Lovell had several interviews; below I link the first interview, conducted by another interviewer in fall 2014, and another conducted by me in spring 2016. Lovell's camera was not working.
Full disclosure: because of the unique circumstances of having several videos, I had a strong opinion about Lovell's type before conducting this interview. My opinion was not changed at all, over the course of the interview, or afterwards.
A few observations:
- Lovell tends to speak slowly and deliberately, he often pauses to search for the proper words. He tends to speak "in circles", searching for the proper way to express his idea, frequently becoming sidetracked or lost in thought, giving very indirect, tangential answers.
- Many lengthy pauses in speech (and not only in my own questions).
- No emotional range in interview context (not the most informative context, but anyway)
- Spontaneously critical of people (main theme - people who don't or can't do their jobs, people who are incompetent)
My view is that Lovell is the ILI.
The most pressing theme that I observed in Lovell's presentation is one that I pointed out explicitly in the video - Lovell is characteristically "minimalist"; he is largely not a participant in the activities that comprise his life. Instead he brings about with him a sort of sense of disembodiment and apathy, a broad lack of commitment towards achieving personal goals. His life seems almost directionless, as if he only partially and halfheartedly sets his mind to the life circumstances and places he finds itself, as though he is reasonably content to do what he does currently, and to be where is currently, but any other place or occupation would suit him just as well, or possibly better.
In response to my challenges, around 42:50, about why Lovell is not more of a participant in his life's circumstances -- Lovell maintains a measured response to my questions, appearing to find the questions "why not do more", logical in nature, but nonetheless responds completely blankly, revealing a characteristic failure of attention to the possibility of doing more to act, rather than think, about the circumstances around him.
Even the way Lovell relates to people, seems minimalist (at least outwardly). The people around Lovell's seem to lack detail from Lovell's point of view, almost as if they were interchangeable, useful for hanging out with and consuming substances, but what they mean to Lovell, if they carry a deeper meaning at all, is very unclear from the point of view of the observer.
In response to my challenges, around 42:50, about why Lovell is not more of a participant in his life's circumstances -- Lovell maintains a measured response to my questions, appearing to find the questions "why not do more", logical in nature, but nonetheless responds completely blankly, revealing a characteristic failure of attention to the possibility of doing more to act, rather than think, about the circumstances around him.
Even the way Lovell relates to people, seems minimalist (at least outwardly). The people around Lovell's seem to lack detail from Lovell's point of view, almost as if they were interchangeable, useful for hanging out with and consuming substances, but what they mean to Lovell, if they carry a deeper meaning at all, is very unclear from the point of view of the observer.
Lovell has a clearly expressed sense of skepticism. This skepticism is not restricted to other people, although we can clearly see it in his conversations about work colleagues where it is specifically directed towards people, but he also shows an inclination is to doubt himself, and the positions he takes. For instance, another point that I made explicitly in the interview, involves Lovell's skepticism, and his willingness, or perhaps lack of willingness, to dream. He responds to my question at 30:30 about what career paths he has considered for himself (this discussion dwindles and I address the theme again around 50:00), and my restatement of this question, with a complex explanation about some things that aren't done correctly at his job, but refuses to really divulge (or perhaps, refuses to make firm commitments about) his thoughts about his own future career. But clearly, we can see that he has thought about his future in the organization -- and the reason for that, in spite of his unsettled half-dissatisfaction with his job, is that he is not willing to "lie" to himself by speculating about possibilities which seem unrealistic. In spite of, as he says, his aspiration to do something "bigger" (54:00 appx)
A lot of these themes -- because I came into the interview with a good sense of who Lovell is -- are made more explicit throughout the course of the interview, with penetrating questions, designed to reveal exactly what aspects of life Lovell's trajectory might not be paying attention to. The reader can judge for themselves how precisely the discussion matches the qualities that in Lovell, might be missing, and where is the psychological pressure.
At the very end of the interview -- around 1:25:30, we hear a characteristic story, that I want to point out briefly, which has to do with the ridiculousness of other people, who pay little attention to what is to factually accurate and instead become offended -- from Lovell's point of view -- from the mildest forms of skeptical questioning, precipitating an unwelcome inevitable conflict which seems to make little logical sense. In my view, this is a very typical story from the point of view of gamma NTs with Ni and Te in the ego block, and Fe in the super-ego.
A lot of these themes -- because I came into the interview with a good sense of who Lovell is -- are made more explicit throughout the course of the interview, with penetrating questions, designed to reveal exactly what aspects of life Lovell's trajectory might not be paying attention to. The reader can judge for themselves how precisely the discussion matches the qualities that in Lovell, might be missing, and where is the psychological pressure.
At the very end of the interview -- around 1:25:30, we hear a characteristic story, that I want to point out briefly, which has to do with the ridiculousness of other people, who pay little attention to what is to factually accurate and instead become offended -- from Lovell's point of view -- from the mildest forms of skeptical questioning, precipitating an unwelcome inevitable conflict which seems to make little logical sense. In my view, this is a very typical story from the point of view of gamma NTs with Ni and Te in the ego block, and Fe in the super-ego.
