Six Sentence Story -the Wakefield Doctrine-

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

Sitting at my ‘desk’ waiting for the sun to turn the glass in front of my desk back into glass, rather than blackboard and chalk. Six Sentence Story warm-up day is what it is and I figured I’d interrupt my solitaire-as-meditation session and mess of the plain white space of a blank post.

So rumour has it that zoe (the host of this here bloghop here) has given us the word ‘DRESS’ as this week’s prompt word. (For new Readers and participants to be) the idea is to write a story employing the prompt word and, just before hitting ‘Publish’ be able to count six periods. No more and no less. (As implied, the goal is six sentences. Whether you’re going the James Joyce ‘do-you-see-anything-in-my-head,-real-or-imagined-that-suggests-that-I-am-thinking-in-simple-noun-verb-object-constructs-if-so-please-point-it-out’ style or the more familiar Hemingway ‘I can do that. Six sentence, right? Sure thing.’ The fun is in the process (and so is the devil and for some reason, God.)

DRESS

“Do you like my dress, Mr. Devereaux?”

Simone Sans, the newest dancer at Bottom of the Sea Strip Club and Lounge stood half a menu away from my right forearm, the reflective fabric of her dress tried to be a mirror and failed quite enjoyably.

I sat at my usual booth, ashtray and ‘silver’ware standing guard on my drink, the tabletop, all ring-stains and cigarette burns had been shellacked so many times it looked like petrified wood. I smiled at the twenty-going-on-lost girl, “Sure, I like it, but I thought you were in the business of being non-dressed?”

She laughed and hip-bumped my arm, the playful gesture an unstated compliment; in her line of work, physical contact with the patrons was as un-professional as a neurosurgeon bringing a meatball grinder into the operating room, nothing in the rule books says you can’t, but it wouldn’t be wise.

Simone took a half-step back, did a pirouette ending in a curtsy which caused the hem of her dress to rise upwards, the hint of pleasure as subtle as neon on a bar sign.

 

Share

Phinish the Photo Pfriday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

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

Today we join Kristi and Kenya at the newly revamped Finish the Sentence Friday bloghop. The primary change was to provide a different ‘theme’ or prompt, each week. There’s a chart out there that Kristi put on the group’s page on ‘the Facebook’. It tells one what needs to be done, wordistically-speaking.

So this week it’s… (hold on, let me do a copy paste)

Finish the Sentence Friday is a link-up where writers and bloggers come together to share their themselves with a particular prompt (different formats each week of the month). If you’d like to participate, join our Facebook group. Link up your prompts below! Please no “link dumping.” If you include a link, comment on other posts.

 

Photo Share Friday – share a photo and share the story behind it.

So.

The story behind the photo.

This photo is, in a very real, yet quite imaginary sense, my very own: Wardrobe (CS Lewis), Tornado (L Frank Baum) Rabbit Hole (Lewis Carroll). The people in the photo are the namesakes of the central idea that brought me to the virtual world: the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers)

The Wakefield Doctrine is a perspective on the world and the people around us. It is easy to learn, fun to use and available only to those with the kind of curiosity that welcomes new ideas and the intellect to permit major league suspension of disbelief.

The people in the photo? They are the people from which we derive the three personality types1 of the Wakefield Doctrine. Before we go any further, I will state un-equivocally: the Wakefield Doctrine is gender, age and culture neutral. As it happened, the people around which the concept of the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers took form were three guys by the name(s): clark, scott, roger.

As with any personality type schema, the names are markers, the characteristics of the three types is where the fun (and usefulness) are at.

I’m thinking, ‘OK, the instructions for this week are clear enough, ‘share a photo and share the story behind it’. Do they mean the story of how the photo came to exist or do they want to know what the photo represents, symbolizes or simply ‘why this photo’.

Gotta go with Door Number Three.

You know how all those personality type systems with their clever little surveys and tests and all are so much fun to take and even more fun to share? “”Honey? Come here, there’s this Quiz on the Facebook, it so has you down to a ‘T'”.  The Wakefield Doctrine is exactly like that, except different.

Being a perspective, rather than a thing, the purpose, use and value of the Wakefield Doctrine is aid us in our efforts to better understand the world and people around us. The Doctrine approaches this by challenging us to discover how a person is relating themselves to the world around them. It (does this) by proposing that we all experience the world, to a small but certain extent, on a personal basis. This is referred to as a ‘worldview’. The theory holds that we are, all of us, born with the potential to experience the world (and, very importantly), grow up and develop in one of three worldviews, that of the Outsider(clarks), the Predator(scotts) or the Herd Member(rogers). At a very early age we end up in one and develop our coping strategies appropriate to the character of that worldview.

