the Wakefield Doctrine

Ah, bravo Figaro!
Bravo, brayissimo;
fortunatissimo per verità!
Pronto a far tutto,
la notte e il giorno
sempre d’intorno,
in giro sta.

Miglior cuccagna per un barbiere,
vita più nobile, no, non si dà.
Rasori e pettini, lancette e forbici,
al mio comando tutto qui sta.

V’è la risorsa, poi, del mestiere
colla donnetta col cavaliere
Ah, che bel vivere, che bel piacere
per un barbiere di qualità!

Tutti mi chiedono, tutti mi vogliono,
donne, ragazzi, vecchi, fanciulle:
Qua la parrucca. Presto la barba
Qua la sanguigna. Presto il biglietto
Figaro … Figaro
Son qua, son qua.
Figaro… Figaro…
Eccomi qua.
Ahimè, che furia!
Ahimè, che folla!
Una alla volta, per carità!
Figaro su, Figaro giù
Pronto prontissimo son come il fulmine:
sono il factotum della città.
Ah, bravo Figaro!
Bravo, bravissimo;
a te fortuna non mancherà. ‘
(The above is from a Libretto from different source, if any Italian speaking Readers would Comment if above is even close to video lyrics)

I can explain!  Really, I can give you a rational basis for todays…Post?

Look, some Posts are well planned and (hopefully) well executed expositions of an idea or a theme, something that says, ‘we have all been thinking about… now that you mention it… since you asked, the answer to your question is…’ A Post that answers questions or provides valuable information.
The previous Post (‘…Pulled out of San Pedro late one night..’) is a perfect example of a rational and reasonable little Post.

Today’s Post….maybe not as much.
But hey, there was the (…when the moon hit your eye like a big pizza pie…) that was a little bit of the, (as roger might say)  ‘spontaneous conception.’ school of Post writing. And there have been other Posts that seem to show up in the morning, screaming like a chicken with it’s head cut off “…write about this…write about this!!” (Apologies to any PETA PALS, my sub-conscious apparently has managed to get an ‘outside line’, as we used to say in the day of rotary dial phones.)

But it is my Post and you are (my) Readers, so the least I can do is come up with some explanation as to why we are watching opera, lyrics in Italian, video with English sub-titles. Surely there is something in the path I followed this morning (to end up here) that will lend even the slightest patina of rationality.

No, no there isn’t.

So screw it. Here is how it all went down.
Minding my own business this morning and decided to listen to the ‘famous Barber of Seville song’. (There has got to be a secret ‘sons of Rossini’ sect out there planning to attack Warner Brothers and steal all the Looney Tune archives.  Bugs and Company having single-handedly destroyed most of this (and other reasonably enjoyable) opera by having Bugs or Elmer (in drag no doubt) doing an acceptable (to my 6 year old Saturday morning cartoon watching ears) rendition of this and other Great Music.

Anyway, not really a fan of opera, but this particular morning as I listened to (Figaro’s Aria), I could hear lyrics! Not just ‘figaro, figaro’. Sure, the lyrics have been there all along, but this time I heard them. This Figaro guy, he was telling a damn story!

And whatever, sub-conscious energy switch was thrown, I was stuck.
I mean, it was instant the hell with work! Find out more about the opera, find a video, do whatever has to be done so that I can to do Post all about this fine piece of music.

So, here you have it. Figaro’s Aria with libretto included.

And, yes  Figaro was totally a roger.

The Opinions expressed in the ‘Interview’ portion of this Post are solely those of the participants, and may or may not reflect the beliefs, assumptions or precepts represented by the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers), its Progenitors or anyone else.  This ‘Interview’ is presented for educational and informational purposes, and may not be reproduced in any medium without the express written permission of the Owners, Progenitors and/or Creators.  The ‘Interview’ section of this Post is not meant to prevent or treat any diseases or conditions, side effects may include, dizziness, confusion, increased thoughts of suicide and sexual activity.  If these conditions worsen or persist for more than 4 hours immediately consult a professional.  Assumptions and conclusions are for comparison purposes, your conclusions and or assumptions may vary.  Read carefully and follow the yellow brick wall, binyons.

(clark) “Glenn, how are you doing?  I’ll be the one conducting this ‘interview’ for the purposes of illustrating certain aspects of the Wakefield Doctrine.  And with me are Denise and AKH. Denise you know cause she is one of the group of Downsprings, AKH has been writing Comments and ‘what not’ and is way ‘up on the Doctrine.’  They may ask a few ‘follow-up questions, you don’t mind, do you?

(clark)   How are you ‘today’?
(Glenn)   I’m alright Little Buddy. How are you?

(clark)   Lets start with music.  What do you think about music? Take it/Leave it?  Why…
(Glenn)  Cannot live without music. Love Rock and Roll—Anything prior to 1967.  Love good singer songwriters—John Prine, Fred Eaglesmith, Tom Russell.  Love Big Sandy and his Fly-Rite Boys.  Crazy about Los Straitjackets.

