couldn’t just do a ‘re-print’, could you? the Wakefield Doctrine pastiche Tuesday (yeah, I like the look of the word, hope I’m using it correctly!) | the Wakefield Doctrine couldn’t just do a ‘re-print’, could you? the Wakefield Doctrine pastiche Tuesday (yeah, I like the look of the word, hope I’m using it correctly!) | the Wakefield Doctrine

couldn’t just do a ‘re-print’, could you? the Wakefield Doctrine pastiche Tuesday (yeah, I like the look of the word, hope I’m using it correctly!)

Welcome to the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers)

not_detected_235607(1)

(damn!  I looked the word up and my intended use is….close, but not really. shit.)

Anyway, I’ve got some clips from previous Posts lined up, better not waste ’em.

From Octovia 7 2010 (yeah, over 14 years ago!)

… clarks, scotts and rogers were at an athletic event and were waving pennants and cheering their team, what would it look like?

clarks: (2 possibilities):  a) a bunch of rogers with $5.00 bills sticking out of their pockets would wave a “Go! clarks” pennant 3 times, look around, start talking to their fellow rogers and forget they have anything in their hands and “go clarks” end up under the bleachers…to be found later by a clark, who would gather them up quickly so that no one would see them and get embarrassed; B) among the rogerian banners and pennants being waved from the full bleachers, in the upper left corner there is one pennant that says “go clarks….

scotts: they don’t need pennants, or if there is someone near with artistic skills, the scotts will have them (probably a clark) write words on their faces and chests in body paint. Mostly, “Kill”, and “Go Team! (KILL)” but for the most part the scottian element at the game will be happy shouting, “KILL (other team name here)” or “Get in the Hole”!!! or ” eee haaa” or similar ‘inchoate-high-volume-noise-meant-to-designate-a-perceived-freedom-to-act-in-any-manner-that-occurs-to-the-scott-in-question’ ( … aiiyee, Miguel! esta palabra, ‘incipiente’ ¿Qué quiere decir?… ).  Guess it is kinda hard to put into words, but then again, they are scotts

rogers: you know that  ‘wave’ thing that stadium goers do? Stand up and sit down in sequence?…rogers!   And the thing where the crowd holds up black or white cards that, when seen from afar (there is a hint right there) the whole half of the stadium appears to be spelling out the Pythagorean theory complete with proof and citations …rogers!   Hell, for that matter, every marching band in the western world… you know, the ones who insist on doing an arrangement of “I Feel Good” (James Brown) complete with choreography and solos by the horn sections and everyone, including the overweight tuba-playing guys, doing the splits at the end?…rogers!  Real simple concept here, if it is complicated to the point that you lose track of the original reason for doing the thing and requires a level of coordination that would make a school of albacore blush in shame, then you are talking about rogers

So, there you have it! In time for the football season, you now know how to identify clarks, scotts and rogers at the (high school/college) football games.  (… yes? Britney? you have a question?  the female clarks, scotts and rogers?  Why of course they are there!! The Wakefield Doctrine is, after all, gender neutral!  Let’s take the easy ones first…. {very funny Jimmy, besides the scottian girls…} the cheerleaders.  Not counting the male cheerleaders, who are rogers to a “man”. The girl cheerleaders will have the rogerian females on the ground-level of those formation things. Can’t afford to have anyone lose their focus and wander off, the rest are little scottian girls being thrown into the air by clarklike females (with the extra sparkle-things on their showlaces and their hair a little weird).

