-the Wakefield Doctrine- ‘I replace the broken keyboard and the first thing I post is a ‘re-print’!?! who’s a clark? lol

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

szerszamok

Yes, I did buy a new keyboard. That means…. it’s ok to make mistakes because I have a delete key once again. lol  no, seriously …. I can!

Today is, of course, Valentines Day and being a High Faux Holiday in the Ecclesiastical Calendar of Hallmark, I naturally thought to write a post. Trouble is, I’ve been writing this blog since 2009. I may have written myself out. (The one saving grace: since I’ve been writing about the Doctrine since July 2009, I’ve been doing little else, (‘if it’s worth doing, it’s worth over-doing.’) Maybe something has happened in my life in the intervening 5 or 6 years that I haven’t discovered yet! oh boy!)

Anyway. I need to work on the final Chapters of ‘Almira‘ so here’s a Post from 2012, titled:

“St Valentine, was he a roger or was he a clark…the Wakefield Doctrine deals with the important questions of the day.”*

no, it's ok! I'm a Saint

“No, it’s ok! I’m a Saint.”

St Valentines is the worst, most contrived and cynical, gyno-centric guy-bait(ing), toy-with-the-emotions-of-innocent-bystanders, holiday on the whole damn calendar. Of course we are all familiar with the origin of the holiday and the internet is positively turgid with countless blogs, and stories and articles that tell us all about Hallmark and the candy industry and the rest of the sordid tale of this day in February. I will not try to compete with these other more skilled and capable Commentators ( and -torinis), as I do not have the time or the ‘writing chops’ to do such a ripe topic justice. Instead, let me tell you about my most lasting memory of Valentines Day.

Third grade, parochial school (St. Imelda) and a classroom of 25 students. The boys were required to wear blue shirts and blue ties with OLM printed on the front, fortunately ‘clip-on ties’ had been invented by this time, so easy-peasy; the girls wore the catholic school uniform, i.e. plaid skirts white shirt, socks. damn, little did I realize at that pre-pubescent time of my life how potent that little Roman Catholic Church fashion dictates would become for me and countless other men at a later stage of life.
So with much fanfare, Valentine’s Day arrives and we 9-year-old boys and girls are told that in the afternoon, before the end of the school day, we would have time to deliver our Valentine cards to each other. ( The day before we spent ‘Art Period’ making little baskets out of construction paper and taping them to the front of our desks. These would serve as ‘mailboxes’ for the cards we would receive the next day).
The thing was, the horrible twist to this introduction to the world of love, relationships and rejection was that, the time when class stopped and we were allowed to get up and deliver our little cards was not the end of the school day! It was right after lunch… and it lasted 15 or 20 minutes…as in ‘ now return to your desks and we will continue with the afternoon’ classes’. To sit for 90 minutes staring at the contents of the container on the front of my desk… I will leave it to the Reader to decide the emotional landscape of that afternoon on a February 14th.

Anyone out there not comfortable with finishing the story, or satisfied with their conclusion of this little tale, write us a Comment! Regular Readers Students of the Doctrine know that the rogers gave the biggest cards, the scotts received the most cards and the clarks delivered the most cards(….secretly without the recipient ever knowing who the really fun card came from.)

Now I better get back to work, before I get in trouble.

 

*edited for content and times**

** as in, ‘to account for the experience of (the) reality during which the events forming the subject of the post actually occurred and the effect of the passing time since, and it’s effect on the author.

ok, Back to Almira and the story of two girls growing up a lifetime apart but meeting once before parting.

Share

Friday Quickie -the Wakefield Doctrine- “as soon as our scottian readers stop laughing, we will begin”

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

CSR

You wanna know one of the most fun things about the Wakefield Doctrine? A post like this. Which is being written because I was sitting around this morning, after shoveling the driveway and talking to Phyllis about something that I had to do at work. I made the statement ‘clarks live with fear, in a reality characterized by fear’. ok, fair enough (and accurate, as well). Then Phyllis, who is a roger with a significant secondary clarklike aspect and is very well-versed in the Doctrine, said, “and rogers worry.”

