer. As @laufire pointed out, it's hard to see Dumbledore, Remus, etc. believe the same of James if the situation was reversed. Lion vs Snake secondary, man. I agree he was most likely a Glory Hound Lion that probably shifted more towards Paragon after he graduated from Hogwarts and joined the war.

Severus Snape - I don't remember who sorted him and where, but I totally agree with Snake Bird. Severus was a pretry unhealthy Snake who fixated on Lily since childhood, but also valued power more than her. He thought he could have the best of both worlds and then Lily died and I am pretty sure he burned to a crisp. And yeah, what other secondary could the potion master have but Bird?

Lily Evans - We really know ridiculously little about her, but the way she stood up to James again and again since their first till their fifth year, makes me think she was a Lion secondary. (I am getting the feeling James really liked Lion secondaries) Definitely an Idealist primary and I could see Lion, but I like the idea of her housesharing with Harry too much, so I prefer imagining her as a Bird.

Regulus Black - Pretty much my favourite character on this list LOL. We also know too little about him to really have any definitive sorting, but I like your ideas that he might be a Snake Bird or a Double Bird. If it was the former, it's truly tragic, as I think only Kreacker would have been His Person by the time he died. Buuut, I am more inclined towards a Bird primary who thought pureblood ideaology was Right and Good, till he was smacked across the face with evidence that it really, really wasn't. The reason I am choosing Bird over Snake is because I cannot see a Snake sacrificing himself in the Cave when Kreacker was already safe. Snake!Regulus would have either: 1. never let Kreacker leave with Voldemort 2. sacrificed himself if it was between his life and Kreacker's or 3. as soon as Kreacker came back from the cave, would have taken him and deflacted from Voldy and the Blacks. But he didn't do any of these, instead he chose to die in the hope of his death helping bring Voldy's destruction. Kinda screams Idealist to me. And I think it's Bird and not Lion, because the cave and the horcrux and Kreacher almost dying seem to have been the straw that broke the camel's back for him and he did a 180 degrees turn and decided the Black family values can go to hell, Voldy needs to die. Considering the (super dramatic) message he left, Regulus strikes me as a planner, so I agree Bird secondary could suit him well.

So, TL;DR:

Peter Pettigrew - Lion Badger

Remus Lupin -Badger Bird, burned primary

Sirius Black - Snake Lion

James Potter - Lion Snake

Severus Snape - Snake Bird, unhealthy and burned primary

Lily Evans - Bird Lion

Regulus Black - Double Bird who changes his belief when he realizes how dangerous Voldemort is.

But, really, we know so little about most of these guys, you could write them as almost any sorting in fanfics and it probably won't look out of character. These are just my preferred interpretations.

#sortinghatchats #hp thoughts #anonymous #answer #my thoughts #peter pettigrew #remus lupin #sirius black #james potter #severus snape #lily evans #regulus black

22 notes · View notes

kaz-with-hat · 2 years

Note

on the topic of your badger vs lion secondary post, what are some differences between badger and snake secondary? the (harry potter) stereotype is that theyre completely different, but theyre more similar than people give them credit for in both being fluid secondaries. and i understand that badgers are a prepwork secondary, but ive heard badgers say that they can thrive in improv situations because their prepwork is in the people around them. thoughts?

This ask is ironic because Snake is the one Secondary I do not understand at all. Lion? Bird? They're not who I am deep down but I get them, they make sense to me, I can use them in a pinch - Bird is both fun and useful while Lion is my "break glass in case of emergency". Snake? Snake is some sort of wizardry beyond my ken.

My suspicion is that Snake and Badger might be a case of Secondaries that can look very similar to the outside observer but are coming from fundamentally different places. Like, the fluid thing - I can easily imagine that this can be hard to tell apart for someone watching. Especially if we get into Exploded Badger, where you can in fact shift pretty strongly and contradict who you were earlier to match the other person. That might look pretty Snake!

