the Wakefield Doctrine begin to improve your life today!

Welcome to the Wakefield Doctrine ( we have the answer, you just need to know the right question!)

(ed. note. I have a slight problem, in the form of a note that I apparently left myself last night. Hold on, let me start this way: I recall in the first year of writing this blog,  I asked ‘Mel’ how he went about writing for ‘the Spatula’. He told me that he had a ‘white board’ in his office and would write interesting news headlines, things he heard on TV and anything else that struck him as odd or interesting. He would do this over the course days, until a theme or idea (for) a Post took shape. He would then elaborate, expand and otherwise shape it into what would become a Post. I asked the Progenitor roger the same question, and his answer was much the same (minus the white board). He said that he would wait for an idea to occur and approach it like a ‘book report’ or ‘term paper’, writing everything he could about the subject and spending days refining and polishing until he was satisfied. (New Readers! Both of these eminently readable authors are rogers, the significance of this fact will become apparent as you learn more of the Doctrine.)
While I will not to attempt to describe my own process* I will say this, when I sat down at my computer this morning I saw a note on my Ampad Gold Fibre pad that simply said, ‘write something heart-warming‘.  heart-warming??!  Holy shit! I’m a frickin clark, I don’t ‘do heart-warming’!  thats for rogers! (and other girls)** But, hey what are ya gonna do!)

As I stood in the lobby of the Omni Hilton in Ft Worth at 3:30 am this Saturday, waiting for my car to take me to the airport, two things demanded my attention:

…from the elevators a very attractive  woman in a short black dress emerged and walked past the Front Desk and into the seating area of the Lobby. She was blond, tall, in her late twenties and tired, but tired in a ‘one more lap to go’ kind of way. I say this because she walked very purposely to a comfortable chair near the fireplace, looked around the lobby with a frown on her face and upon sitting, immediately took out her iPhone and become totally engrossed, if not seemingly aggravated with whatever she was reading.

… just as my car pulled up to the front door, in from the sidewalk walked a young couple. They both seemed to be in their early twenties and two things made them impossible to not watch:  they were both totally engrossed in each other (but not in a clingy, lovey-dovey way) and the way they walked. They walked as it might have been 11:00 in the morning or the middle of the afternoon. Not a hint of fatigue. Not the slightest sign of ‘it’s so early’, just walking and talking and talking to each other. They appeared to be not tired, not drunk,  stoned or hyper …simply enjoying what they were doing. They walked through the Lobby doors, went to the elevators and disappeared.

That is the heart-warming story, from the most recent Doctrine Road Trip.


* not sure if there is a school of rhetoric that ascribes to the notion: ‘if you don’t have any idea what to write, come up with a subtitle or a music video, everything else will follow

** the style of scotts?  …no, you don’t want to know  lol


clarkscottroger About clarkscottroger
Well, what exactly do you want to know? Whether I am a clark or a scott or roger? If you have to ask, then you need to keep reading the Posts for two reasons: a)to get a clear enough understanding to be able to make the determination of which type I am and 2) to realize that by definition I am all three.* *which is true for you as well, all three...but mostly one


  1. Downspring#1 says:

    Did the blonde in the black dress see you? Look at you? If so, what did you do?
    Did the blonde in the black dress look at the lovey-dovey couple? How did she look at them? I guess chances are she never did look up from her Iphone. btw, what makes you think she was “reading”. Could have been a game she was playing. And she was frowning because she just lost another round.

    • clarkscottroger clarkscottroger says:

      Good questions!
      No (and re-read that passage, they were noticeably ‘lovey-dovey’ they were simply having fun)
      Because you could see the ebb and flow of comprehension-understanding-reaction-response on her face.

  2. Downspring#1 says:

    Seeing as we might as well be in there with everyone else on the Boulveard of Broken Dreams thought I’d drop by for a few…..Great vid. BB and his music go right to my very soul.

    Was rather successful at being scottian for pretty much all of today. I don’t know. For some reason the energy was there and there were only a few moments, coupl-a split seconds in which I caught myself slipping into that special, sabotaging (spell that right if it’s not wouldja?) self conscious self-awareness that can topple a clark in mid-stride. Which brings me to my point.

