send us your favorite fictional characters! -the Wakefield Doctrine- (“…Shakespeare and Pesci and Spader, oh my!”)

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

news_forbidden-planet

 

I have of late—but wherefore I know not—lost all my mirth, forgone all custom of exercises, and indeed it goes so heavily with my disposition that this goodly frame, the earth, seems to me a sterile promontory; this most excellent canopy, the air—look you, this brave o’erhanging firmament, this majestical roof fretted with golden fire—why, it appears no other thing to me than a foul and pestilent congregation of vapors. What a piece of work is a man! How noble in reason, how infinite in faculty! In form and moving how express and admirable! In action how like an angel, in apprehension how like a god! The beauty of the world. The paragon of animals. And yet, to me, what is this quintessence of dust? Man delights not me. No, nor woman neither, though by your smiling you seem to say so. (Hamlet)

ok… we got that out of our system. No, not depressed or anything, and you can stop smiling.  The thing of it is, Friend of the Doctrine zoe suggested we look at famous and enduring fictional characters  through the lens of the Wakefield Doctrine. Here, lets let her comment set the stage:

hey re literature and the doctrine and ideas… how about doing in lit what you tend to do in movies…. i.d. famous literary characters based on their reactions in the books…

you bring up an interesting point… the authors prediliction vs the characterizations within… maybe you should ask people their favorite authors and books and see if you know any of those? I can come up with a ton of book titles and authors but Im not a lot younger than you are… if age is the factor!

You got a favorite author who’s created characters that you really enjoy? tell us! This can be any fictional character, protagonist, antagonist, major or minor character. The purpose of this exercise is to read (the work) and see how they relate themselves to the world around them. I’m willing to bet that it’ll be clearly identifiable as one of three characteristic ways as an Outsider (clark), a Predator (scott) or a Herd Member (roger).  Now, you may be thinking, ‘yeah, sure, of course they will, so what?’ Two reasons:

  1. it’s fun and it’s good practice (around the Doctrine we use the term ‘fluency’ in the context of how quickly and effectively one can apply the perspective (of) the Wakefield Doctrine to better understand the behavior of the people in our lives. As with learning any new language, the more you practice, the better you become and, if you become fluent enough, you become capable of thinking in that language), and we’re all good at learning new/weird things, or we wouldn’t be here
  2. I have a theory, (yeah! no, not just the obvious joke), that the more talented/skilled the author, the more true the representations of the worldviews
  3. I enjoy hearing the case made for any of the worldviews, especially when I disagree. It’s not just figuring out that, say,  Melville’s  Ahab’s a roger …or a clark… or a scott, it’s the evidence that you can cite. You know, when we talk to each other about people and their probable worldviews, sometimes we get hesitant to take a position. But, like any other discussion among friends that is not concerning: surgical options, moral indecision, changing lifestyles, deciding to end a relationship or coming to grips with addiction, the disagreement and ‘the give and take’ of proving your point should be fun! Speaking for myself, I get a kick out of when someone disagrees (about worldviews), I’m all like,  “No! Way!!  tell what you see that says she is a clark….he is a roger….!!!”  I learn more about the Doctrine, when another person points to something that I just didn’t notice and I’m, ‘my god! you’re right!! he owns more than one style of hat… of course he’s a roger!”

The more I think about this, the better I like it!  So send in your suggestions for books and/or specific characters in literature.

Just to get us in the mindset. Actors portray characters from the perspective of their, (the actor’s, not the character’s), predominate worldview. Following are 3 video clips from the movies: ‘Wolf’, ‘Mad Dog and Glory’  and, ‘Casino’.  (This last one is kinda NSF….well, it is illustrating the scottian worldview, so if you’re not certain what that means, ask us ….before you gather the boss and your co-workers ’round your computer or the parish priest and the choir director or the children under 19)

Wolf (I know I don’t need to tell you Jack is the scott, but my god! James Spader is surely the poster boy for the rogerian worldview)

YouTube Preview Image

Mad Dog and Glory (David Caruso is the scott and, as we all know, Robert DeNiro is so a clark)

YouTube Preview Image

Casino (this the first clip I came across, years ago and, when I heard the voice-over narration at the end of the scene, I was all, ‘when did Pileggi and Scorsese read the Doctrine!!’)

