Category: Character Nulls

DAPHNE AND SIMON, THREE AND NULL

As an Austen stalwart, I was reluctant to watch the playful take on the Regency era that is Bridgerton, but I was persuaded to try it and I enjoyed myself. Since the show focuses on a particular romantic couple each season, I’ll begin with the Duke and Duchess of Hastings.

Daphne is the Bridgerton we follow in Season One. (Think of the Bridgertons as a homeschool family, lol. They’re a quirky bunch.) The eldest daughter, Daphne enters society and the marriage market with the Queen’s favor. Meanwhile Simon is a recent and reluctant Duke. These two, through twists and turns, end up married.

The plots for Bridgerton are heavy on the romance novel tropes. (This season includes an episode that is almost entirely sex scenes, although they do have relevance to character development.) Simon has sworn an oath to his odious father on his deathbed that he won’t procreate and further the line. Daphne, an innocent, eventually understands that Simon is pulling out before orgasm so that he won’t get her pregnant. This is the main conflict.

So what do we have for Character Enneagrams? 

Like Elinor in Sense and Sensibility, Simon has made a promise with details he won’t share or break, even to those he loves. Elinor can’t reveal Lucy Steele’s secret and painful engagement to her beloved Edward because she swore to tell no one. Not even Marianne can know. In that vein, Simon won’t tell his wife that, although he is physically capable of fathering children, he is morally restricted by his oath. (It’s a tough sell for a modern audience. For us, his resolve borders on stubbornness.)

In Austen world, someone who keeps an oath is honorable and heroic. It’s an ideal that not everyone can achieve. Let’s decide that, for Simon, the rules are the same. This is a man of impeccable character. And he loves Daphne.

Holy cow. He might be a Null. Everything about him is trope. I can’t even remember what finally persuades him to change his mind and agree to become a father! He’s beautifully acted, but his character is void of specific traits. He isn’t particularly Body, Heart, or Head Type. Simon is a generic, handsome romantic lead with nothing to distinguish him as an individual. He doesn’t appear in any future seasons, which is probably a contract issue with the actor, but it also sends up red flags. They didn’t know how to write him once his plot conflict was finished.

As for Daphne, she’s probably a Three. Beautiful, confident, successful in the realm of Regency dating, Daphne is the Bridgerton who shines. She takes charge of her own future by entering into a pact with Simon to fool society. There’s just no way that Daphne will fail. The plot deals her with setbacks, but Daphne has an indomitable quality. She ends up happily married, pregnant with an acknowledged heir, and a wise advisor to her family in future episodes.

The first season is so heavily locked into romance novel expectations it narrows the Enneagram choices. Future seasons do a better job of expanding the characters.

BEETLEJUICE, NULL

Does Beetlejuice have character traits, or is he only a demon who acts according to his nature?

He has a very clear intention: say my name three times so I can be loosed onto the world. Whatever he does at the beginning of the movie is in service to that want. When he’s free, though, he pursues mayhem and tries to marry an underage Lydia. Sowing chaos and practicing sexual assault are pretty much demon actions. It’s quite possible he’s a Null.

Does he ever exhibit a characteristic that is distinct to him and not a generic trait any demon could hold? Is Keaton only portraying an imp, a poltergeist?

It’s well-acted and perfectly suited to the story. Beetlejuice is not our protagonist, of course. As an antagonist, he is driven strictly by his demonic impulses. Yes, he’s a Null, and it’s a wonderful choice for him.

However, Beetlejuice 2  is currently shooting. I’ll be very curious to see if Beetlejuice remains a Null. I would argue that his lack of an Enneagram is part of what makes the first movie beloved. I hope the showrunners stay true to that instinct.

BATES, NULL

If we’re going to talk about criminals, which I did with Baxter, then we’d better get to Bates. Actually, he commits no crime, but he does go to prison.

He’s difficult for me because his and Anna’s story is very soap opera. Like Sybil and Tom, some parts of their characters only exist to further plot tension. Finding the Enneagram requires extra digging.

He limps, the result of a war wound. Anyone can have an injury, but I want to say he’s a Body Type simply because he seems defined by it. I feel sure that the writers invented this character trait for dramatic purposes, but it becomes more than that. He spends one season using some newfangled corrective leg brace that tortures him. 

Eight? He can be impetuous and intemperate about his first wife, which leads him into trouble. Also, Anna refuses to confide in him about her rape because she fears he’ll kill the man.