But the thing is that a Courtier Badger is not acting. In that way, Badger is more similar to Lion than Snake, IMO - you're always being authentically you. It's just that "you" is a fluid concept. Certain parts are magnified and others tucked away depending on who you're talking to and the overall vibe of the group, but to a certain point that just feels natural? And at least for me it's not really happening consciously, I don't decide "oh I think this person I'm talking to needs an extra dose of tech geek Kaz and extra emotional intensity but to go minimal on sarcastic Kaz" or whatever. You just sort of see how the person acts and automatically shift to bring out the parts of yourself (or, when Exploded, create the parts of yourself) that suit that. My understanding from what Snakes have said is that their shifting is a lot more deliberate and calculated and there's a lot more distance there.

(more on Badgers improvising on familiar territories and how "integrity of method" can actually include some Snakey elements below cut)

The improv thing is interesting, because the analogy I actually want to draw here is to Rapid-Fire Bird. Namely: I think the Built secondaries can be capable of quick shifting and dealing with things on the fly, but it needs to be in an area where they have something built already. From a Badger perspective, it's like - the stronger your foundation, the less necessary it becomes for you to build and plan every little detail of what you need in advance, the more likely a rough idea of where you're going is enough, and the more likely it is that you can react to something quickly because you're on such familiar ground. Like, when I'm at work, I know that I got this. I have the skills and background, I've built up the expertise, I know that if I don't know something right away I know where to find it out, I have the trust of my teammates... so I can roll with the punches and try out various tactics to solve a problem, and also leave stuff unplanned knowing I'll be able to figure it out when it happens. This sounds similar to what you're saying about Badgers thriving in improv because their prep work is in the people around them, and this might look Snake to the outside observer? But it's extremely situational, it's only possible because we're in my territory here. I have absolutely no clue how Snakes pull this off without that basis. My Lion model is pretty much actively terrifying to use due to that lack of something to draw on, it feels like I'm jumping in the deep end - and at least that's straightforward, you just pick a direction and start going. Snakes just, like, do the adaptability/try a bunch of different tactics/find a path around obstacles thing in completely unfamiliar situations? I... but... how.

One last point where I think the two might look similar but get there in completely different ways: what exactly the Badger's "integrity of method" is can vary a lot. I think a lot of people who hear this might think that it's always about throwing more and more effort at the problem to solve it. But the Right Way to solve something can include "don't reinvent the wheel, make sure there isn't an existing solution you can use for this before you start solving it yourself". Or "try a few different approaches to make sure you've found the best/most efficient/most elegant one." Or "don't sink too much effort into trying to find the absolute perfect solution right off. It's more important to get something that works in place now and then come back to improve on it over time." To an outside observer, this could look Snakey - you're stopping and trying different things before you settle on the best way to solve something, you're borrowing things other people have done to save yourself effort, you're showing up with rough solutions that handle the problem but could really be refined. But it's coming from a very different place, with Badger doing these things because it's the right way (and, therefore, likely to do things like try different approaches even if the first one worked OK, or go to a lot of effort to make sure there's no solution already available even when making their own wouldn't be that hard), while the Snake is more goal-oriented and doing these things because they're trying to find the path that gets them to their destination quickest.

(...rereading the above paragraph I'm like: how obvious is it that I'm a software developer...)

Conclusion: even if in certain contexts the end result looks the same, Snakes remain magic beyond my comprehension. Sorry anon!

#badger secondary #snake secondary #answers #sortinghatchats

38 notes · View notes

magpie-of-a-birb · 2 years

Note

which idealist primary would you say might be most worried about being overly credulous? i can see it for lion integrity vs the bird search for truth. for sure i’m not a loyalist but i haven’t yet figured out where my ideas come from. it’s just a huge pet peeve of mine when things are taken without question/at face value, and i really value finding things out for yourself.

My first instinct is to say bird, since when it comes to the morality side of things, what is picked up could have a more direct impact on the bird's compass than if they were a lion, so making sure the data isn't faulty would be important. However, due to this post that umai made, I'm not so sure. For the most part, I think it could go either way, but depends on whether or not the bird or lion has something in their system that makes double-checking information to be important

That being said, the way that you value finding things out for yourself makes me think that your secondary may be influencing this, as well, since you're valuing having the "checking" step as a part of your information-aquiring method. The way it's phrased makes me think badger secondary, since it sounds like you take pride in doing the work to find the answer, yourself

TL;DR: checking over newly acquired information leans more towards bird primary, but could be bird or lion primary. However, the secondary may be influencing said value

#sortinghatchats #magpie speaks #magpie answers #lion primary #bird primary

16 notes · View notes

solcomfortssouls · 2 years

Note

what's the difference between a character mastering lots of different fighting techniques because they're a badger vs if they're a bird?