We both laughed that special laughter that celebrates co-discovery of something new and good, not funny laughing but ‘yeah! you see it too?’

…and I said, “scotts live in panic

And the Doctrine insight was complete, ‘clarks exist in fear, rogers worry and scotts live in panic.’

Ain’t it cool?

(New Readers: word about the insights afforded by the Doctrine. The core element to the Wakefield Doctrine being an effective tool is that it’s all about perspective. We maintain that perspective is, for all intents and purposes, reality. Further, we say, if you can accept that and then imagine the world as the other person is experiencing it. then you have one more perspective on life and the world than when you started. And more perspective is better than less. The rest of the Doctrine is the real fun. Think of it as describing the world to another person by singing metaphors. the words are not important, the literal definition totally does not matter, just the fact that it feels right when you say it. And…and!, the other person can pick up the ‘tune’ and follow along, or as happened with Phyllis this morning, as has happened in the past with Friends of the Doctrine, she picked up the melody and found the next phrase.)

Try it.

Share

Tuesday -the Wakefield Doctrine- ‘on severing the ties of desire while still caring about the outcome’

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

dog-pulling-on-the-leash

Yeah, we clarks are like that…. all the time. Even when no one is looking, we’re trying to figure this, world and reality, people and relationships, thing out.

You know how cool this Wakefield Doctrine is, as a tool for better understanding the people in our lifes? Consider the last part of the last (complete) sentence. Where I say, ‘we’re trying to figure this thing out’. The Doctrine tells us that if you’re a clark, encountering that implication will increase your interest; if you’re a scott, and have nothing better to do at the moment, your curiosity is piqued, ( the essential difference: the amusement value a ball  or a ball with a little bell in its hollow center); and if you’re a roger, you’ll start to get annoyed. You know for a fact that, if the writer doesn’t want to (and can’t) express a complete thought, there are serious implications to how worthwhile any further investment of time might be and will look around (wherever you might be) and see how you’re feeling.

Anyway.

Today’s subtitle: ‘severing the ties of desire while still caring (enough to continue the implied effort) about the outcome’, is one of those goulash insights that we like people are totally prone to, as we go through our day, absorbing knowledge and information (mostly information and of that, the bulk of which might, on first blush, seem to be useless information). Every now and then, a set of stray words clump together in a new and interesting way. (Sort like, on the science channel, when they illustrate the galaxy and the solar system formed…. only way speeded up.)

So we’re all familiar with the famous observation/ lesson/ inference/ hey!-check-this-out-about-existance that asserts: ‘Desire is the root of all suffering’. Clearly this is an accurate assessment. But the question that popped into my head, (while playing solitaire, my preferred form of sitting zazen), was, so how then are we to self-improve ourselves, if we don’t care whether we succeed or not. (Imo) (the) desire is not, in and of itself, destructive; the relationship created (between us and the desired), is the culprit. To desire something (someone, whatever) is to identify outside of the self. And, as any good salesman will tell you, you not only want what you can’t have, you want what you can’t have more than is supported by the benefits inherent in the desired.

whoa, is it me or is this getting a little dense for a Tooesday post?

…fortunately, the Wakefield Doctrine has an answer. Well, not quite an answer, more of an illustration of how to not get trapped by the me/not-me conundrum so often waiting for those of us who try to be better lifeforms. The approach taken by the Doctrine to self-improvement can provide(an) additional perspective. And if there’s one thing we like, here at the Doctrine, it is to have additional perspectives.

Pick a quality, a personal characteristic that you believe would make you a better you. Chances are it’ll be something like, ‘I want to be more confident at work.’ or ‘I really would be happy if I didn’t lose my temper so quickly.‘ or even, ‘If I could stop being such a perfectionist, that’d be great!

The Wakefield Doctrine maintains that what others refer to as one’s personality type is simply a reflection of the character of our ‘predominant worldview’. Example: I live in the worldview of the Outsider. What accounts for those personality traits and characteristics that identify me as a clark is the fact that I grew up and encountered the world of the Outsider and so my social strategies, coping mechanisms, all the things that I say and do in the course of interacting with the world are those of a clark. This worldview can also be thought of as our personal reality, that part of life that is a melding of the subjective and the objective world. In a way, the Doctrine’s view of personality types is that each of us are demonstrating the best coping strategies we could develop, in response to the reality we grew up in.

