…(That was a refreshing little naplet, blogorically speaking. But now, back to the work at hand…)

Welcome! Especially to our new friends in Australia, and Israel and of course, our friends in Slovenia!

Today we have kind of a special treat. Two of our  Downsprings¹  are helping us out by participating in a little… T&A? err, PTA?,  I got it! Q&A!

We have had people tell us, after a recent Post(…breaktime…), that they felt they got a better understanding of the Wakefield Doctrine when it was discussed in a context that was ‘applicable’ to everyday life. (Yeah, like in everyday life people decide to sneak up on a certain class of person and do something indefinable to them and then report back a score). Sure thats an everyday application in, maybe say,  Zanaxville.

Anyway, we have a set of questions about the Doctrine that was presented to Joanne and Glenn (our Downsprings) and their answers are recorded in the following interview.

A little background first.
Glenn is probably the leading scott in terms of possessing both knowledge and (a practical) understanding of the Wakefield Doctrine. As a matter of fact, he helped instigate the process whereby the Doctrine was taken out of the realm of  oral tradition and brought into the ‘real world’ of this blog. You will have to make allowances for him, after all he is a scott.
Joanne comes to us from the interested observer category, she has been witness to over 25 years of discussion and development of the Doctrine.  Enhancing her position as a Downspring, Joanne offers as much a normal persons interpretation and application of the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers as we have in the group. She is a roger, but with a skepticism of the whole thing that helps us stay in touch with the thinking of the everyday person-on-the-street, in terms of applying the Wakefield Doctrine.
(They are both behaving quite well and are deserving of our respect and admiration.)

(To the interview):

Which of the three are you?

[Glenn]     Scott
[Joanne]    I am predominantly, a Roger.

 What is the ‘best’ single positive trait or quality do you have as such?

[Glenn]      I’m wicked funny
[Joanne]    I am sensitive to other’s feelings.

The most negative single characteristic or quality?

[Glenn]     I can be reckless—verbally and behaviorally
[Joanne]     I pay too much attention to detail, although, sometimes that is a positive trait.

 Which trait or personality quality do you have that you feel is most mis-understood by people of the other two forms. (For example: clarks don’t get this about me; or rogers don’t get this about me.)

[Glenn]     Clarks don’t understand that I act mostly out of a desire to have fun—not out of a desire to hurt anyone. Rogers don’t understand anything. They eat the grass and wait to be killed. They LOVE to feel like victims, so they perceive everything a scott does as “cruel”—and then they have a feelings festival—hurt, angry, sad, –the equivalent of a roger orgasm. Fuck them.
[Joanne]    The attention to detail is always misunderstood by the Scott that I am around often.  Just try observing me and the Scott trying to put something together.  We were putting a shed together one time, and I was standing in the corner frantically reading the directions while the Scott was banging nails.  I kept telling her to stop..and finally convinced her to read the directions first. I seem to be less sure about discerning clarks from the other two.  I’m not sure which people I know are clarks, so I can’t comment on how they misunderstand me.
   

If someone were to ask, ‘what is the surest way to spot one of your kind in a crowded shopping mall?’ what would you tell them?

[Glenn]     Anyone talking to more than one person—and holding their attention.
[Joanne]    I’m not sure about that one.

You are at the funeral of a friend and are asked to say a very few words, complete the following: 

My friend was a clark and I felt…

[Glenn]     that he mostly enjoyed my company—and was more loyal than your best dog ever.
[Joanne]    ummm…let me think about that for a while.

My friend was a scott and I felt…

[Glenn]     an attachment to him based on competition—which evolved into respect as the years went by.
[Joanne]    I will miss my friend for her ability to just wing it in life

My friend was a roger and I felt…

[Glenn]     guilty that I didn’t indulge his incessant need for emotional validation and support. I feel bad. He thinks I found him to be a pain in the ass. He’s right.
[Joanne]    I will miss my friend for … so many, many, reasons.  There were so many wonderful things about her..thoughtfulness, empathy, sensitivity….etc.

Finally, tell us what you think the practical value, if any, of the Wakefield Doctrine is.

[Glenn]     When rogers piss me off, I remember that they are rogers and cannot help it. They are doing the only thing they can do.
[Joanne]    It’s entertaining and I think if we know which type someone is, it may help us to understand their behavior and possibly not take some of their behavior personally.

(Now say good night to the Sloveniaannnns)

[Glenn]    How do you say “fuck you” in Slovenian?
[Joanne]    Good Night, Slov

Wellie, wellie, well. Was that not nice? There is much here that can be discussed and elaborated upon. But the primary goal was to help the Reader ‘hear’ the Doctrine actually applied to a situation that all of us might experience. I am sure there will be questions.

There is a space below (this Post) for your Comments. Do not, I repeat, do not be shy or bashful. We would love to hear your thoughts or questions. If you have any ideas for an extension of the (above) series of questions to our Downsprings, by all means ask.

1) Downspring is a term to designate a member of the group of people made aware of the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers by one of the Progenitors. In the context of this blog, there are three Progenitors and four Downsprings (Glenn, Joanne, Denise and Phyllis) all seven people have full access to the blog and creation of the contents.