I'm no expert on badgers secondaries, I'm a bird secondary myself though, so this is how I understand it:

Birds will learn all the techniques, cause they are collecting all the tools they see as needed for a situation. Or for fun, it doesn't all ever have to come to use. It's about expanding their toolkit.

A badger character would learn all the fighting techniques, because they are a hard worker. Because they want to show up and do the work, and if it's their duty, their job, the need of their community, they will go and master all there is to know about it. They wouldn't do it for fun or in cass, but to fill an actual need. To be diligent, caring and honestly there for those who need it.

Hope that helps!

P.S. please send sortinghatchats asks to my writeblr @writingonesdreams in the future, thank you!

#sortinghatchats #bird secondary #badger secondary

6 notes · View notes

painted-crow · 3 years

Note

ugh i am so confused on my secondary :/ the one that i know im not is lion because i do the face switching thing with every person i talk to- even via text. its not a conscious thing either, it just happens & has always been this way & i enjoy doing it! but im unsure if its snake face-switching, badger mirroring, or actor bird. i just take someones energy and reflect it back at them- but the snek neutral state does resonate with me. there's a "me" under all the layers but its still... (1/2)

(2/2)..but its still very actor-y/mirror-y. the only time im not putting on any layers/pretty blunt is when im super apathetic or sick. im kind of a shitty improviser in certain areas but good in others, if that means anything. kinda makes me sound rapid-fire birdy or just a built sec in general lol. i do the bird *unconsciously hoarding info* thing haha which is nice, but im also usually suprised at my good rep/how much people seem to like me. any tips on telling between these 3? thanks paint!

Last ask before I crash for the night -w-

I have a couple asks about similar stuff, how to tell these kinda similar-looking secondary tools apart... let's talk about it for a bit here. Hopefully I'm not too asleep to make sense. I was just gonna write a quick post about it, but being concise is hard >.<

Courtier vs Actor vs Rapid Fire vs Snake (bonus: vs Lion)

Courtier Badger mirroring

Showing someone the parts of yourself you think they'd find most relatable. They end up feeling liked and accepted by you because they feel you're similar to them.

All of this is genuine on your part, at least in the moment--you're kinda bad at faking it. It's difficult or impossible to mirror someone you really dislike.

Actor Bird masks

You can play a role ("professional," for instance) or turn the volume up on some of your traits (e.g. "friendly/extroverted/music lover/charismatic") to make a mask. This is a way you can act, and it doesn't have to be as genuine as a Badger's mirroring, though it probably takes less energy if it is.

Once you've gotten into character for a mask, it can take a bit to change out of it. It's kind of a mindset shift, and it's hard to fluidly change into a different behavior set without seeming to contradict yourself. Masks don't easily adjust on the fly.

Rapid Fire Bird bricolage

You have background knowledge, skills, experience, and/or resources related to a whole lot of different topics. You're creative, resourceful, and good at recombining past tools into current solutions.

You might also use Actor Bird masks as part of your toolset. Actor + RF Bird doesn't = Snake, but can seem similar at first glance.

Snake improv

You're making this up as you go along, and you're totally cool with that. You're not really afraid that things will go wrong, because you know you can recover and just pivot into something that will work better. You're willing to experiment with different tactics, watch them work or fail in real time, and adjust on the fly.

You don't mind acting differently toward different people. Your act doesn't have to be genuine, the way a Badger's would. It doesn't have to be prepared, either, and you don't get stuck in it like an Actor Bird might. You're great at using whatever resources are around you, but you didn't necessarily prepare any in anticipation of needing them. You may or may not start out with a plan, but you have no problems with dropping it if you see an opportunity come up that you want to take.

If you're dropped into a situation where you have no clue what's going on and no prior experience and no tools and you don't know anyone, you're probably still fine. A Bird in those circumstances would either panic, or withdraw and become an observer until they feel they've gathered enough information to know what to do.