“But! But what the heck does this have to do with CS Lewis or, for that matter, the blogosphere? What about that?”

Guess I should describe the path from a chance insight in 1981 and typing today’s post.
In the summer of 2009, I was driving around with a friend talking about life, reality and ‘the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers’. For whatever reason, I said, ‘This theory is so true and so much fun, I got to do something more with it’. My friend replied, ‘I agree and, in my work in counseling, I do in fact use the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers at times. But the name is not good, too college dorm. You need a better name.’ I then said, ‘Alright then. From now on it’s the Wakefield Doctrine.’ He laughed, ‘That’s an excellent name. What are you going to do with this Wakefield Doctrine?’ I replied, ‘Well, I guess I need to start a blog. Let the world know all about it.’

The weird part? Until that Saturday evening, my opinion of blogs and bloggers was the rather typical, ‘Sure, now what makes you think that you have anything to say on this blog that anyone would care to read? What you had for breakfast? Maybe your opinion on the state of the world! Yeah, right.’ The thing is, with the decision came a passion that I cannot recall experiencing before, at least not in public and in the daytime. I found that writing posts was the opposite of work. I couldn’t wait to start the next one.

Now the really weird part. I didn’t change. I was still a clark. (I will leave the fun of discovering the full implications of that statement to new Readers). Suffice to say, all of my insecurities, fear of scrutiny, fear of looking like an idiot, fear of meeting people, all stopped existing in the context of writing this here blog here. Seriously. I found a strength (I already used the ‘passion word’) that not only had me going beyond my lifetime-accepted limitations, I enjoyed doing everything and anything I could to get the story of the Wakefield Doctrine out to as many people and readers as I could. This ‘everything’, included joining my first bloghop. Yep! Finish the Sentence Friday (and the Facebook) was a threshold I crossed that brought me into contact with many I still value as friends.

…the actual photo? Taken in the mansion at Harkness Memorial State Park on the shores of Long Island Sound in the town of Waterford, Connecticut.

Guess that says it all. The photo I’m sharing this particular Friday explains how it is I’m here sharing this photo.

1) hey! I was down here getting ready to disclaimer whatever it was I thought I should, to head-off any criticism of ‘over-reaching’ or ‘being silly’ with the terms I use to describe the Doctrine. You know, something to the effect that ‘this is all based on anecdotal evidence and does not claim status as…’ then it struck me, ‘Well, duh, clark. Give the readers some credit, why don ‘cha?’ Ain’t a chi square, distribution analysis or bell curve within fifty metres* of your blog.’
I thank you, future Readers, for reminding me to stay with what makes this Wakefield Doctrine so unique and fun… the fun and uniqueness of it!

* lol, sorry, couldn’t resist

 

Share

January 1, 2018 -the Wakefield Doctrine-

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

‘Una and Phyllis sitting on the bridge at the pond on a single-digit temperature afternoon.’
(landscape orientation)
Three quarters of the photo is of winter-bare trees, background woods and a snow-covered bridge identifiable as such by the repeating divisions of the top surface, as the snow is so light and dry as to allow the gaps between each plank to show dark. Una and Phyllis are in the lower right quarter of the photo. Una is the triangular shaped fur-covered lifeform who appears to be smiling, if for no other reason than she has the quality of living in the moment. Phyllis is the blue, black and grey shape to Una’s left. Phyllis is smiling as she is practicing the way of life that permits such a response, despite the conditions of the external world at the moment.
I am behind the camera assuring both that ‘that’s a great shot! it’s a wrap’.

the Wakefield Doctrine is a perspective; inherent in all perspective is a new way of understanding.

the Wakefield Doctrine is a tool; (one definition) of a tool is, ‘an artifact created to enhance and multiply the intended effect of an effort’.

the Wakefield Doctrine is fun; fun has been defined as ‘the byproduct of relating ourselves to the world around us in a manner that meets the external demands of the world while leaving the opportunity to be creative‘.

Thanks and a big shout-out to Friend of the Doctrine, Cynthia for her ‘first of the year clarity statement’ Which simply means that, as a clark, she has captured the spirit shared by all clarks.

Two and an eighth clarks….*
Cynthia and Una and John.
Una is sitting in her chair at the head of the table. Cynthia is standing to Una’s right. John is on the left side of the table, mostly ‘out of frame’.
No one is looking at the camera.
of course

As per the above definition, the work in the Summer of the years past illustrates that one (circumstance’s) effort (and labor (and expenditure of energy)) is fun when those involved contribute (creativity includes assembly) to producing a thing of utility and value.

And so, in the time that unfolds into the next culturally arbitrary division of time aka the ‘New’ Year, we here at the Doctrine will take up our friends challenge to have an effect on the world by finding ways to become a more and better self.

