Tuesday -the Wakefield Doctrine- ‘(an) answer to yesterday’s question’

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


So yesterday we had a post that in part posed a question to Readers. And, as is the way of this here blog here, the process of answering was both the clue to the answer and confirmation of the underlying assumption. (No! wait!! scott.… I’ll get things moving… just let me set up the premise… then music videos and excitement!! I promise!)


I think I’ll settle for a quiz that’s as close to a personality assessment as you’re going to encounter here at the Wakefield Doctrine):

    • When you woke up this morning, did you feel good/scared/confident that today would be a good day in ‘the world out there’? If that sounds at all reasonable, go stand over there… no, there are others already in that section of the gym, you’ll see them when you get there.
    • When you woke up this morning, did you get up? ok… amuse yourself while I deal with the last group of personality types. Sure, anywhere will be fine.
    • When you woke up this morning, (well, lets rephrase that to ‘when you transitioned from quiet concern to active concern), did you feel that although you might describe yourself as confident, you will swear in a court of law that the world makes sense if you just work hard enough at understanding it. If you don’t find that description of the start of the average day totally un-reasonable, don’t go anywhere… stay here in the middle of the crowd of participants

There you have it! The three personality types of the Wakefield Doctrine!

How do you know which you are?

To which our friend Cynthia Sageleaf commented:

“Hmm…when I woke up this morning, I thought, man, I DON’T want to get up…I just want to stay warm and let that world out there just do its thing while I do my thing (reading, writing, contemplate) right here. lol”

So, New Readers? Cynthia is a clark* by her own admission. Now in her comment, she gives us clues to understand why the choice she made (from among the three) is the clarklike choice. Do you know what that is?

Hey! We’re not so much into the ‘Tell us the answer and we’ll tell you if you’re wrong or right’ here at the Doctrine. That being said, many of us enjoy the challenge of ‘getting it right’. Far be it from us to deny that self-affirmation that prompts that hand to shoot up in the back of the class…”I know this one!! I know! Call on me.”

So lets compromise! This is being posted in the morning. I’ll follow-up in the afternoon with a continuation of the discussion of the implications of Cynthia’s Comment. Since we’re kinda ‘open book’ in our quizzes here, if you want to ask Cynthia directly, go to her site ‘Intuitive and Spiritual’ and ask her. She is totally happy to help.

Be sure to come back this afternoon!!


OK it’s afternoon, in an early-evening sort of way. Thanks to Valerie for commenting (and thereby reminding me that I needed to finish this post).

So, the key element to the ‘quiz’ is the notion of the world as being ‘out there’. Not, ‘out there’ in the sense of, ‘oh man, clark, you’re really kinda getting out there with this personality theory’ but more ‘out there’ as in ‘separate from the person making the observation’. aka the Outsider. Of the three, clarks are the ones most comfortable with the notion that the world, reality, the girl in the checkout line at the Stop n Shop and your favorite nail technician at ‘Plenty Pretty Salon’ are in a place that is not where we are. We wake up and consider the world out there and decide how best (or if at all) we can deal with it. rogers and scotts tend not to make a distinction between themselves and a planet full of people, nephews, dogs, old movies and serious religion. They are a part of, on a pre-conscious level. clarks, it is said, can believe anything because we don’t believe in anything. (that is a deliberately provocative expressing of the notion that if there is always possibility, there can never be certainty.)

ya know?

(Since I did promise our scottian friends a music video):


*  btw one of the few Rules around here has to do with designating a worldview to a person. It’s up to you to determine which of the three is your predominant worldview, and therefore, your personality type. No one has any authority to say, “You are a (fill in the blank) get used to it!” That does not mean that we can’t talk about another person’s worldview, but it’s the height of gauche to discuss someone’s worldview when they are standing right there, unless, of course, they invite discussion. aiight? Cynthia has stated publicly that she is a clark.