Lions being Lions

All this talk about code-switching and changing how you act is uncomfortable. Why would anyone want to do this? How can you get good results like this??? Nope. Nope.

You kinda just do stuff. You're resilient, even stubborn. You don't go in for half measures. You don't give up easily. Snakes pivot all the time, but you don't--you bulldoze a straight line through your projects and problems, without necessarily thinking ahead. It usually works out, which confuses the heck out of other people sometimes, but hey, it's just how you roll!

Final note

You might model or perform any of these in addition to your actual secondary. (Info about models and performances can be found near the bottom of this page on the SHC WordPress.)

You could be a Badger who's specifically learned to use Bird masks, for instance. It's up to you which words you think best describe you and the tools you use ^^

78 notes · View notes

wisteria-lodge · 1 year

Note

Hello Wisteria, I'm not sure if you've already made a post about this, but I'm having a bit of trouble differentiating between a Badger Secondary leveraging community to get things done and a Bird Secondary who happens to be an "I know a guy" Bird. How do you tell the difference between a Bird who collects people and a Badger who connects them?

Thank you very much!

A Badger secondary is like a net - a community of interconnected individuals that you can call on for back up, help, and power. An "I Know a Guy" Bird secondary is more like individual fish hooks - you know a lot of of people, you know what they can do, and know how to call on the right guy for the right job. If you're not sure if someone is a Badger or a very social Bird, one trick is to check if all the people they know seem to know *each other.*

#sortinghatchats #shc #badger secondary vs bird secondary

55 notes · View notes

reds-burrow · 2 years

Note

I was just reading about how Queen Gertrude and Hamlet bond by screaming true things at each other, and it got me thinking about how each of the secondaries would argue. Lion Secondaries are the most obvious because they’d confront the issue head on, but what do you think about the other secondaries?

This is actually one of those things that has helped me sort a character, one that I was sure was either a Lion Secondary or a Neutral Snake. What caught my attention was that when he was arguing with people, he'd always be the one to back off and try a different approach. His emotional outburst didn't work? Then he'd try evidence and logic. That didn't work? Then he would try strong-arming the issue with an "do it anyway and apologize later" approach. And he does this multiple approach thing in different arguments throughout the show. I'm pretty sure a Lion would have either stuck with their first tactic or skipped to the strong-arming. So, I'd say that is the difference between how Straightforward and Circumventing Secondaries argue (or as Wisteria has aptly called them You Change (as in you change your mind) vs I Change (as in I'll change my approach)).

I'd also expect Built Secondaries to do better in an argument if they've had time to study or experience the subject before there is an argument about it. I don't know if you've ever seen a Bird Secondary argue in a forum they've already been studying, but they are a force to be reckoned with, able to pull up different facts or philosophies to back up their viewpoint. With Badger Secondaries, it's a very similar thing, except there seems to a pattern (at least in my limited experience) of Badgers trusting personal experiences to change a person's mind over factoids. And oh boy, if that Badger Secondary has invested their time and energy into you? You do not want to argue with that person. That person knows things about you.

Also, it's not what you asked, but I'd be remiss as a Snake Secondary if I didn't say there are other techniques I'd use to try and change a person's mind before I resorted to arguing. It really depends on who you're trying to convince and what type of response you're trying to get from them, of course. Some people don't respond to anything but arguing.

#sortinghatchats #ask response #the secondaries #loved this ask nonny

24 notes · View notes

laufire · 2 years

Note

how would you sort the legacies crew?

I've had this ask + an anonymous one asking about Lizzie's sorting for nearly a year in my inbox ^^U. My plan is to still wait until the show is over to properly sort the characters (likely with you and @missbrunettebarbie's help :D), because I think hindsight is essential to Plecverse sortings... but I thought I'd post the ones I've thought about so far, some with Artemis' and you as well, because otherwise this would never get answered lol.

-Lizzie: hers I'm probably most sure, by gut feeling alone even -Double Lion. The Lion secondary POPS xD, and Lion primary makes the most sense. And, although I can feel this ~omg they're soooo like me/project onto characters with sortings don't have anything to do with me own... there's something about fellow Double Lions :P

-Josie: Artemis and I think it's possible that, like Alaric, she's a Snake Bird with a Badger model/a Steffie kind of uncomfortable Snake primary. Shake that up girl, it'll be better for you in this 'verse xD. Sidenote, but Artemis and I were debating the possibility that Jo Sr. was a Lion Bird, and we love the idea of the twins being a crossed match of Jo and Caroline <3 (or Jo and Kai, who I personally think it's yet ANOTHER Snake Lion lol).

