Myers-Briggs by the Book

Have you ever done a Myers-Briggs test? That's the personality test that is supposed to classify you into one of 16 types, made up of four distinct groups. There's introvert vs. extrovert,
intuitive vs. sensing, thinking vs. feeling, and judging vs. perceiving.
I am usually an INTJ (The Strategist) or an INFJ (The Protector). I really ride the line on that thinking-vs-feeling thing. And before you start emailing me, yes I am an introvert. It isn't about how you present yourself to the world, it's where and how you get your energy. I recharge my batteries either alone or in small groups.
There are lots of ways to find out what your MB type is, so Google it and take one of the tons of online tests. This is important for the book angle we're going to talk about next. So go find out what you are and then come back. I'll wait...
Okay, now that we have that out of the way, Huffington Post has provided a handy guide that tells you what book characters most closely match your personality type. Are you a Huck Finn or a Sherlock Holmes?
Not surprisingly, I am either like Elizabeth Bennett from Pride & Prejudice or like Jo March from Little Women. There is also a handy guide that offers career choices. According to that, I should be a scientist or an artist. Wow. That's quite a range. I did buy a watercolor kit this weekend, so clearly I am on the right path.
This is obviously a fabulous test that should be taken incredibly seriously. Well, unless you are an ESTP. The HuffPost item then says you are like the character from American Psycho. Sorry about that.
Here is the link, so spend the rest of the day looking up your type and those of all your friends and family.
You're welcome.

"Great" Books

I spent Sunday morning in the bookstore ― as I do ― and I perused the big table of Summer Reading selections. Those are the books that teachers have assigned for upcoming English or literature classes.

Looking through the stacks, I found a few old friends (Pride and Prejudice, Tale of Two Cities) and some enemies (Finnegan's Wake, Beowulf). I've re-read my favorites over and over, but I pity the poor kid who has to start on something as tough as Pilgrim's Progress.
Traditional classics can be hard to read in a 21st-century world. The language is often old fashioned, the prose can be breathless (you can almost hear the bodices heaving), and the storylines can seem staid. But great plots that stand the test of time are there to be discovered if you push your way past the old-school verbiage in books like in Vanity Fair or in anything by Dickens.
The online magazine Slate recently asked authors to name their least-favorites in classic literature. In the article (click here), the consensus seems to be that Catcher in the Rye is overwrought and that Ulysses isn't worth the time. I agree that Thomas Hardy needed Prozac, but I would debate Mark Twain over his hatred for Jane Austen. As one sarcastic wit to another, you would think he'd be a big fan. Or was he jealous?
Let's add to the debate. What are you favorites in classic literature, and the books you hope to never read again? I'll publish the results in a future post.