YouTube Preview Image
Share

Summer Reading Post -the Wakefield Doctrine- (“…no, nothing like David Copperfield or Red Badge of Courage… more like Mad Magazine, Catcher in the Rye and Fight Club”)

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

Today will be the start of our Summer Reading series… no, not just reprint Posts! (well, yeah there will be some re-prints, occasionally …like today, but not everyday! There’ll be contests and prizes and such, it’s just that I’m feeling the need to read fun Posts and write serious Posts, but lacking time and skill, I’ll need to publish these kinds of posts.  Hey!! Any requests, i.e. topics and subject matter, let us know. So, without further adieu, here….read this:

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

images-150

(I normally would spend a lot of time here,at the top of the Post, trying to avert misunderstandings on the part of Readers for the following, by pre-explaining and/or qualifying statement that I think might be mis…somethinged. But, today no. Not this time).

clarks mean well. clarks try so very hard to: do well, to live up to their potential, to not let their parents (and families down), to be good students, to not disappoint, to learn and be like others, earn a good living and support their families, to not be too distant and be the person that their spouse deserves, to learn how to act like others and not be so strange, (clarks) want to be accepted and will work and try without reward or reinforcement, towards this goal, needing only to not feel that they are being looked at and laughed at for being that ‘strange one’.

Had an interesting experience/reaction today. I often, when in a situation that carries the threat of un-wanted attention or un-earned rewards, find ways to sabotage myself. How I sabotage myself varies and is so innate that, in some circumstances, you would think I was doing it to myself on purpose! (lol*) In any event, for reasons unclear to me, on this particular morning, I got mad at this self-sabotage. Now, I know what some of you are thinking, “…don’t you mean, clark, that you were getting mad at yourself”
Only at first.
And then, I was angry only just enough to disrupt the cycle, (which is often, but not always, possible to do). But that is not what prompts me to write this Post. What prompts me to write this Post is that shortly after this occurrence , as I continued to drive along in my car, I thought about my living with this kind of thing. And, then I thought of the/a young(er) clark, experiencing something that while clearly a self-induced ….’thing’, and despite knowing that it is/it was, all in my mind, (it) still happens.

…and a surprisingly strong feeling of sadness came over me.

not for myself, driving along in my German luxury car, working in a business that is challenging, enjoyable and rewarding, but for that clark that I was. and, (being in possession of the Wakefield Doctrine), for all the other clarks out there who have a similar experience. It really was quite a remarkable 30 minutes or so (see? I’m back to normal…I described it as remarkable).

As I sat behind the wheel, letting this emotion have it’s way, I thought ‘how un-necessary’. In the special mental/emotional shorthand we all have, I knew that somehow this self-sabotage was directly a result/consequence/offshoot of my efforts to learn my way out of being ‘the Outsider’. and, while I do not, for a second, devalue the efforts that I have put towards this end, (as does every clark, everywhere to one degree or another), I felt sad that I could not somehow reach back to my younger self and say, ‘don’t worry, even though being an Outsider is not necessarily your first choice, you are doing good work and you can feel proud of the effort, independent of whether anyone else in the world acknowledges it. you are a good and sufficient person’

…this Wakefield Doctrine, man!

(oddly enough, I was talking to Denise last night about how the Doctrine offers so many different ways to aid in the effort to self-improve ourselves, and that I have not even begun to scratch the surface, in these Posts.)

I debated with myself whether adding a favorite music vid, (thinking, ‘Werewolves of London’) would be too much of distraction from what I wrote, a typical clarklike effort to ‘hedge my bet with the world’… as much as the ‘smile of a clark‘ which we all recognize, the pressing of the lips together, a glance out of the corner of our eyes, all to make sure we aren’t smiling where we are not welcome.

