on the other hand, there is something to be said for the stupid approach

 

Yes, I could publish a Post with only a subtitle and some aquisified1 music videos.

But that would be cheating2 and as we all know it is wrong3 to do that/this.  So we won’t.  But since we are on the subject of shortcuts as found in blogs of theories of personalities it would seem to beg the question4  which is a journalistic style of saying, hey fuck you I won the debate on the initial premise that I did not bring up and now, as the old joke goes, “we’re just haggling over price”.
Where was I?  Shit!  I forget…started doing the footnote thing which, which requires spending time to go and do some extra format thing so that the little number thingie shows up and then go back to the  bottom of the page to write the footnotes5 which are  the supposed punchline6.  Damn, lost the thread.

When all else fails, get back to the reason for this blog:  the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers)!
(…ok…I’m here….hellooo anyone around?….shit…don’t make me wake up the only imaginary character that is still around…Jimmy, of course! everyone else is off somewhere for the Summer Vacation).

Better now, back to our topic/theme/point-less Post.

What’s the deal with rogers?  They always act so put upon.  You know, you go up to one, ask for some help or (even) offer some help and what’s the first thing you get?  Is it:
     a) “why no I don’t mind giving you a hand”…
     b) ” Hey!  love to have the extra help on that, really appreciate it…” (or)
     c)  “What do you want?  Can’t you see how busy I am?  Man, you are really slowing me down, sure if you really, really need to lend a hand…wait you got that all wrong   God…how did you get this far…this is the second time today this has happened to me…why does this always happen to me…everytime I go out of my way to help you people it is always the same thing, I have to do it all myself…I probably will have to do it all myself…yeah…thanks a lot.

Ok, Wakefield Doctrine Lesson of the Day!!!  After seeing the above multiple choice question in print7 it became immediately clear that one of the trickier ways to know the type you are either dealing with or are observing is the different way a person responds to the other two types.  Which is the long way8 to say, “the roger cited above is responding to either a clark or a scott, which of the two is it?

….put down your pencils.
The correct answer is “D” a clark.  (Of course the other person is a clark, if the roger in this example were interacting with a scott, response “C” would have been the metaphorical equivalent of reaching out, grabbing salt and pepper, sprinkling it on his own head.)

The more interesting question is why is that a characteristic of the clark/roger interaction as opposed to the scott/roger interaction.  And we will save that for another day.  Right now I have to come up with a few more, “Man! how do they come up with this shit”!!  Too funny” footnotes, some pictures or images to do the Lead in with and finally try to frame the music videos in a manner that will elicit a Comment from you people.

So on with the music.  First up is the original and the second is a cover (by Prince). (Tell me Prince does not have style!  Not just the girl rhythm section, anyone would think of that, it’s the initial setup with the bass player sitting on a couch.  That is the creativity that is the hallmarks of those wacky clarks.)

YouTube Preview Image YouTube Preview Image

1  (ah-quiz-if-fied) to use with or without specific and/or appropriate permissions
2  (chi-ting) to take advantage of/utilize resources from unsuspected and/or surprised suppliers
3  (roar-awng) the complementational aspect to conventional and/or societal approval
4  The Latin phrase for “beg the question” is petitio principii, which means “assume the initial point.”
5  Footnotes are most often used as an alternative to long explanatory notes that can be distracting to readers.  Most literary style guidelines (including the Modern Language Association and the American Psychological Association) (lol) recommend limited use of foot and endnotes.  However, publishers often encourage note references in lieu of parenthetical references.  Aside from use as a bibliographic element, footnotes are used for additional information or explanatory notes that might be too digressive for the main text…Yeah I so totally agree!!
6  The final part of a joke; the word, sentence, or exchange of sentences that is intended to be funny and provokes laughter from the listeners.
    That was quite a build-up for such a puny punch line.
7  …as opposed to ‘on screen’ in turn as opposed to represented by fuckin, heisenbergian, non-locational specific, frickin electrons

  

of infinite jest, of most excellent fancy

Hey, yo clarks…it’s Saturday and the other two have the weekend starting.  They both know this is a time when they are entitled and (in the case of rogers) required to relax and have fun and engage in all things not of the work week.  You, (being a clark) know nothing of this…this is a day as are all other days.  Sure, you may aspire to having the feeling of enjoying some  ’time off’,  relief from the weeks organised work, hell you may even have a situation in which you have weekends off, but you and I both know that it is not the same (as it is with those other two, scott and roger).