    Had been thinking about the Doctrine and how I could use other people’s behavior to cue my own. I suppose in a way that might be considered scottian – sizing up the prey. Except I don’t think scotts “size up” in an overly consious manner. It’s more instinct at first. The sizing up comes afterwards. Anyway, the thought occurred to my that just as we can predict how another will act in a certain situation, we can also predict how another will act in response to interaction with a clark, scott or roger respectively. Going convoluted here, but you being the creator and all…..thought I’d give you some homework and see if there is anything to salvage out of all of this.

    @ catch phrases and/or catchy ditties to say about the Wakefield Doctrine – here are just a few :D

    the Wakefield Doctrine…You’ll be Glad you Did! or
    the Wakfield Doctrine…You Want Easy, Go to Amsterdam! (no? too insulting?) perhaps this version:
    the Wakefield Doctrine…Not Easy But You’ll Be Glad you Did! or
    the Wakefield Doctrine…The 21st Century’s “It’s Not You, It’s Me”

    • clarkscottroger clarkscottroger says:

      the Wakefield Doctrine… if you have to ask, you can’t understand it!*
      the Wakefield Doctrine… the party is over, your friends have all gone home, do you go with unpleasant company or do you face the night alone?**
      the Wakefield Doctrine… something different to do, until you die

      * unfortunately, not original. Picked it up somewhere, one of the truly discouraging statements about enlightenment hood, the original form was, I believe, “If you have to ask the question, then you cannot understand the answer”


  3. Jennifer Wilson says:

    OK you two (clarks) move over for some scottian ditties:

    the Wakefield Doctrine… hang on, I’ll be right back
    the Wakefield Doctrine… just get to the point
    the Wakefield Doctrine… they have music videos, although it can be difficult to listen to them in their entirety

    • clarkscottroger clarkscottroger says:

      excellent… you have written ‘action sub-titles’ which is so totally appropriate, being a scott and all. And you illustrate an under-appreciated aspect of this here Doctrine here, that it is very difficult to hide your true form (clark or scott or roger) from (anyone) who is learned in the Wakefield Doctrine!
      But then I am once again, ‘preaching to the elect’ as you know this as do the rest of us DownSprings. Which leads us down a path that is frequent fodder for movie scripts and tales and fables, ‘we have a certain power that others do not have, how do we use it?’

      (oh-kay… Ms. AKH, you get to be the ‘bad one’ the one who gets ambitious and starts to talk about the rest of the human race as insects ( “to be crushed if I please!!!!”))

  4. Jennifer Wilson says:

    Oh yeah:

    the Wakefield Doctrine… just stopped by to say hi

  5. RCoyne RCoyne says:

    Two things;
    a) The main rule for writing a SecRag post is; once writing has begun, you absolutely must finish in one sitting. You may edit heavily as you go, but nothing is ever saved and gone back to at some other time. To do so would alter the perspective that started the thing, and then it would simply be a different thing. So if there is some point to be made, it must be done immediately. Once and done.
    b) Rather than distant observations from a roving clark in a public setting, I would much rather hear tales of our very own Clark in Ft. Worth, in a convention center packed with scotts, rogers, and I’m sure more than a few of your own. An anecdote or two to share? Inquiring minds would like to know, very specifically, what you truly draw from the experience. And remember; “heart-warming’ isn’t necessarily as you describe. It has much more to do with cutting close to the bone; having the courage to risk exposure to the heart of a matter.

  6. Downspring#1 says:

    Mr. Coynes’ comment is the Wakefield Doctrine at work!
    I agree with Mr. C’s sentiment about writing. It is a rare thing to begin a post or any other type of word collection, put it aside and then go back and actually continue and complete what had been started days or weeks prior. Perspective changes once the pen/pencil is put down or the computer turned off. Here today, gone tomorrow very often can apply to the writing process.
    As to inquiring minds and wanting to know what was gained by “our very own Clark” during his venture to Texas….well the conversation during last Saturday’s Doctrine Call In Show touched on this very thing. In part how clarks and rogers deal with “life challenges” – more specifically, seeking out the “challenge” deliberately.

  7. Jennifer Wilson says:

    Well now that you mention it….. lol

    We use the understanding of the other two (yes, clarks and rogers. Duh) for our benefit. You know, how to distinguish the useful ones from the waste of time ones. Who will be most beneficial to our needs at the time.

    If you want me to go more in depth, I’d love to but I just don’t have Whoa! Did you see that?