-Hope: I think we all thought about Snake Lion for her, and I still think it makes the most sense. Besides, her conflicts with Lizzie very much read as Lion secondary vs. Lion secondary to me xD

-Landon: Double Bird makes most sense to us, with how he collects trivia and uses it to solve problems and I LOVE it. Make that boy a phoenix again, cowards!! (also this way we can be sure we won't get ANOTHER extended death and resurrection plot... I want this to be the last one, pls).

-Kaleb: we think he's another possible Snake Lion, with how he's more impulsive/improvisational + his way of prioritizing Cleo vs. the others.

-Cleo: possible Lion Bird. Leans more towards collecting items and strategies and planning, and her impatience over Hope's Snake-y love for Landon felt very Lion to me xD

-MG: I remember you had him as another Lion Bird, and I'd agree.

-Alyssa: I put her as another Snake Lion and I'd stand by it, with her rashness and how appealing to her using her bond with her parents was a surefire way of working.

Some I haven't thought of yet where I'd welcome your thoughts: Rafael (I'm inclined towards internal primary though. Or very introverted Badger, but eh), Clarke (another possible Snake primary, maybe?); Ted (on instinct I'd say Lion primary but we'll see lol); Jed; Dorian (universal Badger, maybe? He could be a Badger Bird I think); Emma; Finch (internal primary would be my first instinct); Penelope; Sebastian; or Wade.

#nectargrapes #replies #talking to the void #my thoughts #sortinghatchats #plecverse thoughts #legacies #plecverse

7 notes · View notes

sevilemar · 1 year

Note

I got curious, if you're comfortable talking about it could you tell us about the point your friend made about shc?

They made several:

- They referred to this post, and said that nonny was right, and that loyalty is, of course, also an ideal, so our classification of idealist vs. loyalist doesn't work because one is essentially a more narrow subset of the other. After a bit of discussion we agreed on calling them abstract/big-picture (lion, bird) and concrete/small-scale (badger, snake) primaries instead.

- Also, they pointed out that I have not really defined what selfishness means to me, and that I maybe confuse it with self-care, and attribute it to snake primary when it's indeed just a human thing and has nothing to do with sorting at all. And that I do this because I might still be in survival mode myself, and need an excuse for basic human self-care.

- And branching off of this, they showed me that selfishness is indeed a value my society holds, but only for certain groups that use selfishness to shit on marginalised people. And how my arguments for selfishness/self-care would look from the outside when we switch from fandom to political discourse. It's why I deleted the post in question because fuck that.

- That's one of the biggest scepticisms they have for any kind of personality sorting, actually, that we take basic human things and only attribute it to a quarter of the population instead. And I have come upon that problem a lot in my shc posts. It's the reason why I do not feel confident in sorting anyone at the moment.

For me, shc is more art than anything else, a nifty little tool to use for getting to know myself a bit better and heal a bit. It's not scientific, it's not based on facts, it's a vibe thing. It's always in flux, nothing is ever set in stone, and I'm only using it as long as it's helpful. But I think sometimes I need the limitations of the system pointed out to me so I don't do more harm than good to myself and others in the community.

- They also called me out on something I've been waiting to be called on ever since I mentioned it, and that's my assumption that playfulness = snake secondary. Turns out I mean a certain kind of playfulness, and I was curious from the beginning if this was a sorting thing, a me thing, or a human thing that has nothing to do with secondaries and more with what kind of humour you prefer.

#sortinghatchats #ask answers

8 notes · View notes

intheseautumnhands · 3 years

Text

Sorting The Last 5 Years

Hello I’m back with yet more tiny fandom sorting because I have Thoughts and also, Feelings. Let’s talk about The Last 5 Years, which has ranked consistently among my favorite all-time musicals for so very, very long, and has such great characters for dissecting.