Lucky for us, the Wakefield Doctrine allows that, though we live our lives in one predominant worldview (the Outsider, the Predator, the Herd Members), we never lost the potential to experience the world as do ‘the other two). As a result, when we talk about self-improvement, we’re actually focusing our efforts on discovering qualities that we already possess, albeit as a potential. But the important thing about this approach is that we’re not trying to learn something totally new. We self-improve by discovering and accepting and practicing those traits and characteristics that we would be exhibiting (as our personality type) had we grown up in one of ‘the other two worldviews’.

Well, that’s all the time we have today. Be sure to follow along in Part 2 as we continue the exploration of ‘The Passion of Mindfulness’

 

Hey!  You want to do me a favor?  Go to ‘Almira’ and read the latest, Chapter 37 and click on the ‘vote’ at the bottom of the chapter. It will help me with my standings on the site. And as we all know, we never really left high school and so the appearance of popularity is pretty much all thats necessary to succeed.

 

 

Share

Monday -the Wakefield Doctrine- ‘and nothing can ever be the same again’

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

images-2

I thought I’d indulge in some nostalgia and use clips from a wonderful movie that I can’t say for certain I seen in it’s entirely and, by doing so, flash back to post-writing as it was in the early years of this here blog here.

That second point, the way we used to write posts? That was during the time when I would post something every single day. ‘But clark,’ you might be saying. ‘what possibly could provide interesting content in sufficient supply to fill a post every day?’

Good question.

But first our movie clip.

The Time Warp from Javier Martínez C. on Vimeo.

 

Almost too late. The future is eating my past. There is no clip from the Rocky Horror Picture Show that begins with Rick and Janet knocking on the door of Dr. Frank N Furter’s castle to ask to use the phone on youtub. There are tons of videos of stage plays based on the movie, clips of a movie about the movie, even some totally well-intentioned local drama club productions. But simple clips from the original? Gone like a life-giving nutrient inadvertently absorbed by a malignant tumor. The tumor grows and the host dies.

Well, that certainly puts a happy glow on the work week ahead, doesn’t it?

 

Anyway… the subtitle to today’s Post is from the above song. And it represents the second manifestation of nostalgia. There was a time that a song lyric or commercial on TV or even the label on a jar of pickles proved provocative enough to write a thousand words*… in the original sense of the word, of course

mid-15c., “eliciting,” from Middle French provocatif (15c.) and directly from Late Latin provocativus “calling forth,” from provocat-, past participle stem of Latin provocare (see provoke). Specifically of sexual desire from 1620s  (courtesy of our friends at the Online Etymology Dictionary)

Perhaps the point of today’s post is to remember that, just as the Doctrine would have us understand self-improvement, positive change is more a matter of will than effort.

The Wakefield Doctrine is a tool for understanding the world around us, especially as it’s applied to the people who make it up. The proper use of the Doctrine will allow a person to better understand themselves and therefore lead happier, more intentioned days.

So when you’re out there today** and you encounter people doing things that annoy or perplex you, consider:

