Monday -the Wakefield Doctrine- ‘wherein the author sees (and seizes) an opportunity presented by errant comments’

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


At times, in the course of writing this blog, a comment will appear that, while intended as a response/reaction/rebuttal or rant, is of such a nature as to form the basis of a new post. Our friend Cynthia, to name just one, has a certain penchant for such commentationing.

So, this weekend, there was, as usual, a TToT post. Josie has continued the tradition of the TToT quite effectively, so much so that we are seeing an increasing number of new ‘faces’*. And, of course, the usual gang of writers, tellers of tales, and, of recent time, travelers. I refer, of course, to Friend of the Doctrine, Kerry.

As has happened increasingly of late, I was short an Item or two for my TToT. I wrote on the Facebook a plea for help. Kerry graciously consented, wrote a comment (for inclusion as an Item on my Saturday post). And therein hangs our tale. (Or, at least, the ‘theme’ of this Monday post). First, Kerry’s Comment:

Sounds good. Let’s all, three of us, all go to dinner together. Love your ideas

And, sure, I’d love to offer up. I have plenty of those Mexico stories. I continue to be thankful for that trip every day. Any in particular you’re looking for?

The mariachi serenade in the park? I already wrote about that experience and submitted it for consideration of an excellent Canadian literary prize. I love to eat rose petals and crickets. I am thankful for all the food I got to eat and the people I got to meet. I love to find a rhyme in and amongst my thankfuls.


Huh. Hmm. Where did my comment go? I told of stories from Mexico, per your request, but now I am rewriting.

Thank you, Kerry! I recall the mariachi story, but the ‘eating rose petals and crickets’? Now how could I have missed that!  (lol… hold on a second… hey! Kerry’s text to audio app! that last sentence, the italics??  remember: sarcasm comes in many tones. In this case, the tone is one of, ‘I know how I might have forgotten the image of insects ala carte, however there is admiration overlaying the sarcasm… got it?  fine. carry on’)

OK, I’m back.

One of the things about Kerry’s comment on her comment (at the Doctrine) that resonated with me was notion of re-writes. For whatever reason, there’ve been a couple of instances in the last week in which I wrote comments (and received comments) with a significant delay. Over at Jo’s Fallen Angel, for example, I kept not seeing my comment register… speaking of the Wakefield Doctrine


(yeah, there really are no situations, (in life, virtual or real), that cannot be enhanced with the application of our favorite personality theory.)

In any event, whenever I do that, i.e. write a comment, hit publish, come back a few hours/the next day, to read replies and see that my comment is missing I have two immediate and nearly simultaneous** reactions: a) ‘oh man, they’re gonna think I’m blowing them off, reading and commenting only on a few and still looking for them to comment on mine’ and 2) ‘maybe my comment was deleted…blocked even! should I write another comment, which, if it’s my computer messing up, will at least let them know I wrote one or just back out of the room quietly and maybe everyone won’t hate me.’

Did I mention that, in the parlance of the Wakefield Doctrine, I’m a clark?  lol  yeah, good thing I  have this here personality theory here, otherwise I’d be way more reclusive this Monday morning than normal.

Well, time to go, Thank you, Kerry! Not only for the comments, but for the post starter-thought.


*  for example, there’s Patricia, and her eponymous blog1Patricia’s Place‘  who has joined in the TToT conversation and added a quietly insightful voice

  1. just wanted to see if I could use the word and get away with it

** will offer this question to our more rabid Doctrine aficionados, (I’m looking at you Denise, Cynthia …. Lizzi!!) which of the two reactions comes first?


Friday -the Wakefield Doctrine- “and then there were three”

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


Why is a coffee mug like a writing desk?

no, I’m serious… Readers of the Wakefield Doctrine can easily imagine how good/pleased/(I’d say delighted but fear that would sound… I don’t know, a little X-Chromish) I felt when, upon Phyllis’ arrival home the other night and said, “Did you know there were packages on the porch. I think one is the clothes I ordered…”*

Well. I came up the stairs, a rectangle box that  was littered with slogans and icons of LL Bean in one hand, and in the other, a cube of styrofoam. Not exactly a cube, more of a decahedron of styrofoam. I looked for a return address and finding none, walked out (through the French doors in the dining area) to the deck and scanned the trees surrounding the house.

There was a cup inside the cube decahedron. And the cup is,  well you can see it above. It is a lot like the first mug and undeniably quite different.  Let me show you:


…that’s how a mug is like a story.

Thank you, mug-fairy(s)**

(Best be careful in them trees, hear tell there’s some snow in the future for them of us in New England)

*  note: I always come into the house through the garage, which is sorta under the main living area and so will hardly ever notice parcels or packages on the front porch. I put a photo in the ‘cover photo’ for this post. You can kinda see the design in the photo

** no, I totally agree, not a major risk of that term gaining traction in the world of fun surprise anonymous gifts of coffee mugs that contain a secret story.



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


“…too early to work” -the Wakefield Doctrine- “surely not too early to reprint an old Post!”

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


Up way too early. Work and writing, neither wanted to go to bed last night. And, yeah, that wouldn’t be the worst thing, the worst thing was that both (work and writing) was just in my head. All of the bad and none of the good, oh well, what’cha gonna do?

Re-print an old Post?

