the Wakefield Doctrine

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

While the action in FictionLand is cranking up, i.e. Six Sentence Story, this is still the Wakefield Doctrine. And the raison d’être for our little blog has not changed. It’s always been about presenting the principles of our little personality theory in a manner both entertaining and easily understood.

oh yeah? I’ll step in yer frickin river as many times as I

July 11, 2010

Yeah, it is Sunday again.  And no, there is no rule that we have to get all weird (alright, weirder) on Sunday Posts.  But the Doctrine allows for virtually anything, as long as there is something (in the Post) that advances the understanding of the Wakefield Doctrine.
The Wakefield Doctrine Lesson of the Day:  talking yesterday to a person who has recently encountered this blog.  She expressed some concern about knowing for certain which of the three (clarks, scotts or rogers) she was, which is appearing to be a rather common experience among new Readers and as such is important to us here at the Doctrine.  We want everyone to immediately get the Wakefield Doctrine and then conribute to the blog through Comments.  As to the un-comfortable part,  I suspect there is an element to the writing “style” of these Posts that imparts some kind of “you better get this right” vibe to the First Time Reader.  Damn.Hey Readers, yo. (No you’re wrong, I am totally entitled to affecting any (writing) style, slang, patois, pidgin, dialect or any other form of projectile cool (including a delusional perception of sounding cool, inevitably limited to my own imagination) if I want to cause I am the one writing this Post and who is anyone else to say that I am not in fact a dreadlocks-sportin, surfboard-on-the-car drivin’, pants-worn-down-about-mid-thigh wearin’ scott or roger or, for that matter clark(except the part about the surfboard and pants and dreadlocks but otherwise, I’m there) Sorry, lost control of the parentheseses.  Besides, the job is open, anyone got a Post you want to write then step right up.  Let us know in the form of a Comment and we will be too damn happy to let you write one of these rascals.Anyway, the important thing here is this:  the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and roger) proposes that all of us start life with the qualities ascribed to  three (‘personality’) types (clarks, scotts androgers).  Further, at some relatively early point in life, we begin to experience the world mostly from the perspective of one (of these three).  At that point we can say we are a clark or a scott or a roger.  Having said that, we always retain the qualities/capabilities/capacities of the other two types; but except for you Readers, we all seem to forget that we have a rogerian side or a scottian aspect.
The reason you are reading this is that you have the intellectual flexibility to imagine that which is not. (Yes, I know what you clarks are thinking at this point, but let’s just keep that to ourselves for now, shall we?)
The short form (lol, as if) is this: you already know this shit.  The Doctrine is a productive, unique and fun way to look at the behavior of those around us and understand why the people in our lives act the way that they do.  Pretty simple, isn’t it?So, New Reader…relax take a deep breath (not too loudly, scott) (not too dramatically, roger) (breath! clark, breath!).  There is no rush.  Since you are already all three, deciding for yourself which of the three you are predominately will take care of itself.
The most frequent experience of new Readers is to say, “Yeah, I get the theory, but sometimes I am like  one type and at other times one of the other two. Almost as if I am all three”.
To which we say, “Very good!  Many of us feel that way when we start, then we frickin read what is written about being all three and it being predominately one of the three and we get over it!”  Jeez…come on, people I know you have an extra capacity to understand new shit or you wouldn’t still be reading this, you would have long since moved on to crocheting-with-emily.com or wrench-and-sports.com.  Relax, trust your instincts and get over it.  Have fun! (clarks, see us after class and we can help you apply an overly long, convoluted, tail-eating definition with complete instructions on how-to have fun).And write a Comment.  Win a hat (for your damn head).

You want pressure?  I give you pressure…watch the following music video and tell me (through a Comment) if the Conductor is a clark or a scott or a roger…(come on scotts, some of you must like classical music)…but the challenge is identifying the type.
Not easy, of course, but I don’t want anyone to feel that they should not submit an answer….there is a hat (for someone’s damn head in it) for the correct answer!

ed note link below was bad (this is from 2010) but if you would like an updated quizlet, just go ahead and write in the comments.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bZwgLrVEw84…put down your keyboards, your time is up…answers are in…remember what we say here at the Doctrine,  “there are no stupid questions, just your questions”

(Come on Readers, lighten up.  Take a chance, clark; don’t feel threatened, roger;  hey scott, you can do this)

*

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

We had a story in mind, towards the end of last week, that felt like a good one to re-tell as part of whatever this Tuesday thing is trying to become. Unfortunately it’s been lost in the clutter of the daily effort to a) stay on the Path with Heart* and 2) be on the alert for the best inciting incident to push this project along.

We left ourselfs last week with the definition of ‘the Everything Rule’. This is, of course, the…

damn! just went back and reviewed the previous post. We’re tempted to re-take a narrative path that was here, in this post, before I sicc’d the back-delete cursor on the words.

Here’s a question: does writing a memoir (or history or biography or simply a story of a tool for better understanding the world around us) necessarily require… Wait. Stop. We answered our own question.

But what does survive, this (most recent) attempt to sabotage our effort to write the definitive book on the Wakefield Doctrine, is the use of the term ‘manifest’ in the context of the three predominant worldviews.

As an adjunct (or extension or some cool term of rhetoric) to the Everything Rule is the recognition that how a thing manifests in the reality of the Outsider (clark) or the world of the Predator (scott) or the life of the Herd Member (roger) is directly affected by the character of the person’s relationship with the world.

Enough. Time has run out for this Tuesday.

That said, permit us to take refuge in what constitutes one of the most important gifts we’ve received over the years. Specific to this week’s Memoir post is the insight that it is easier to edit than it is to write (on a blank page)*.

Remind us to do two things in next Tuesday’s post: a) go into why the Wakefield Doctrine is of use to clarks, as opposed to scotts and rogers, and 2) tell the story of ‘The Spot that Moved’.

* interesting that I feel a push-back on this idea from both my scottian and my rogerian aspects. each for a different ‘reason’. But we are exploring the concept of how things manifest differently in each of the three. Won’t attempt to go too deeply, but a scott would favor the illusion of energy inherent in a ‘single take’ and a roger would sow doubt about anything that wasn’t already an effective narrative.

1. last time
2. the time before that (the inaugural post)

* a cool phrase borrowed from one of Carlos Castaneda’s books.