Monday Post on Monday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

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


Given that this post is being written on Monday, it is, prima facie, a post intended for clarks.

(How do you know if you are clark, and therefore qualified to read this here post here?  Good question*)

The Wakefield Doctrine provides for three ‘personality types’: clarks, scotts and rogers. Further, the Wakefield Doctrine maintains that we are, all of us, born with the potential to become any of the three. Further, it is understood that though we become one type (predominant personality) we never lose the capacity of seeing the world as the ‘other two’ might. The development of our predominant personality type is the result of adapting to the world we find ourselves in, as but a child. The quality and characteristics of the personality types are a reflection of our personal realities, as opposed to inherent drives and impulses, urges and predilections. The Doctrine does not seek to identify your type by your description of what you like and dislike, hope for and fear. All we do is ask you to consider three descriptions of the world. The one that makes ‘most sense/looks good/feels right’ is the key to identifying your predominant personality type as:

  • clark: the Outsider living in a place apart from, a life of observation, a person who seeks to blend in for fear of being discovered yet does not tolerate being ignored; for a clark, the world (and it’s peoples) is a place, it’s ‘out there’, it’s always waiting for them each and every morning and chases them into the night’s darkness
  • scotts: the Predator the only one of the three who would demonstrate the rather banal (popular with rogers) expression that ‘Life is Good’. scotts demonstrate this sentiment, they do not embrace it, by virtue of the fact that, for (a scott) life is meant to be lived, in and of the here and now. reflection and conscience are drags on their efforts; scotts run towards the day regardless of what awaits them and they will chase the day (and the world and it’s peoples) into the night, sleeping only when their efforts exhaust their capacity
  • rogers: the Herd Member they lead perfect lives, orderly lives, lives quantifiable. to be a roger is not only to know what it is to be alive, it is to know why and what must be done to live properly; there are no accidents in the lives of rogers, there are only surprises and wrongs to be accounted for; the day is a set number of hours in which the goodness (and, don’t forget, perfection) of their time on earth is to be demonstrated; without the rogerian influence we would all be roaming the savannah, eating to live and hiding to survive.

So there you have it!

oh…yeah, one more thing!

How to apply the insights and secrets, help and cautions of the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers)? It’s all about ‘how we relate ourselves to the world around us’ today. Totally important note: The wording is critical and not what you might think you read. Once more, ‘how we relate ourselves to the world around us’. As we leave the computer or phone that are whispering these thoughts, do not be as concerned with ‘how you relate to the world today’….be it at school with teachers and friends, girlfriends-to-be, bullies-to-avoid or at work where your life can be twisted into a shape that is better than or into a shape that you are forced to drag through your life, returning home in the evening both embarrassed and fearful, or if you’re maintaining the life of your family (biological or social) and doing this and doing that,  don’t waste you time on how you relate, spend your time in consideration of ‘how you relate yourself, to the world’.

I didn’t say it, but someone did, ‘to thine ownself be true’




*  which, of course, is suggestive of being a clark! for most clarks, we’ve never met a question a question we didn’t find interesting!**

** if you understand the reason for the italics, and the inference… you can stop reading, you are so a clark


Six Sentence Story -the Wakefield Doctrine-

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


This is, of course, my pre-writing writing. I find it immensely helpful to get some words in the Post prior to writing a Six Sentence Story. There is something about words already being ‘on the page’, or perhaps, it would be better to say, ‘it’s good, when deadline time arrives (tomorrow morning), not to have to stare at a plain, white, empty page. So, I come here the evening or perhaps the afternoon of the day before zoe calls for Six Sentence Stories, which she does every Thursday. Each week there is a new prompt word around which we are asked to write a story of six and only six sentences.

It’s fun. You should try it. Now. This week. As in …’today’.