  • if the sales clerk (who’s wearing all sorts of metallic shit on her/his face) looks back at you with an evasively hopeful expression but mumbles so badly that you want to shake them by the shoulders (which would result in a funny, cartoon dust cloud with things flying out of it, at first an earring and maybe an eyebrow stud, but would quickly escalate to, like, tin cans, nails, wrenches and finally a full-sized anvil) and say, ‘speak up’ Ask yourself: “Could this be one of those clarks that the Wakefield Doctrine speaks so enthusiastically of? Maybe, in the world of the ‘Outsider’ all that crap on her/his face is not awful, but a well-intentioned and thoroughly sincere badge of honor. Too bad! All that they have to do is speak clearly and look at me!”
  • your shift manager, boss, VP of HR, who always says ‘Good Morning’ or ‘Good Night’ (and follows each with a list of details describing what will follow in their lives for the day, whether they’ll be going to the gym, picking up the kids or mowing the lawn, there will be more information than you really need) has sent you an email, note, message or asked the admin to say something to you that makes you feel on the defensive, stop and ask yourself, “If this person is a roger, which given his/her deliberate choice of clothing, pronounced punctuality, giant (and sometimes mean-sounding) laughter, how the hell do I make certain this warning is about me and not the person to my right? Well, those Doctrine people seem pretty sure of themselves, and they say that this personality type is like a Member of a Herd, so whats the best way to interact with a member of a herd without causing a stampede?”
  • holy shit! that guy talks fast! always fun them fun but jeez, if they slowed down just a little then their: test scores/batch quality/performance review would be a lot less stressful, maybe he/she is what they call a scott in that blog. well, only one way to find out, “Hey! How you doin!” (damn, it worked! they’re not running away and they’re not at my throat!) “I need your help on a thing.” (would you look at that! don’t know why they call this personality type a Predator…) “Listen, I know you mean well, but we have rules here and we all think it’d be best that you stop…..”
  • (lol)

Enough for now. Am out to try and not let the hours slip.

*well, sure, there is so,thing to be said about the difference between writing quality versus quantity, but that’s for another post

** a totally clarklike way to express the thought

Share

2uesday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

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

(yeah…that little bastard in the left rear did, in fact, throw something at our hero, who is trying to take the proffered advice to 'just ignore them and they'll get bored and move on…')*

I must confess to a somewhat sordid and ego-centric motivation for my writing a post today, the second on as many days and quite out of the ordinary for this blog, at least as of late. That I never tire of writing about the benefits of the Wakefield Doctrine is not surprising, the way the mind has of turning things around in a manner at once misleading, (in the actual effects of certain behavior) and somehow obviously not what the original intention, is.

….whew!

At least my pendantric gland remains in robust good health! No, you’re right, I shouldn’t joke. This is serious.

…ok, I hear you. ( from the back of a classroom that, in my mind is as real as the plastic keys that shape the light into letters on my screen.) I hear “Hey! You’re writing about a personality theory that’s called, ‘the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers’!! Don’t worry about anyone taking this too seriously! And, since you’ve given voice to a character-in-a-visualization-of-an-idea, tell ’em what this ‘classroom’ looks like, why dont’cha.”)

Sure.

This classroom that’s providing me with a subtly engaging context for today’s discussion of the use of the Wakefield Doctrine? The desks have wrought-iron frames that are bolted to the floor, they aren’t simply uprights to support the desk and the seat. These frameworks have curves and almost classical lines, filigree in dark bronze. The desk itself is a slanted surface of wood (maybe maple… yeah, probably maple) that’s hinged along the top edge, where there continues a 3 inch level band of wood, with a groove running from left to right for pencils and a circular hole on the right side for the bottle of ink that you’ll never be given. Inside is simply space for your dotted-middle lined pad of paper, spare flash cards and a chipped-and-picked-at (for ammunition) brick of flesh-colored gum eraser. Oh, yeah and two Lindy pens well-tooth-indented.

The classroom is 5 rows across and seven deep. The nuns are nothing if they’re not orderly. In the very back of the room is what you love to hear referred to as ‘the wardrobes’… pretty much closets with folding doors and a double row of brass coat hooks. There are two doors to the corridor with windows at adult height and a single inward-tilting transom window. There is a pole in the back of the room to operate these windows. The blackboard is black and there are 4 black felt erasers (with a red and white label on the non-erasing surface) in a metal tray running along the lower edge. Across the wall, just above the blackboard are the letters of the alphabet, (capital and small) in script. Above the row of letters, in the dead center is a crucifix. The teacher’s desk is entirely wooden, and her chair does not have wheels. The floors are tile (greenish and black in a checkerboard pattern). There is a black and white clock on the inside wall, well above reach. All your friends are there…

 

hey, sorry!  wordisthenics time is over for the morning. Will try to get back later in the day. Feel free to leave any (additional) classroom details in the Comments

Share

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