The first thing I’d like to make clear is that Tolkien does not write like an INFP. Though he was known for not finishing projects he started on and for working in “idea bursts,” his writing does not express an Ne-style creativity. If you want a better example of very INFP writing, look to Neil Gaiman as your (exaggerated) example.

Having studied medieval literature at the university level, it is clear to me that Tolkien did not come up with most of his “ideas” himself. Almost all of the cultures and concepts found in Lord of the Rings, The Hobbit, and the Silmarilion are literally borrowed aspects of the medieval era literature he was obsessed with. If you need evidence of this, here you go:

• Wergild: the individual naming of weapons and treasure found in Anglo Saxon culture, wherein each treasure was unique and one of a kind. Where do you think Sting, the Arkenstone and Mithril came from?

• Riddles: Anglo Saxon people commonly played riddles as a form of entertainment. 94-97 of these riddles (depending on how they are divided) have been preserved in the Exeter Book (the book that lives in Exeter and has no title).

• The Monster Quest: Monsters in Old English culture were individuals with personalities, incredible intelligence and distinct names (sound like Smaug, or Shelob to you?) The whole Hobbit story follows a hero who is faced with a bunch of seemingly random quest-tasks, tests and monsters that he must outsmart. It might as well be Beowulf with a happy ending.

• Homosocial Comitatus: The whole storyline in The Hobbit follows a group of male-only heroes who are incredibly loyal to their alpha male leader (Thorin) who are upset because their original alpha male leaders were killed like…a thousand years ago. This is a perfect example of Celtic Comitatus.

• Elegiac: An Elegy is basically an old english funeral song that expresses deep mourning and loss. This not only shows up in actual songs that the dwarves sing in The Hobbit, but also shows up in the entire attitude of Middle Earth (ex. the world is dying, the elves are leaving and the time of men is coming, so sad). If you look at any portion of the Lord of the Rings, you will see an overwhelming sense of loss carried by almost every character.

• Liminality: The name “Middle Earth” is a direct reference to celtic liminality, which is basically any time, space or event that could be considered middle, or in-between this world and the next. In these spaces, Celtic literature commonly featured appearances from mystical beings or Gods. Ex. Aragon is met by the dead in a cave (which is a liminal space because it’s neither considered part of the earth, nor the underworld).

• The Return of the King: Arthurian Legends of the Middle-Ages were all about the return of just kings to save a people in a time of chaos and corruption. Most of the major Arthurian Lore revivals that occurred in Medieval history (namely those brought on by Geoffrey of Monmouth, Thomas Malory, and Henry Tudor VII) happened at times when England was in a state of utter chaos and was in need of a great king (for instance, during the Wars of Roses…which we might parallel to the fact that Aragorn is supposed to be King, but some other blokes in Gondor are fighting over it).

• Horses: The horse people (Rohirim) directly references the importance placed by Pagan culture on horses.

• The Woman Warrior: Pagan culture treated women with far more respect than many other cultures throughout history (including ours). Women could fight in war, and were looked to for power in many situations that interestingly enough, were not sexual. Sound like Éowyn? Or maybe Galadriel and Arwen coming to save all the helpless men? Tolkien writes his female characters using very Pagan archetypes –it was very common in celtic literature to see female character coming to the rescue when the men were at a loss for what to do.

• Names: The names Tolkien gives to his characters and places (Éowyn, Théoden, Galadriel, Mithrandir, Lothlorien, Minas Tirith, Helm’s Deep etc.) bear the markings of medieval languages.

• Kennings: cleverly juxtaposed compound words used to create alliteration, puns and allegorical meaning in Anglo-Saxon poetry. (Ex. Worm-tongue, Tree-beard, Witch-king, Hammer-hand, Weather-top).

You get the point.

An INFP writer would probably have come up with all this crap himself (upper-Ne), rather than borrowing it from factual knowledge studied at a university (upper-Si). And just to be clear, I am in no way claiming that Tolkien was plagiarising other works. I think what he’s done here was genius –I just know an intuitive writer probably wouldn’t have done this.

Some people look at this and say, gee, that bloke had one singular obsession for his entire life, and so they conclude INFJ. However, to me, this is not INFJ writing. INFJ writing attempts to convey a singular underlying philosophy, while what Tolkien is doing is relaying his knowledge of medievalism. That is SiTe writing. 

Tolkien was first and foremost, an expert in linguistics and medieval studies. He wrote about Middle Earth because he wanted somewhere to use that knowledge (Te). His middle earth world is almost more about the details of world building than it is about storyline, and the fact that it’s so ridiculously detailed points directly to an upper Si function.

In fact, HE REFUSED TO EDIT HIS WORK because he didn’t want to remove any of the details (that, when looked at from a literary perspective, are completely unnecessary and bog his writing down). Thus, we get The Two Towers, in which, Frodo and Sam travel (that’s it? Yeah, pretty much. You might want to skip that one and just read Return of the King).

The reason that Tolkien did not finish his projects had nothing to do with an Ne-distraction tendency, but more to do with the fact that he insisted on including so many details in his stories. This is the same reason that my ISTJ sibling cannot finish the drawings they start –because they wants to go slowly and get every detail perfect.

Tolkien’s writing, albeit poetic, is very factual. He tells more of what happened, than what the characters felt about it, which is why I’m lead to believe that his Te was more dominant than his Fi. People who mistype Tolkien as an INFP do so either because they assume ISTJs are not creative, or because they have recognised the right jungian functions in his work, but in the wrong hierarchy.

Anyone still not convinced?