This week’s prompt: ‘Bread’


Claire Griswold brushed at the wave of blond hair projecting beyond the hood of her coat, now a crystalized shield from the blowing snow, and ran across the street. The young woman realized, only as she leapt over the slush-clogged gutter, that, hidden under the white innocence of the freshly fallen snow, the concrete sidewalk was glazed with ice. Deciding that, if her fate was to meet Death on the streets of a small New England town with the improbable name of South Egremont, upright was preferable to supine, smiled defiantly as the plate-glass front of the bakery rushed towards her.

Deprived of any other constructive course of action, Claire concentrated on reading the lettering on the rapidly approaching glass storefront which, like the ice field of an arctic bay with it’s cold-dark blue interrupted by patches of cold-white ice from broken glaciers, had patches of snow obscuring the gilt-painted lettering, ‘..sh bread and past..’ the only intelligible message. Out of nowhere, an encircling grip established itself around her waist, as her feet and her head, still in the grips of Newton and therefore determined to continue on to the building, bent slightly over and under the arm that held her mostly in place.

Claire felt, as much heard, in a woolen semaphore, a strong voice penetrating her ice-crowned hood, pressing up against still-warm ears, ‘gotcha!


TToT -the Wakefield Doctrine- (it’s all kinds of fun and useful!)

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


Don’t you love it when one thing becomes more than one?  (Of course, as all clarks instinctively recognize, if not lack the standing to take advantage of it* all things are one and one can be all things.)

Whoa! Yeah, take a second, remind yourself, ‘oh, that’s right! this is the Wakefield Doctrine I’m reading! they ain’t heavy, they’re just having fun!’

Anyway … I’m referring to my subtitle ‘it’s all kinds of fun and useful’ and while I wrote it to reference the Wakefield Doctrine, it immediately connected to this bloghop, the Ten Things of Thankful. Two inferences for the price of one!

So on with the TToT.

1)  Lizzi Lewis (who continues to deny her famous great-uncle (on her mother’s side)), for creating this here bloghop here. The cool thing about the TToT is that you can’t do it wrong! (yeah, I’m feeling all Oxford don-ish, so I’m gonna go ahead and leave that one hanging out there… one hint: BoSR/SBoR)

2) Phyllis and Una:  one for demonstrating how simply useful and beneficial the principles of the Wakefield Doctrine can be in terms of living one’s life, the other for demonstrating how good simple life can be.

3)Almira‘ what an interesting trip it’s been, these last 42 or so weeks. Experiencing an odd reluctance to write the remaining chapters. I suspect that it’s the same as the reluctance of our readers to read the last chapters.

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

5) the photo at the top is from a church where I was sitting (in the back, of course) attending a funeral for the spouse of someone I know. Talk about your essential paradox of life! I felt sympathy for the living person in the front pew and yet was grateful to be included among those who were expected to be there. In a clarklike way, there are few of events more life-affirming than a funeral. It serves, (for me), as a reminder of the whole ‘grain of sand’ thing in Blake’s poem. Next to walking out through the doors of a hospital after visiting a sick friend, there are few times when the world feels as large and full of potential, as when I walk out and away from a funeral service, as I did the other day.

6) the gang at Six Sentence Stories.  Talk of creating a world and a community!   zoe has done what people who are gifted with people and have the ability to let strangers feel like they belong do. Every Thursday, theys a bunch a people what write stories in six (and precisely six) sentences… (yeah, I’m a clark, so, of course, I went for the patois)

7)  the crew at the Gravity Challenge   val and joy, lisa and sarah and kristi  (hey! you need to join us!  well, no, not  need to…. need to  as in, its fun and useful! And we have Kristi’s Rule  which says:  ‘take a photo first thing every morning (except Sunday). it can be of as much or as little of the scale readout as you want. what we’re sharing each morning is the change, the experience of Stable Weight or the hunt for a new stable weight’)

8) (gonna repeat last weeks thing of leaving an item blank for now, seeing as it’s only 8:13 in the morning, surely after a day in the field, I’ll have something interesting or, failing that, a cool photo)

9) (did you miss the part about ‘leaving an item blank for now?’)