First some brief housekeeping: This is based specifically off the script for the stage show, and the cast recording version by Norbert Leo Butz and Sherie Rene Scott in 2002. I have not been lucky enough to see this live. I also promise no consistency with the movie because I just... nope, sorry, don’t like it. I think I remember things being consistent enough that this’d probably be good for both, but I’m not gonna try to include movie-based thoughts.

Second: I am not purposefully getting into the great “who was at fault” debate but I think my thoughts on them as characters makes it clear that I think both of them have flaws, and that while Jamie crossed a lot more lines at the end, neither of them are blameless for the relationship’s issues. SHC is always kinda YMMV, but even moreso than usually, if you’re really biased towards one side or the other, we probably read these characters very differently. Which is cool and I’d love to hear other opinions! But I will not be surprised if we disagree somewhere along the line.

I’m going to do this slightly different than usual -- since we’ve only got two characters to talk about, and I want to discuss how their houses bounce off each other, I’m going to go by house instead of discussing by character. In addition, I’m going to go Secondary first, because I have a lot I want to say about their Primaries.

Secondaries

In his second song of the show, Jamie tells us exactly how he approaches life:

But I say no, no, whatever I do I barrel on through, and I don’t complain No matter what I try, I’m flying full speed ahead.... Things might get bumpy, but Some people analyze every details Some people stall when they can’t see the trail Some people freeze out of fear that they’ll fail But I keep rolling on

If I had to pull out one singular moment to crystallize how he approaches things, that’d be it. Jamie doesn’t bother to stop and consider or change his approach. He sees what he wants, and he goes for it, and he’s lucky enough that that works out really, really well for him. And even when it’s a response to hardship, that’s still his approach. Just look at I Could Never Rescue You: so we could fight, or we could wait, or I could go. He decides there’s nothing else worth trying, calls someone else to help him leave, and goes.

Even when it’s not the best idea right now, when tempering what he has to say might help him get what he wants (If I Didn’t Believe In You) he doesn’t do it. Jamie charges, he’s stubborn, he’s set on what he wants -- he’s a pretty intense Lion, in other words.

Cathy tries to go after what she wants, too, but she ends up with several more obstacles in her way. While a lot of that is luck of the draw, she’s also a little more hesitant overall. Look at her running internal monologue throughout Climbing Uphill, second-guessing every decision (why’d I pick these shoes, why’d I pick this song, why’d I pick this career). In The Schmuel Song Jamie alludes to the same hesitance: maybe it’s just that you’re afraid to go out onto a limb(-o-vitch), maybe your heart’s completely swayed but your head can’t follow through.

She comes off as having that preparedness of a foundational Secondary -- I don’t see any hints of the breathless charge and certainty of a Lion, or the adaptability of a Snake. I honestly think either Bird or Badger would be suitable for her, and could easily be played into in either direction depending on small acting choices.

Absent of other interpretations, I’m going to lean Bird, off that line from Jamie above and some of the little nuances of Sherie’s performances. There’s a lot of frustration that this all isn’t coming more easily that, while it probably has a lot to do with how easily things have come to Jamie, also leans me away from Badger a little bit; but she’s clearly not unwilling to put in the work, and I could absolutely see that interpretation working just as well.

Primaries

Interestingly, Cathy is outright stated as having the traditional Snake-y trait: don’t you think that now’s a good time to be the ambitious freak you are? That’s not why I’m going to say that Cathy’s a Snake Primary, and Jamie’s clearly got ambitions too, but it does make me smile a little.

Loyalist Cathy’s earliest (timeline-wise) songs are so full of Snake wrap-myself-up-in-my-favorite-person sentiments and lines. Goodbye until tomorrow, goodbye until the rest of my life, and I have been waiting, I have been waiting for you. You don’t have to change a thing, just stay with me. I want you and you and nothing but you, miles and piles of you. I don’t mean to put on any pressure, but I know when a thing is right. Once Jamie’s in her life, that’s it, he’s a priority. It is heartbreaking to go back over this show and realize how much more of what Cathy says is directly about Jamie than the other way around.