However . . . in the later seasons the limp is only incidental. We forget about it and so do the storylines. Nothing else about Bates is particularly physical. Okay, look. He can’t be a Heart Type; he has no Envy. He’s no Head Type; the life of the mind never influences him. He’s obviously not a One. That only leaves Eight or Nine.

Wow, is Bates a Null? He’s a kind of Eight/Nine amalgam. Sometimes he’s volatile, sometimes he’s easygoing. Sometimes he’s reactive, and sometimes he’s measured. He takes on an awful lot of conflict for a Nine, yet he doesn’t have the vibrancy of an Eight. Holy cow. No wonder his character bugs me, even though I couldn’t put my finger on why. Interesting.

GRAMMA TALA, NULL

She’s a troublemaker, lol. A rebel. She opens the movie by terrorizing the toddlers with the story of Maui. When Moana is grown, Gramma basically gaslights her by pretending she doesn’t care what Moana does. “I’m the village crazy lady,” she says. “That’s my job.” She’s a fairy godmother with a manta ray tattooed on her back.

Her only individual, character-specific moment is when she stands on the shore and admires her spirit animal. Otherwise, she’s the quest-giver, the heroic mentor, and the beloved elder. She’s a trickster. (Did they miss one of the archetypes, lol?) The showrunners pack a lot onto her shoulders. Can an Enneagram rise above all this weight?

Wow, no. In a previous review I held Gramma up as a great, well-written cameo character. I think I may have been bamboozled. Sorry about that. She’s layered with so many archetypes that she dazzles. However . . . she’s just a Null. Bummer.

ABE WEISSMAN, NULL

What do showrunners do with a genius like Tony Shalhoub? In Season 1, you ask him to play a version of Monk. He’s on-spectrum, brilliant at math, and able to connect with almost no one. He likes his library, playing piano, and being left alone. All of his students are idiots in his opinion. He’s a strange side character, probably an ivory tower Six.

In Season 2, when Rose has her mid-life crisis in Paris, Abe shows amazing sensitivity. When he finally realizes she’s gone (lol) he follows her and lives with her, jumping into French life. His practical self from Season 1 is still there, though. He makes it clear when Rose wants to take an apartment that their life is not here. He’s firm, persuasive, and calm, and Rose returns with him. He’s left the ivory tower and taken a more main character position. He could still be a Six. His coffee time with the French philosophers is very Head Type. When they get back to New York, he schedules dance lessons for them so they’ll be better than they were on the banks of the Seine. He brings Rose into Columbia to study. It’s an intellectual world, still distant to him.

It’s Season 3 that begins Abe’s transformation to a different Enneagram number. (Needless to say, I’m horrified.) He’s no longer a Head Type, but a Heart. He’s quit Columbia, he’s lost his apartment, and he’s surrounded himself with young, restless people. He’s no longer romantic towards Rose, but wrapped up in a rebellious, beatnik lifestyle that is a mid-life crisis on steroids. He doesn’t collect things (not a Two), and he’s not successful (not a Three), which would make him a poorly-written Four.

As you can already tell, I’m labeling him a Null. You don’t change numbers. You don’t upend character. Even if you’ve cast Shalhoub, you don’t ask your actor to make sense of an arc that twirls about and goes nowhere. Everything I loved about him is gone. It’s heartbreaking.

XIALING, NULL

The sister has a lot going on as a character, and seems placed to contribute more in further sequels.

She’s self-taught. While Shaun was trained abusively, Xialing was ignored. On the quiet, she watched and learned.

She’s self-made. After leaving home as a teenager she built a fighting arena in Macau that becomes hugely successful. At the end of the movie, she’s taking over her father’s crime business.

It’s actually a bit awkward. She’s brave, strong, smart — a hero — yet no one ever suggests that she wear the Ten Rings. Even she never questions why Shaun gets the power. It’s canon, or it’s a father/son inheritance, or both. Shaun never even offers her the Rings. I mean, yes, that’s the story — abused boy becomes resolved man — but if sister is going to be worthy of power, then we need to see that discussion.

Oh, dear. She’s much more developed than mom and auntie, but is she just an archetype, too? What does she want? What is her arc and what are her goals? She gets a lot of screen time and is integrated into the main plot. She saves them on the skyscraper scaffolding and in the final dragon battle, but her actions could’ve been performed by anybody. Besides being Sister, she brings nothing specific to these moments. Yikes.