9.3)  Hey!  here’s an idea  Why don’t we try to post other TToT posts here… in this one. It might work, at least until Lizzi gets back from the Dark Continent (do they still call it, ‘the Dark Continent?’ they don’t? what the hell! It’s a pretty cool name. (Interviewer: “Where were you born, Mr scottroger?”  Me: “Well, as a matter of fact, I was born in a speeding cab careening through a small village in the heart of the Dark Continent.”  Interviewer: “Cool!”)

I am totally proud of css-self!  see the photos?  click on ’em

anyway, here goes. In order of the Facebook, Wendy’s TToT:


now, Pat Brockett’s:






10) SR 1.3  (New Readers? SR 1.3 stands for ‘Secret Rule 1.3’ and it’s to be found in the Book of Secret Rules (aka the Secret Book of Rules) zoe just happens to be the Reference Librarian (yeah,  complete with reading glasses worn around the neck, a chain of strung crystal beads, and …and! she has one of those clasping holders for chalk?  you know, you push the button on one end and these teeth-things open and you put the chalk in and release the button. white chalk unless (on special occasions only, blue!)  and a timer that sits on the front of her desk. which, in turn, is one of those closed-front, short squared legs oak desks with the handles on the front of drawers made of the same wood and a locking shallow middle drawer.

*  there are notable exceptions, of course. Among them, one Cynthia (‘my friends call me Sageleaf‘) Calhoun who has been my personal…. hey! there must be a word for designating a person who exemplifies ‘principle in practice’…. damn, whatever, if I can’t find it, then I’ll just have to make a word up!


VI Sentience Story -the Wakefield Doctrine-

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


Thursday (sorta) already! (Full Discomfiture: these words are pulling themselves from the ether and sticking themselves on the white screen, like Velcro-robbed penitents storming a medieval cathedral. The task put before us by zoe, is to write a story and contain it in six regular sized sentences that is about/related to/concerning or otherwise involved with the word: LIGHT.

I better get a move on…

Holy smoke! Six sentences is not a lot of … sentences! I just went looking for a previously written Six, thinking of maybe doing a continuation of a story and, man! That’s not a lot of sentences! My compliments to the zoe and the other Sentitioners here, how they be creating whole worlds, (and some cases), entire lives playing out in a serial format, all in only Six Sentences.

My compliments to all…. messes me way the heck up. For some reason, I’m appreciating anew how small a spot it is we have to stand and tell our stories!


I stood over the things that spilled from the round metal container, sniffing past the sick-making moving-food and had just nosed out a piece of burnt meat when I heard a heavy thud of the door on a yellow moving man-thing come from somewhere near the end of the alley.

“Halt! It is useless you should try to run away, Fräulein, I am not yet done with you.”

Snapping up the food, I crouched back and focused on the shadows that moved at the end of my escape path, causing the bright man-filled area beyond to flicker in warnings of light and dark; it had been a long time since food and the behavior of man were predictable, the many men that moved on the hardened paths and sat in the sandy bad-water places gave off alternating scents of prey and predator, I was almost always ready to fight.

The first man to run towards me was of the smaller types of man, the kind that usually did not attack/challenge first, I still crouched, but she ran past me and looked out from behind another round metal food container.

The light changed and a scent screaming of both rage and hunger, like the crashing bad-waters at the end of the alley, it was mix of fear scent and chase scent threatened to drown me where I stood, my morning food fell to ground as my lips curled back and my tail swept down.

I backed towards the smaller man, who had long yellow hair and smooth, bare legs and arms, her fear scent changing to a mix of attack and flee; as the new attacking man approached, I heard the smaller man say something that sounded like ‘Good boy!’ and felt my tail briefly move from protecting my hind quarters to swing twice, as we both prepared to leap forward.




© 2009-2017 Francis Clark Farley All Rights Reserved -- Copyright notice by Blog Copyright