So, am glad you are still reading.  I hope you can continue to ‘set aside momentarily’ your inclination to dismiss this blog as something that you have already got covered in your own system of understanding (the world) and see if you cannot benefit from this Wakefield Doctrine thing.  And it is to the clarks that I speak today…”no, scott, no special music videos and nothing of a sexy exotic nature”…just clarks stopping for a moment to see if we can’t maybe help each other out a bit. (As to our rogerianReaders), they are totally into ‘hey! it’s my weekend can’t you see how much I have earned the right to be even more self-absorbed than I am during the rest of the week”? lol Yeah.

OK.  Post for and to the clarks.  Hey! come back I have just started!

I could cut and paste stuff from the clarks page, about how we live in our heads, and think a lot and do not show emotion but we are past that at this point. There simply is not a roger or a scott still reading this…so it is us here.  I know that you know that I know…etc…blah…etc.  Fine we have established our credentials, identified ourselves it is up to me to offer something that you have not yet thought of, or have not been willing to think too loudly, much less try and discuss it with one of the others.
Fine.  I am willing to play.  Here’s the thing…we can accept our low self concept/esteem, in fact it is a point of pride with us…sort of like the person who has overcome a handicap…we own it and accept it and there is hardly anyone in the world that is qualified to discuss this topic (with us).
Sure.
Understood.
I get the knowing/thinking thing.  And I am sure there are clarks who are better than I am at thinking/analyzing even better at describing and expressing what it is to be inside the head of (and therefore to live in the world of) a clark.

Difference is I have experienced the alteration of my clarklike nature. (Sorry no insult intended but for dramatic purposes I have to do the following, even though I know that you know).  Notice and re-read what I just said…I have experienced…alteration…clarklike nature…I did not say:
“I have learned to…” or “I think differently”…I have not even said anything about “discovering something new, a key to understanding…”

I have experienced an alteration in my clarklike nature.  Am still a clark( lol ya think? ) but have something in addition to…

So, welcome to the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers)…I think we better go find those other two…roger is probably swelling up in emotional intensity…sort of getting wider and lower to the ground with the severity of their sincere and heartfelt nature…and the scotts  lol god knows what they are up to!..I don’t hear any cries of torment, maybe they have found something old and worn to gnaw on…they are such simple creatures… but fun…

So come back when you are ready to Comment…we will be here…I think…ya never know…lol

YouTube Preview Image

fuck that greaser 50s rock and roll or country music that scotts so love that they turn into little pre-teen girls at the thought of, bless their simple scottian hearts…and roger’s idea of music…I’m sorry I do not believe that I am quite qualified, in an acedemistical sort of way to criticise the music that most rogers will beat people over the head with, for their obvious lack of qualifications to enjoy…

(oh before we go…) you know that just because we are self-conscious and mumble and all that sort of thing does not mean that we are not to found in the spotlight…I offer as a closing example a clark we can all be proud of…

YouTube Preview Image

Hold on…just discussing Doctrine matters with DownSpring#1…and she made a statement about my doing something better than someone else which resulted in my success at “being taken under their wing”…
…now you’re clark…you like the sound of that…”under their wing”…tell me I’m lying.  DS#1 insisted that the choice of words was ‘accidental’ that she did not mean it that way…

If you want to ever have the slightest hope of doing that which you have been trying to do your entire damn lives, you must be prepared to accept the fact that it is always your choice…and it is not the words that matter, it is the fact that the words we choose are the instructions we give to the world out there…instructions as to how we are to be regarded…as clarks
But you are still reading because a) you remember that all people have the potential to be any of the three, a clark, a scott or a roger and b) this potential does not ‘go away’ or wear off it is always possible to add the qualities to what we are and finally c) clarks are the only one of the three that think that improving themselves is not only a good idea, it is a necessary idea…because of d) the central idea of a clark is way beyond the scope of this particular Post…but you have earned another video!!