 

(From the Year of Our Lord MMXII, the month of Octopi):

So a quick review of primary characteristics of clarks and scotts and rogers.

clarks: quiet, tend to mumble and are on the “brainy” side (not geeks who tend to be rogers) but clarks are the ones who are living in their own heads.  If you want to know about anything that normal people don’t have the time to learn about, clarks are the people you will go to… there is one in your life, close but you just haven’t noticed them.  clarklike females will dress from the “androgyny fashion collection” mix and mix, especially shoes… the clarklike males will be grey(with a splash of beige)  and have virtually no eye contact when speaking to you, which if they do, will consist of strings of incomplete sentences.

scotts: never stop moving, never stop talking, never fuckin stop…sports fans to a person…your scott is the one who introduces themselves whether they are entering a situation where they are the stranger or there is a stranger entering the setting where the scott  already is…when you move to a new place, the neighbor who comes to “welcome you to the neighborhood” that’s your scott…always helpful as long as “completing the task” is not the priority…scottian females…always attractive/seductive/commanding/demanding depending on the context, scottian males…always in charge…the person best described as “not always right but never uncertain…”

rogers: the most social and accommodating person you know, the roger is, in fact, most likely your family doctor, your family lawyer, your family accountant, emphasis on family…the person who knows the family history and insists that you come to the family reunion that’s your roger, the one who knows how many forks should be on which side of the plate…there’s your rogerian female…want to have a long conversation?…talk to a roger, they make it so easy to talk about yourself…the rogerian male will be well dressed and if you want to know if ascots and large briarwood pipes are still worn and/or smoked you will find the roger when you see either of them and if you want to imagine settling down and raising a family with a beautifully decorated home and be a member in all the right clubs and organisations…then a rogerian female will be near by.

Thats all we have time for today.

Remember to be ready next week to Vote for your Faaavorite Guard Virgin

Share

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

Comments

  1. zoebyrd says:

    “…requires a level of coordination that would make a school of albacore blush in shame.” that has got to go down as one of my favorite written lines of all time. AND yes, I would be the one gathering up the embarassing banners and writing on OTHER people.

    • clarkscottroger clarkscottroger says:

      lol… what the hell is the matter with our people?!!

      • zoe says:

        oh Im sorry did you say something? I was off in the corner hoping to be noticed.

        Who the hell knows? What’s up with that?

        • clarkscottroger clarkscottroger says:

          lol…. (old Doctrine saying about clarks: ‘prefer not being the center or attention, will not tolerate being ignored’)

  2. dyannedillon says:

    “Not always right, but never uncertain”? Yeah, that’s my son. Except his secondary Clark is very, very strong. In fact, maybe those should be reversed?

    • clarkscottroger clarkscottroger says:

      of course, the cool thing about the Wakefield Doctrine (and figuring out what personality type another person maybe) is that you can’t mess it up. you eliminate the ‘no frickin way they’re a….’ and that leaves two. the reason we say you can’t mess it up is that you try out one worldview and then the other… which one is the person more in focus in? even if you’re not right, they’re not going to change their worldview, so you try what you think it right and eventually you will settle on the one that is most consistently accurate in describing them
      scott or a clark? temperament: mercurial or steadystate enthusiasm and energy: always on or only when something has totally captured his attention (and a big one) does he seek validation for actions that he’s planning? (notice I did not say approval or permission… both scotts and clarks have healthy egos…. but one’s a labrador and the other’s a Jack Russell )
      hope that helps

      • dyannedillon says:

        He totally seeks validation. Hates to draw attention to himself. Extremely knowledgeable about a lot of subjects, can speak endlessly (ENDLESSLY) about them and can’t understand why you don’t want to hear ONE MORE WORD about (fill in the blank – it’s usually something about chemistry or biology). Pretty even keel, but when something sets him off, it’s a 180 degree change. No gray area.

        • clarkscottroger clarkscottroger says:

          sounds like predominant clark with a secondary scottian aspect

          (you know when he gets genuinely angry… he goes totally quiet…distant (people pay attention)

  3. Lisa @ The Meaning of Me says:

    More often than not I read these “description” posts and find myself deciding that I fit this particular type because I clearly don’t fit the others. But there’s always this one little piece that keeps me from being totally convinced. Like the wave thing? Never. Hate audience participation kind of things. Other than that, I’d happily agree with Roger. I do think the more I think about it (uh…stay with me) that it’s Roger with a side of Clark.