(Clearly that admonition is hypo-grammatical both literally and figuratively.)

The third ‘definition’ of the Wakefield Doctrine above mentioned fun. It is. Fun. For example, from one of the earlier posts in the blog, a discussion of jobs.

All jobs, employment, occupations, avocations, professions, missions, crusades, escapades and ways that we chose to earn money fall into one of three categories:

Scientist, Salesman and Machine Operator.

  1. Scientist is (for our purposes) the one who wants, no, make that needs to discover the unknown and upon discovery wants to share it with others. clarks, it has been noted elsewhere are the creative one of the three, creative in the purest sense of the word.
  2. Salesman is the one who wants to change others, to get them to conform to his/her will.  A scott will get others to do things just because if she is the one directing others then no one is directing her.
  3. Machine Operator is a person who believes that the only tasks worth doing is the one with a defined set of variables, anything from engineer to accountant to musician.  Rogers tend to be the most excellent of musicians from a technical standpoint. (If you had a band comprised of a clark, a scott and a roger, the scott would be the ‘front man/woman’, the roger would play lead and the clark would play rhythm (but also be the main songwriter).

So get out there and look around.  What do you like to do for work or for fun? I guarantee that whatever it is, it will fit into one of these three jobs and more than likely it will correspond to whatever it is you are (clark or scott or roger).

 

Share

Tuesday -the Wakefield Doctrine- ‘the truly user-friendly day of the week

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

There is a post (or two) somewhere in the archives that look at the ‘Days of the Week’ from the perspective of the Wakefield Doctrine and seek to identify the days that are ‘good days’ for people of each of the three personality types. Some are megaphone-obvious, like Saturday and scotts or Mondays and rogers or Tuesday and …everyone! But, especially clarks.

Why is that? Why does the sub-title use the slightly arrhythmic phrase ‘truly user-friendly’? Unfortunately the word ‘mild’, is nearly harmless, there’s absolutely nothing in what it implies that anyone could take issue with, “…and temperatures will be mild today.”  “Don’t worry, your child is exhibiting the normal signs of the flu which includes running a mild fever.” It does, at least on the surface, seem to be a complimentary assertion (of the character or quality of a person or a worldview).

So what’s wrong with ‘mild’? What would cause a blog writer to begin a post with an apologia?

I don’t know. Nothing I guess. Don’t give it a second thought. Sorry I brought it up.

(Interruption for a Wakefield Doctrine insight. You know how we have descriptions (metaphoric and otherwise) of the world as it is experienced by those of the three personality types?

  • scotts ranging across the savannah hungry and impatient, take a moment to play with young pack members or sleep in the shade with one eye half-open;
  • clarks standing in the shadows, moving carefully, watching and, like self-animated marionettes, encircle their arms, hugging empty space in practice embraces, seeing more detail in the actions and plans of the others, the shadow-light allowing a closer insight and
  • rogers moving through the day, across the world, in unison of spirit, competing with the other Members of the Herd, not for supremacy, rather for positioning and increased centrality to the others in their local part of life.

To further our insight into ‘the other two’ worldviews we strive to infer from the actions, reactions, distractions and attractions exhibited by the person we are trying to better understand. It would seem that I’m implying that there is something about the quality of ‘mildness’, as it exists in the reality of a clark, that they (the clarks) feel is nothing to be overly proud of. But I’m getting off track. Back to the post.)

So Tuesday is the Mildest Day of the Week. Sure. I get that. Monday is over, Friday is a lifetime away and Wednesday, (‘hump day’ to rogers, they love to have almost-clever labels in their world. Know someone who insists their car has a name? roger…. unless she’s a girl…and it’s her first car…. and even then, she won’t really mean it.  rogers will.  lol (Go ahead, put your ‘You don’t know what you’re talking about and besides…and this whole Doctrine things isn’t anything but…’ in a comment, please.)

Anyway.

I did want to get in one other concept that carries weight, especially in the worldview of clarks:  expectations and pre-expectations.

As we know from ‘the Everything Rule’, these two conditions exist for all three personality types. However, when considered in the context of clarks, they provide excellent illustrations of the unifying principle of the Doctrine, which is: ‘we use the perspectives of the Wakefield Doctrine to allow us to better understand how we relate ourselves to the world around us.’

That’s all we have time for this morning. Be sure to write in your un-answered questions!

Share

Tuesday -the Wakefield Doctrine- ‘..of occupations, avocations and worldviews’

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

(Refresher: the Wakefield Doctrine maintains that we, all of us, are born with the potential to experience reality, (and the world). in one of three characteristic manners: as does (an) Outsider (clarks) or a Predator (scotts) or the Herd Member (rogers). At a certain early age, (the Doctrine tells us), we settle into one of these three ‘worldviews’; we become clarks or scotts or rogers. We do not lose the potential to relate to the world as do ‘the other two’, they are available if we but find ways to access them.