…and I decided that it was.

* lol: ‘laugh out loud’ I am told that use of this…expression marks me as out of: date/touch/cool/current blog writing practices. too bad)

Share

TToT -the Wakefield Doctrine- “of photos and Summer and train wreck Posts”

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

 

Ten Things of Thankful

Your hosts

Join the Ten Things of Thankful Facebook Group


… oh yeah! damn! the TToT List! wait …wait!

The first photo (no, this is serious, I’d really like to know what kind of plant this is….any of you hortiologists out there can ID this thing?):

20150704_072505_resized

 

…I’d really appreciate it. Hey! #1 0T!

2) Clearly I was exhibiting some innate and underdeveloped gift of prestidigitization when I (sub)titled this Post last night, so I will also include a (Semi)closeup of the mystery plant later in Item 6 of this Post.

3) Una and the Rose Bush*

20150704_083213_resized

 

4) Our Founderette, Lizzi (not only for this bloghop, but for speaking a foreign language that her people have persisted in referring to as ‘English’) ex.

“The 7 GuardVirgins are responsible for guarding the Book of Secret Rules (or Secret Book of Rules) and if you can’t think of a Thankful, you are at liberty to dance for the 7 and if they give you the book, you can use a rule to justify your lack of actual thankful.

Rule 1.3 is an old favourite – that having got to item ten on the list is its own thing of thankfulness. :D”

…last time I checked there was no ‘u’ in favorite!   (now that I think of it, have then they, a different spellcheck demon over in Metric-ville?)

5) …but we still love her, so, everyone? lets don’t tell her she has misspelled the word ‘favorite’, in her Reply to Samara in the Comment thread at Considerings, it’ll be our little secret.

6) speaking  of little secrets, here’s another photo of the mystery plant…actually it’s the junior version of the plant in the lead photo…sorta reminds me of that episode of Star Trek, look on this!

20150704_093004_resized

 

20150704_093014_resized

 

7) so there, above, close-up of flower with a Bumble Bee

8) Seeing the increasing numbers of people new to this, the-bloghop-that-Lizzi-built, I’ll contribute my own opinion re: the Book of Secret Rules (aka the Secret Book of Rules)… it’s the best thing ever to happen to a bloghop. The simple reason is, whenever there is a theme, inevitably there develop limitations (self- and group-imposed) that, while not inherently bad, have the effect of encouraging the ‘what is expected effect’. And while I personally admire the more… sensible and well-written Posts that are seen here every week, it’s good to know that I’m still encouraged to participate. Having said that, the TToT remain a bloghop focused on the sharing (and appreciation) of the positive things in our (group, individual and collective) lives. …the cool thing is the very clear feeling in all the Posts that appear here each week…whether it’s a photo Post, or a clearly delineated list or a wildly meandering stream-of-consciousness thing… we’re all here by choice. This is probably an unnecessarily long-way around to say that what we have here is community.

9)  I’m grateful for having work that involves driving around and having properties that are located on totally cool names, such as:

20150625_175137_resized

10) 1.3 (metric v. 3.1)

 

Share

-the Wakefield Doctrine- “…a six Sentence Doctrine Post”

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

William_Blake,_The_Temptation_and_Fall_of_Eve

wikipedia: William Blake, The Temptation and Fall of Eve, 1808 (illustration of Milton’s Paradise Lost) one word: ‘holy shit!’

