FTSF -the Wakefield Doctrine- ‘..of slide projectors and Planters Cocktail peanuts.’

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


I was wandering the ‘net and scrolling through the Facebook when I saw a familiar face. The cool thing is that it was of person I’ve never met but have known since he was, like 5 years old. The best part of this virtual world is the opportunity, if we’re lucky, to share or get a glimpse into the lives of friends (and their family) that we may very well never ever find ourselves in the same room with. But, as I’ve said elsewhere,  the gift of the blogosphere is to be able to say, “hey remember the time that Tucker…” or “that reminds me of the trip you all took to…”

This bloghop is where I ‘got serious’ about blogging. The FTSF is a deceptively simple premise, ‘though fraught with the hazard of self-revelation. It was, for me, the place to be for a number of Fridays…back in the day.

This week, Kristi and them at FTSF are inviting us to complete the sentence:

When it comes to traveling…

…I stay indoors.

Funny thing about posts in general, and this bloghop in particular, sometimes you have an idea of what to write but it doesn’t …make you type. Sure it’s a sound idea, a good theme, but its just not fun. Then there are ideas that yell in your head, ‘Hey! There you go!’ (The idea that I really like was right there in my intro, but it took coming back this morning (Saturday) to know what I would write.*)

In my more mundane version of this post, I would have said something about the business trips I used to take and how they were adventures, not merely in seeing new places, but in taking myself to new and different places. Watching myself as I explored other parts of the country was as much fun as going there (whatever that means).

But in this version, (the fun one, where the words rush out like kids out to a school yard), when I read the sentence fragment, I would say

“When it comes to traveling… I like to tag along on friends vacations.

The photo of Tucker (on Kristi’s post) says it all. My immediate reaction was, “Hey! I remember that time.”

I have never met Tucker, but I’ve known him for a number of years. This is true simply because Kristi has afforded me the privilege of sharing parts of her life, through her blogposts at Finding Ninee and (her) comments at the Doctrine and the other places people meet in the virtual world.  So, I remember the trip to the beach and the trip to Colorado. This is travel is a very special way. Think about gatherings of family and friends, especially those made up of people who have not been together in some length of time, the binding thread, the proof of membership to the group, is almost always, “…remember the time….”

Anyway. While some of the most fun I’ve had traveling has been sitting in airport terminals, listing to the voices on the PA try to not sound like that part in ‘Airplane!’ about the White Zone being for loading and un-loading only, most trips are a collection of Doctrine posts.

The real fun in traveling, at least as it comes to mind as I type and tell you about the time driving up through the Mississippi Delta and stopping at ‘Edna’s QQICK Gas ‘n Go’ and the fun conversations I had, has been in hearing about my friends road trips and family vacations. It’s the 21st Century version of slides in the living room on a Saturday Night, (the only time of the year, barring New Years and Thanksgiving, when Planters Cocktail peanuts were available in free supply to a 7 year old clark) and seeing what another family saw on their vacation. Off course it’s not the slides, it’s not even the vicarious pleasure of the commentary, it’s the sharing of one family’s life with another friend or family that’s the greatest gift of this here internet here.

…remember that time that…”


*  actually it took ‘hearing Kristi’ which is to say, reading an overnight comment from her on a Six Sentence Story post… funny thing about ‘voice’ and reality.


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


-the Wakefield Doctrine- ‘of rogerian expressions and insides into the worlds of scotts’

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

CSR copy

I thought I had anticipated every possibility and worried because if things started moving too quickly, there was a chance that I would get blind sighted.”

How long has it been since we’ve heard a new rogerian expression? As I type, I’m trying to remember the source of this most excellent of rhetorical terrorism, courtesy of our friends-in-the-Herd. No luck, can’t remember where I read it, however, I do know that I recognized it instantly. There is that existential stutter followed by a burst of surprised laughter that is characteristic of a true rogerian expression.

On another note: I was talking to a scottian friend/work associate and one thing led to the other and, in the spontaneous (and totally metaphorical) wrestling matches that frequently occur when a scott is involved, came the following:

scotts act (in order) to think

clarks think (in order) to act

being a scott, she affected to not enjoy the insight that resulted. scotts have that innate sense of control and will not play games they are not totally familiar with, at least not for too extended a period of time.

This sort of reminds me of the fun of the early days of Doctrine posts, when everything was new and the excitement was everywhere. It was fun to write posts because the Doctrine was in full self-reveal mode. Someone would say something and the next thing we knew I’d be writing about how rogers have a very distinctive relationship with towels (the cloth type, bath towels mostly, all through dish towels are not totally innocent). And how scotts, when in public but not in the spotlight, will self-narrate their actions and behavior.

Thats back when 500 words was a decent length post.

Guess that’s about it.

…oh, yeah  that post with the funny object in it, this weekend past?  It was a candle molder.


and, in keeping with the retro-ness of today’s post, here’s a music video of a song that I’ve got stuck in my head.


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!


Six Minute Story -the Wakefield Doctrine- ‘hey, I haven’t a clue what that’s supposed to mean!’

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


Today I am reminded of the wisdom of writing warm-up words for this Post. I am reminded because I did not write a warm-up Six Sentence Story post yesterday, the way I always do. Nothing in particular, the day got away from me…. (‘hmmm. ‘the day got away from me’  ya think?…. nah‘)

In any event, this is zoe’s Six Sentence Story ‘hop.

New Readers?  A word is given, this week the word is; ‘Share’. We are then invited to write a story involving that word, composed of six sentences. No more. No less. Come and join the ‘fun’.


“Ok, I think this might actually work,” typing, you wonder why you’re narrating your own actions.

You pull your fingers away from the keyboard, not a great distance, less than an inch, just enough to reduce the chance of words accidentally getting on the screen, your skill with this POV being as limited as a toddler’s first attempt to pour dry cereal into a bowl.

“Four more sentences to go,” you feel the cautious optimism of a patient when the dentist reaches up and tilts the light away, “surely the readers feel they’ve gotten their money’s worth and you can end this Six.”

“How do you suggest we do that,’ your stomach sinks at the realization that you not only have no surprise ending, but you’ve gone and employed a plural personal pronoun. With the cold flash of a naked-in-public nightmare washing over your face, you realize you haven’t a clue of the effect a plural personal pronoun would have on a second person POV narrative.

Looking at the time, I noticed I was late, so I walked to the bedroom doorway and said, “Clark! did you happen to remember to include the prompt word?”





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