…good clarkie… you made it this far! …take a penny, please

YouTube Preview Image

I’ll bet this really does not work/it will be great

…no way…this is so not going to work…

(Screw it) let’s deal with them clarksrogers they’re easy if for no other reason than there are just so damn many of them out there…prevailing opinion is that of the general population the breakdown is: 65% rogers 25% clarks and 10% scotts

…(alright, alright I’m getting to it…damn this is turning out way harder than I thought)… (And it’s not that it is hard to describe clarks/being a clark/understanding clarks), what is the challenge is to not sound/appear/look/or seem to be overly self-indulgent/un-certain/too-clever or even apparently-not-able-to-settle-on-one-description.

(ya think?) …hey you want to try this?  ,,,(back to amateur experimental writing 1010)…(I know! let’s quote some source material!)… The following  is from the ‘Page’ clarks, which if you had read that, you would not need to read this,

To a clark, information/knowledge is the thing of highest value in the world.  This belief is the flaw from which all in the behavior (of a clark) flows.  “If I know everything I can understand why I feel different.  If I understand why I feel different, I can change and then not feel different.  Then I can be like other people.

That pretty much sums up the nature of clarks, thanks for coming by…..

(…they still out there?)                    (….shit)                                (…I know, I know I have to fill up more space….)   (more pictures!….that will fill in the white!)

 

 This is Flo, she is a clark…as a matter of fact, clarklike females are totally easier to identify than are clarklike male-type people.  (At least in the current culture) women are permitted a wider latitude of physical expression, both in physical features and in clothing.  (Funny thing about them, always odd footwear, and a mixture of clothing styles that does not just cross the male/female line, it totally obliterates it).  The patron saintlette of clarks is Diane Keaton, not only in her role as Annie Hall, but by all indications, in her ‘real life’).  Don’t take my word for it, look at this clip.

(…we done yet?…) ….(goddamn it, yeah I know ‘no one is forcing me to do this’…) ….(if I actually hit PUBLISH on this Post it will be a major miracle)…

Are there any questions? (oh great, roll out the over-done classroom thing with young and not weird students to act as deux ex machina*…(clarks, they know what that means)…most of them are not stupid, even though they think that you think that they are….)

You can see the clarks, if you just look.
See that herdlette of rogers over there?  They are all talking in a circle, not a perfect circle, but a group with a common center.  See that guy that is standing at an angle to the group?  See how his body is oriented to the same center as the rogers?  Notice how his head/face is looking outward from the group?  That’s your clark.  Look at the corner of the room, see that person who appears to be moving to another part of the room?  But when you look back, he is still in that corner, still looking like he is moving to another part of a room?  That’s your clark.

(Physical characteristic of clarks: hunched shoulders.  The result of growing up with a worldview/perceptual bias/simply being a clark and living in an essentially hostile environment, knowing that you are always going to be an outsider/different-from/not-like-them.  Always with the bad posture).

Funny thing about clarks, tho…we get along with scotts.  In fact, find a scott and there will be a clark nearby.  It is so characteristic as to be axiomatic, the clark will be giving ideas to the scott, who will act on them. The clark never gets credit, not being the one who acts, except from the scott.  In that sense the Progenitor roger is correct.  There is a strong symbiosis between a clark and a scott.

(…are we done yet?)…(how the hell did you go from ‘painfully self-conscious’ to ‘totally boring’ so fast?…jeez dude)…(well you have come this far, find something to wrap this deceased equine up in and go home…)

Hey!  You know who are clarks out in the real world?  Woody Allen, Steven Wright, Jimi Hendrix, Prince (that’s right, I said that Prince is a clark), Flo, David Hyde Pierce (no shit), Norm Abrahms, Richard Linklater (Slacker, Dazed and Confused), David Duchovney, Bob Newheart, Diane Keaton and many, many, you have to pay attention to spot them, people.

So, scottsrogers…. you people need us.   (So, clarks…don’t believe that for a second).

(…can’t wait to see what he considers appropriate music…..)

YouTube Preview Image
* deux ex machina -[dey-uhs eks mah-kuh-nuh, dee-uhs eks mak-uh-nuh]
–noun
1.(in ancient Greek and Roman drama) a god introduced into a play to resolve the entanglements of the plot.

2. any artificial or improbable device resolving the difficulties of a plot.

© 2009-2012 the Wakefield Doctrine All Rights Reserved -- Copyright notice by Blog Copyright