YING NAN, NULL

This is the aunt who lives in the magical realm. If you want a character to enter at the Third Act and dominate with ease, of course you cast Michelle Yeoh. Does she have a number, though, or is she an archetype like her dead sister?

She has a compassion for her niece and nephew, and no flexibility toward her brother-in-law. She reveres her sister’s memory. These are all predictable emotions and reactions. As with Li, the portrayal is so compelling I want to find more than the writers gave these characters. This film is not their story, so great actors are given only a sketch to inhabit.

You know what movie gets this right? Moana. The grandma is like these women, really only an archetype of a wise woman mentor, yet the writers also gave her a specific character, nailed in one or two scenes. I’ll have to take a closer look! I love that movie.

Meanwhile, I’m sorry to say, we have no Enneagram here. The showrunners cast Yeoh, who brings a certain charismatic identity imbued from her other films, and calls that her character.

LI, NULL

This is Shang-Chi’s mother. We don’t see much of her, but she is so impressive I wish we saw more. Gentle, obviously. She defeats the Ringbearer in the smoothest, quietest manner possible. Nature swirls around her, a cloud of leaves dancing with her movements. It’s lovely.

She gives up her own country to live with her husband and children. As a mother, she’s a fearless defender and a patient teacher.

Actually, she’s kind of perfect. Too perfect? Is she a real character or only an avatar of motherhood and sacrifice? She’s portrayed so beautifully, I want to give her a number, lol! Sadly, though, she has no flaws, no arc, and she’s basically fridged.

HAWKEYE, NULL

The first time we meet him in the MCU he’s co-opted by Loki and brain-manipulated into a villainous henchman. Bad choice! He becomes likable in later movies, but he’ll always have the taint, our memory, of the evil version of him.

(Why do so many movies remove a character’s free will? I hate that kind of lazy writing, but that’s another topic, lol.)

Later we learn that Clint has a family. He ends up as the most normal superhero in the series. When we finally spend time with him in his own show we see he’s dogged, dutiful, and honorable. His family disappeared in the Blip and he lost it, turning rogue. He’s really just a dedicated dad and husband who can shoot arrows.

Actually, I think he’s written all over the place. Early on, he’s not a character at all, just a plot point. He’s the Avenger with no back story. Even his eponymous series is more about the young woman who will team with him than it is about him. I want to call him a Null, a character the writers didn’t develop with enough consistency to fit into an Enneagram identity. Does he pull it out at the end in Hawkeye? He has the trooper qualities of a Six, although he’s much too physically fearless for that. He has the recklessness of a Nine in trouble.

No. I refuse to examine a character who’s been in multiple properties yet only begins to develop at the end. He’s important enough to deserve a fully-fleshed personality, and I find it disrespectful to the character that they did not give him that. A Hawkeye written with integrity helps the showrunners craft a better story and gives Renner more foundation for a better performance. Someone this haphazard is a Null.

GAMORA, NULL

Ah, the Front Row Kid! She’s obedient as a child, which wounds Nebula, and she’s obedient as an adult, working for the betterment of the universe against her father’s wishes. Every other teammate should and does drive her crazy with their disorder.

I quite dislike Gamora, possibly because she strikes too close to home! Here’s where I think the portrayal goes wrong, though: the dilemma of a Front Row Kid is that they’re only organized on the outside. On the inside they’re terrified of failure. I don’t see that tension in Gamora. She’s too physically competent. It gives her a confidence that her personality shouldn’t have.

I would’ve liked to see the portrayal go either into One, as a physical and orderly being, or into Six, as a cerebral and orderly being. As a One she would’ve been less uncomfortable with the other teammates, and she would’ve had a playful, biting wit that nailed their disorder. As a Six she would’ve been less confident, less physically capable, but her moral certitude would’ve persuaded and comforted the other teammates.

Is it fair to call this Gamora a Null? I could probably call her a Four as a kind of catch-all, but Nebula owns that Enneagram number so thoroughly that anyone else feels false. I could call her a Nine based on her physical competence and her stoic personality, but she doesn’t have the generous sweetness of a Nine. Possibly a Three, based on her get-’er-done competence, but she’s too uncertain to be a Three. I think they miswrote her. I’m sticking with Null.