Even later on, after we get the first tiny signs of tension, it’s still there. In The Next Ten Minutes: I don’t know why people run, I don’t know why things fall through, I don’t know how anybody survives in this life without someone like you. I could protect and preserve, I could say no and good bye -- but why, Jamie, why? In Summer in Ohio: I found my guiding light, I tell the stars each night, look at me, look at him -- son of a bitch, I guess I’m doing something right.

It’s not even the first time she’s done this. In I Can Do Better Than That, she talks about a previous relationship in the same terms: I gave up my life for the better part of a year. When Cathy gets serious about someone, she makes them her priority,

And that’s what she gets, until that’s all she has, and she lashes out with the exact same thing she wanted at the beginning: you and you, and nothing but you, miles and piles of you. And I don’t think it’s because she didn’t actually want it. It’s because she thought it would be less one-sided.

Because idealist Jamie does put her high in his priorities, but he doesn’t put her first in the same, fixated way. Jamie’s instinctual and set-on-his-decisions Lion Primary chafes against Cathy’s expectation that he’ll put her above what he wants, fed into by that charging, bold instinct from his Secondary.

Which is not to say that Cathy isn’t important to Jamie. But the downfall in their relationship is that what that looks like is so different between the two of them, and they never figure out how to meet middle ground. They’re both unreliable, biased narrators in this story, and neither of them see what the other needs.

A while back, I talked about how different Primaries love. Jamie and Cathy could be case studies in what I said there, and especially in how that love can go bad.

Lion Jamie sees that they both have big dreams, and encourages Cathy to push her way forward on her dreams: Shouldn’t I want the world to see the brilliant girl who inspired me?... Stop temping, and go and be happy! He uses the thing that is most important to him -- his writing -- to encourage her, show her that he sees her hesitance and he believes in her. And when they’re having problems, he puts the blame on how her dreams are going first: Is it just that you’re disappointed to be touring again for the summer? Did you think this would all be much easier than it’s turned out to be?

And that’s where we get, I think, one of the biggest highlights of how they misunderstand each other: If I’m cheering on your side, Cathy, why can’t you support mine? Cathy feels unsupported, Cathy feels like everything has become all about Jamie -- but Jamie feels the same way. The kind of support they need is different, and neither of them see it.

(Even at the height of their love story, the one moment they’re at the same page, The Next Ten Minutes, it says so much to me that Jamie keeps getting these lines about a bigger picture that he and Cathy are just part of: there are so many dreams I need to see with you -- not dreams about them, dreams they can see come true together. I will never change the world, until, I do.)

And Jamie withdraws, and takes her more and more for granted, and steamrolls over her both accidentally -- A Part of That, and Cathy’s fierce declaration of I will not be the girl who gets asked how it feels to be trotting along at the genius’ heels getting disproven in front of her eyes -- and then purposefully, when he decides it’s time to stop trying.

Meanwhile, Snake Cathy sees that as the betrayal. She puts him first, makes him the priority, and when she doesn’t get that in return, she sees it as everything being about Jamie instead of the balance being equal. Fed into by her own ambitions going unfulfilled despite her own best efforts, she clings tighter, until he feels suffocated by it: all that I ask for is one little corner, one private room at the back of my heart, tell her I found one, she sends out battalions to claim it and blow it apart.

Until Jamie leaves, and Cathy is left bitter by it: Jamie is probably feeling just fine. Jamie decides it’s his right to decide. Run away, like it’s simple, like it’s right. Because to her steady, solid foundational Secondary and person-focused Snake, Jamie’s impulsive choice and quick action is cowardice at best, proof he doesn’t care as much at worst.

In summary:

Cathy Hiatt is a Snake Primary/foundational Secondary, either works with the text, but based on OCR, likely Bird.

Jamie Wellerstein is a Double Lion.

And Cathy’s person-first version of support VS Jamie’s dreams-first version of support, and their lack of understanding what each other is trying to provide and needs to recieve, is the entire crux of why their relationship fails, with some help from their uneven amounts of luck in their dream careers.

#sorting hat chats #Sortinghatchats #the last 5 years #the last five years #it is truly ridiculous how much of this is just me straight-up quoting lyrics with nothing else to add #which ALMOST makes me feel less ridiculous about it being almost 1500 words #if you read all that you get a cookie #i am SURE other people could read them totally differently #but that's theater for you!

23 notes · View notes