  8. clarkscottroger clarkscottroger says:


    (even though your people are part of the Nature’s Grand Scheme to keep species robust) there are times, I suspect when scotts want to know if there is a clark in the area, as opposed to just rogers and other scotts..the Doctrine surely makes that determination faster, surer and more correct…er.

  9. The Wakefield Doctrine to improve my life today! That’s how Jack LaLanne started each of his shows! Him in his manly jumpsuit, tight as the singer for Def Leppard, leaving nothing to the imagination. I do believe he was a Roger, but I digress, since this has nothing to do with the improvement of MY life. And, that is all that is important as I address this post/topic.

    It’s nice to know who I am, what defines me as a ROGER. See, I don’t have time for BS, let’s cut to the chase and talk about things we know about – interesting things – like ME! Yeah, let’s talk about me or the dominance of Roger vs. The Things from the Wakefield Outer Space. Meaning, the other creatures, non Rogerians, similar to Cyborgs or Klingons. See, in this world, I have more of a robust confidence knowing that, according to this theory, I am a Roger. Remember Roger Ramjet? What a name! RAMJET! That wasn’t a coincidence. He was a superior jet fighter pilot. Yeah, he had his warts, but we all do. But, Tobar The Eighth Man, he could not lose. He wasn’t funny, he was like Superman, dead-pan serious. I think these attributes should be seen in a positive light, thus more women being attracted to Rogerian Men. Now, I’m sure that we, (Rogers) can show a metrosexual side when needed *Note: WHEN NEEDED, to get what we want. If we want YOU? We will feign anything that attracts you, we have that ability. No science data needed. Factoid. Now, to understand the female, we don’t even try – it is truly impossible because 1. We are hormonally different, we see love differently, we see sports differently, we love the Three Stooges – most women do not. So, survey says = Rogers like slapstick! But, knowing that a Clark or Scott woman does NOT, gives us an advantage, so we will fidget thru “Harry Met Sally” with several vodkas and whatever else is in the medicine cabinet to show our OTHER side (which really doesn’t exist), but these other creatures do not KNOW that, unless we tell them.

    Now, on to topic. People should really get involved because, once you find out you are, say, a ROGER, in my case, you can automatically fix a flat tire without calling AAA. Now Rogerian women are a dilemma. You will either A. get along fantastically or, B. you will be found in a ditch with your throat cut. But, mostly, you will not get to that point. As I believe opposites attract, being a Roger helps me determine what I AM and what I AM NOT! So, seeing that, I sum up others and can (with my Wakefield Training and photographic memory, yes I do have one) I can surmise that another person HAS to be a Clark or Scott. Then, I further narrow down the selection. It’s much like picking horses. You can, if you have the knowledge and experience, narrow down the field and at least get a SHOW horse. So, the WF project/theory has helped me do a number of things, the most important, ID’ing me as a ROGER. I am a Taurus, The Bull, which goes nicely with being a Roger and the #4 at Waffle House. Clark Kent. Think about that. True, he WAS Superman, but as Clark Kent, he wasn’t a Roger. He was probably a Clark. Lois was a Scott, if my understanding of the theory is correct and Jimmy, who gives a damn about him. And, how did I get on this, wait – the film in my head is running.

    Ok, long enough post – The Wake Theory has helped me to ID myself first and foremost, but now I’m working on others, I’m interested tho, IF THERE IS A DIFFERENCE IN CLARK AND SCOTT men vs. the same women??? Can anyone help on that one? I’m still defining the Rogerian female, at least defining it as “I” see it, not in stone, of course. Just sayin’ had to say that, cause it’s cool now to say Just Sayin’ A Roger would say “A fact’s a fact, let’s DON’T give it back.” Fosters – Australian for Beeya. Help with men vs. women on all 3 types, if in fact, they don’t differ in CSR with the gender difference? Got it?

    • clarkscottroger clarkscottroger says:

      (Short answer): there is a difference how the genders manifest their individual worldviews (i.e. clarks scotts and rogers) but that is a secondary matter…it is more a cultural thing not a Doctrine thing.
      Try this: the worldview of a scott is that of the predator which means agressiveness as a way of life, men? “hey! fuck you! I am dominant here…lets fight”! scottian women (in most cultures) “Hey! you appear to be pretty strong, come here a minute….”


      Ask me another question, this is good for all of us.