 

*************

Man’s Fall from Grace is an excellent metaphor for the goal of those studying the Wakefield Doctrine, ‘to see the world as the other person is experiencing it‘, is the goal (and) benefit of the application of the perspective inherent in the Wakefield Doctrine. When able to acquire this understanding, we then are in a position to know more about another person than they know about themselves. While the emphasis would appear to be on acquiring knowledge, it is incumbent upon us to remember the Story of Adam and Eve.  While Eve may have been a well-meaning clark and Adam a favored-son roger, they were tempted by a scott, as a result, there appears an un-resolvable conflict in the rational, the emotional and the impulsive, in competition. That we all have within, the potential of all three worldviews, forces the student of the Wakefield Doctrine to strive to develop these three, very different worldviews into a relationship of harmony, drawing the strength of each of these three ways that one can, ‘relate oneself to the world around them’.  As with the biblical story of Adam and Eve and the Garden of Eden, failure to reconcile these three exacts a very heavy price.

 

Share

“what do you mean, it’s Thursday, not Friday” -the Wakefield Doctrine- the fun of being a clark

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

muddywaters

It’s Muddy Waters, of course…. will post something by him at the bottom of the Post for your listing pleasure

… no! come back!  we’re done, (for the moment), with the deep and word-tangly reflections and exploration of advanced Wakefield Doctrine!  After all, 1/3 of the description of the Wakefield Doctrine has always been: fun. And, while I may argue that yesterday’s Post was fun… it was also semi-gigantic and it’s Summer Time which is much less conducive to musings on ‘the gigantic’.

hey…. today’s title? Totally serious. I was so completely chrono-dislocated that, even after spending, like, 15 minutes visiting Posts of friends, (like Kristi and z, and Val and them), searching for the prompt for ‘Finish the Sentence Friday’… I still remained in Friday.  But enough about my bout of hypo-calendarism… lets talk about the Wakefield Doctrine!

(funny thing about this blog), given that there’s only one topic/theme/subject and given that I’ve spent countless posts describing the three personality types (how to recognize them, what to do with them, how to avoid getting eaten by them), to this day I still would rather read a new description of clarks, scotts and rogers than re-read an old one. That’s certainly not very efficient! In any event, here we are again.  Hey! I know (or remember or recall), why don’t you tell someone today about the Wakefield Doctrine…. no, wait, I wrote about that once before… hold on, let me try to remember… ok, got it!  Before you go out and tell another person, one who has never encountered the Wakefield Doctrine, be sure to read the following:

  • clarks: you’re the most likely, (of the three), to want to tell someone else and you are the most likely, (of the three), to have it, (telling someone else about the Doctrine), bite you on the ass
  • scotts: you’re the least equipped (intellectually and temperamentally) to tell someone else and you’re the one (of the three) most likely to have a willing and receptive audience
  • rogers: you could fully intend to follow this directive to tell someone else and you’re the one (of the three) who will forget…forget to tell someone, forget that you even read this post, but you’ll still know that there was something about other people and you in today’s post

So, since I have an extra day this week, I’d best get out there and do something about it. (I love this Wakefield Doctrine. I mean, sure, I write the posts and I’m a clark, but I don’t think about how being a clark shapes and forms the message, until, that is, I stop and reflect on what I’ve written, (happens way less frequently than you’d think… very funny, zoe… you’re right. lol), but I just re-read this paragraph and the 1st 19 words of this paragraph… pretty much tells you all you need to know about what it’s like to be a clark, to live in the worldview of the Outsider… ya  know?

Hey!! Speaking of scotts  and Mysteries (yeah, as if)… someone find Christine and tell her that, at some point, she’ll need to reveal the ‘Secret of the Missing scott’. We have two entries:

Ah, but without the van (because it was waiting to be towed) did she just simply walk to the place to flag down the tow truck? Why not take her phone and vid chat via that?”
~Lisa (the Meaning of Me)

 

“…she walked down to the end of the long long drive, and she was ON HER PHONE – SHE WAS ON HER PHONE GIVING DIRECTIONS which is why she couldn’t vidchat on it.”
~Lizzi (Considerings)

…still time to submit your answer

 

the promised music vid:

YouTube Preview Image
Share

© 2009-2015 Francis Clark Farley All Rights Reserved -- Copyright notice by Blog Copyright