The Wakefield Doctrine wears the label of ‘personality theory’, but it really isn’t. What it really is, is a perspective on the world, the people in our lives and our ownselfs. The Doctrine is a tool for adding to, enhancing our understanding (of the world and the people and ourselves), but has little interest in any whys or wherefores. The goal is to add to our understanding and appreciation of ‘how we relate ourselves to the world around us‘. (Not, ‘how we relate to the world around us’, rather ‘how we relate ourselves to the world around us’. Big difference.)

And so, since it, (the principles of the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers) is nothing more than an additional perspective, what good is it?*

The cool thing about self-improvement and the Wakefield Doctrine is that we don’t have to acquire anything that we don’t already possess. Thinking that you need to learn to be more demonstrative, more accessible on an emotional level? No problem, your rogerian aspect will totally help. Need to temper your temper, pre-empt your impulsiveness? You have a clarklike aspect. Feel like you want to task risks, leave behind the caution and conservativeness? Just check in with your scottian aspect.

So it’s all there, provided you can let it out. And that will be the topic of our next post.

 

 

*  The extent to which a new idea is accepted and embraced by others is very much influenced by the claims made by the originator (of such ideas). It is not about providing the answer to the ‘what’, as it is about making the answer to the challenging question of ‘what’s in it for me?’ immediately clear. Even more so, it depends upon providing this information cloaked in the appearance of being widely accepted and incontrovertibly true and certain. (Which, for one of the three worldviews, is a totally redundant description).  If this is a valid observation1, my own predominant worldview is very much a factor. Not in a good way. Let me explain2.

It will help to consider this: there are three jobs/occupations/avocations/hobbies/styles-of-effort-to-influence-those-around-us. (Yes, just three).

The three jobs are: scientist, salesman and machine operator.

The scientist is concerned with a world of ideas, reveling in explanations and laboring to refine proofs of principles that underlie the workings of the world and (especially) the people in it. The salesman lives for the people they encounter each day, it is not simply about getting them to buy his/her product (or service or convictions or willingly-submit-to-whatever-it-is-the-salesman-wants…at that particular moment), it is about the interaction/negotiation/the ‘Close’. The machine operator lives for the precise execution of rules and laws, relationships and ideals, they find joy (and frustration) in learning the correct way to do job/cook a meal/build a society/live life.

As you’ve probably guessed, each of our three ‘personality types’ is more appropriate to one of these jobs than the others3.

  1. clarks (Outsiders): scientists. if you think hard and observe the world around you, the rules that people follow to feel a part of the group will become knowable. (Career recommendations: school teacher (elementary or college), nurse (pediatric or geriatric) sheepherder, librarian, counselor (effective but not successful), one-term politician)
  2. scotts (Predators): salesmen… I don’t really need to give examples here, do I? The guy on TV, the politician, the early developer in school doesn’t care if you buy or not (well, sorta) that they get to try to get you to (buy what they have/believe what they want you to/do what they feel like doing is what life is all about. (Career suggestions and ideas: cop (or robber), surgeon (but not physician and totally not an oncologist), nurse (charge nurse) teacher (High School industrial Arts, Gym or French…)
  3. rogers (Members of the Herd): machine operator.. precision is the result of following the rules and precise application of the rules is how you get to that point, there is a right way to do everything (add and subtract/machine aircraft parts/play in a symphony/treat cancer/live life… being the best among many is its own reward. (Careers: Accountant, attorney (prosecuting) physician (oncologist), chemist, scientist, philatelist, chef (but not cook), firefighter politician (successful, multi-term)

That’s about all we have time for today. Thanks for coming by.

….the point? My misgivings about how I present the Wakefield Doctrine? Wellll I guess to learn the answer, you’ll just have to keep reading the posts.

1)  see!?!?! damn!

2) enough with the explanation!! tell ’em what it’ll do for them!

3) the Wakefield Doctrine has something called ‘the Everything Rule’. It states, somewhat obviously, that ‘everyone does everything, at one time or another’. What that means is even though the most effective police (in the present culture) are scotts, that does not mean that there are no clarklike or rogerian police men and women. And, chemists are more likely to be rogers, yet you can find scotts and clarks in that profession. (look for the exploding laboratories). The point is, how well one does in a profession or job is very much related to how (that) job or profession manifests to them. One of the reasons that rogers make excellent accountants is that, for them, the world is quantifiable and knowable. So working with numbers is a joy, in and of itself.

 

Share