Well, I don’t mind if I do! Not the same level of satisfaction as writing new content, but better than looking at ‘the Facebook’, which is getting kinda old (‘except for the Gravity Challenge! that’s a whole ‘nother thing. If you want to watch your weight and would like to do so in the company of some interesting people, come on over to the Gravity Challenge! We’d be glad to have you join us. Easy as can be. Every day we take a photo of the readout of our scale(s) and send it in, whereupon I post it to the aforementioned Facebook. Pretty simple, isn’t it? (Oh, btw, we have what’s called Kristi’s Rule. It says, any portion of that readout you care to send in, works fine. The Challenge is about the change, not the number.  So click here.)

reprint from a few years ago:

Welcome to the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of personality that you get to enjoy with your friends and them, before it gets all famous and mainstreamy and everyone will know about it)

Question: If your husband is a roger and you are a clark, is it true that they never accept how much you have changed over the years, since you first met?
Answer: Too true1

(Welcome to ‘ya shoulda just asked Tuesday’! We will be presenting some common questions and the semi-comprehensive answers…along with a little commentary, mostly to let us get away with dividing the page into block quotes.’)

Question: My best friend is funny and fun to be with, but sometimes when we are around other people he gets like, mean even goes and picks on me. But this happens only with certain people, this big kid that (my friend) knows. What gives?

Answer: Chances are your friend is a scott and the person that, when they’re around, your friend starts acting mean?…well, that other person is a scott too, but they are what we call dominant (to your friend). So your friend, even though he is picking on you, doesn’t mean to hurt your friendship… it’s a pack2 thing, you know?
Answer: jeez, if you say so,

(This question deals with the changing pack order (from the scottian perspective) and it’s effects on the behavior of a scott. Note: this question (and by implication, the experience cited), will most likely be posed by a clark. Do you know why that should be?)

Question: My fiancée and I are getting close to the Big Day. When we first got engaged, we both agreed to keep the ceremony and everything on the quiet, low-key side, but lately, ( the wedding is in 3 months), she has been talking more to her sisters and some of her old friends and it seems like the guest list is getting bigger and bigger. What gives?

Answer: She is probably a roger. Forget about changing her mind. It means a lot to her, in a way that you will never understand. So relax! Sneak a couple of your friends that she might not have approved when the guest list was small, she probably won’t even notice now, and if she does make an issue of it, say the following to her (word for word): “I understand how important family is to you now. And even though I am not close to my family, you have shown me that my feelings3 of friendship with (fill in the names of you friends) make them like family. Won’t you let my family join your family …darling?”

(And there are those who would say, ‘Hey Wakefield Doctrinaires! Sure you have a uniquely clever take on personality types, but what about practical applications? Huh, what about those?’ Well, here ya go! Who cannot not identify with this situation? …not counting the rogers, of course!)

Question: My boss is nice enough, but it seems like he tries too hard to be, like my friend or something! Every day it is ‘how are you doing?’, “is there anything I can do to make your job easier?” I mean, all the time! I can’t get any work done when he is in the office, he is always offering to ‘help’! I might be able to deal with this, except that every time I do get some work done that he needs to sign off on, he always finds fault! And if I come up with something on my own initiative (he likes to say that he wants me to try to ‘think outside the box’) he is either totally negative or acts like he is amazed that I actually did it myself! Should I quite my job?
Answer: Probably.4

(This Question deals with a scenario that is all too common. And, although we do not propose that all bosses are rogers, we will say this, ‘If your boss is a scott you have: a) a good time everyday up until the day he decides that it is time to change careers or b) a lead pipe cinch of a sexual harassment lawsuit, so the day you get tired of her shenanigans, ‘it’s sayonara, see ya in court’
If your boss is a clark, then we know the following: a) if your clarklike boss is female then her boss is a roger, if your clarklike boss is male then his boss is a scott! and b) they (clarks) make great bosses, will stick up for you totally against all opponents, but jeez! enough with the leadership by consensus! Get a set, yo.

That music referenced in the Title of today’s Post? Totally weird. I’m sitting and watching TV and a commercial comes on and before I can hit ‘MUTE’ I hear the music in the background (of the commercial) and I’m off to the great and omnicient google… and here we are

1) rogers are about consistency, if they are about anything at all! The worldview of the herd (rogers) maintains that history, tradition, continuity…consistency is of the greatest good! The worldview is also one in which the individual’s relationship with the world-at-large manifests primarily in emotional terms. So when a (lasting) relationship forms, the details of ‘the other’ person are important, in a sense, manifesting the emotional investment. So, as time goes by, even though people change and grow and develop, the roger will still insist on seeing the ‘original person’

2) scotts, in the initial behavioral metaphor: like pack animals, i.e. wolves, dogs, lions and such. The social ranking in the pack is one of simple dominance, an alpha at ‘the top’ and everyone else in order of strength/prowess/capability downward from there. It is a primary characteristic of the scottian personality type to establish ranking when entering a new (social ) environment. Literally going from person to person, figuratively pushing them on the shoulder in order to establish ranking

3) emotions! always play the emotion-card when dealing with rogers!

4) you could try to…nah, don’t even bother. Maybe if you got to the Doctrine sooner, you might have learned enough to invoke your own rogerian aspect to re-configure your work relationship… but too hard, too frustrating, easier to get another job. But then again, most bosses/middle managers/supervisors/Principals are rogers! so maybe you should be asking about the Wakefield Doctrine School of Self-Improving Oneself…school


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!


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