(clark)  They say we can pick our friends but we can’t pick our family. (You have heard that saying right?)  Trade 2 family members for 2 friends.  Tell us why (both getting rid of and picking up option on…like baseball).
(Glenn)  Trade away mother—Pick up a mother who really wants her children to be happy rather than one who dishes out guilt and victimhood.  I would replace her with anyone else’s mother.  Father—Trade him away for being a blank space and replace him with my deceased friend, Al, who was more of a father to me than most fathers are to most sons.

(clark) Let’s shift gears here (ha ha).  You are on the road, car behind you starts the tailgate thing, when you don’t get out of their way they do the high beam thing, what do you do?  (Same questions but this time you have your children and kids in the car.)
(Glenn) Slow way the fuck down and change lanes in front of them if they try to pass.  Keep doing it until they back off. Ideal ending: They pull out to pass recklessly and ram a gas truck head on resulting in a giant fireball explosion killing both drivers and lots of nearby helpless villagers.

 ****(AKH) Hey wait! You didn’t answer the question if you had kids in your car! It’s one thing to risk your ‘life’ but what about your children? (And I don’t mean in the other car, that’s their problem but you have your children in the car…) So?
(Glenn) Didn’t see that additional part of the question.  Same answer.  I’ve done it.  Probably not right to do it, but you can’t let some dipshit disrespect you on the highway, man.  You gotta respond.  Let the fucker know he picked the wrong guy to act like a fucking two year old with.  But, no finger.  That is a helpless, impotent gesture best left to the rogers.  Just look away as you finally drive on.  Like you never knew he was there.  Infuriating.  Flipping the bird lets him know he got to you and that you have no idea what to do about it.  Slowing way down and changing lanes is ….I don’t know…ominous.  You’re willing to get dangerous that way—so what else are you capable of?

****(Denise):  Seriously? Wow.  Hm. 
(Glenn)   Do my answers shock you, Denise?   

(clark)The Wakefield Doctrine…what do you think about it? strengths? weaknesses? (Glenn)It is fun and useful.  It helps me know myself better.  It also help me understand why some people piss me off.

****(AKH)   Hey, I get my dose of Wakefield Doctrine every day, you got to admit it is really something, don’t you?  Seems like pretty weak praise from the ‘high energy scottian personality type’
(Glenn) Good point AKH.  So, let me elaborate( or let me elongate as the rogers might say..). (parentheses for you Clark)—It IS fun.  It is internally consistent and logical.  It’s weakness?  Any system that REDUCES the complexity of the world as this surely does—necessarily  leaves out important data.  It is something of a backwards telescope.  But to simplify, you must eliminate—so it only makes sense that any such system would have this weakness.  One of the things that appeals to me about the doctrine is that it is a SECRET way to understand people.  Most people do not possess this perspective.  It is like a hidden advantage.

****(Denise):  But you didn’t answer the question completely. Everyone knows it’s fun and obviously it can be useful.  Do you really care that now (w/the help of the WD) you can know why some people piss you off?  Do you think it helps you be a better person?
(Glenn)It is not my goal to be a better person.  What a fucking rogerian goal!  I’m a pretty good person as I am.  I’m not in a campaign to improve.  It does make me a (slightly) more effective person.  It also amuses me.  Hence, it is fun.  If I ever decide I want to be a “better person” (whatever that is), I’ll look elsewhere, not to the doctrine.  In fact, the doctrine might be the last place to look.  Because one of its weaknesses is it seems to let people off the hook.  Nobody is an asshole anymore. “Oh that’s just how rogers are..” Or, “All scotts are pushy”, or “ don’t expect a lot of enthusiasm from her, She’s a clark”.  The doctrine is morally neutral.  That is both a strength and a limitation.  But, it seems to me that it therefore cannot be used to “be a better person”—again whatever the fuck THAT is..

 (clark) Last question: You can do anything you want tomorrow.  A day without consequences. Still all of the same people and places, but you can do anything you want with that day.  What do you do and why don’t you do it today?
(Glenn)I get sex from new partners. Lots of wild uninhibited crazy sex.  Later, I jump on a plane and go to Key West just because I can.  I won’t do it today because there are consequences.  Job, marriage, finances, –all that Rogerian shit.

****(Denise):  :) You make me laugh!  Ah, so you adhere to the constraints put on you by “all that Rogerian shit”.  Are you sure you are a scott?  Well, are ya punk?
(Glenn) I’m a scott, but I’m not a fool.  I DO take more chances with all of the consequences listed above than most people do—but I try to be smart about it.  I adhere to some constraints, usually grudgingly, because my self- interest requires that of me.  But clarks question posited no consequences.  So, therefore total hedonism is the only response possible.  In THAT circumstance, my self-interest demands total self-indulgence.  In the real world, where scotts actually live, one must pursue one’s self-interests with a bit more calculation.  By the way, Denise, I love when you call me punk like that.  Kinda turns me on…

(clark)Thanks for your time. You are fairly interesting and much more polite than I thought a scott would be…
(Glenn) Fuck you!

(clark)…yeah speaking of that, if you had to be one of the other 2 (clark or roger) which would you be for a day and why?
(Glenn) I have written in this blog that I have been both of the other two styles at times in my life before.  Being a clark was fucking scary.  Being a roger was humiliating.  I guess I would be the roger though.  I prefer humiliated to the kind of scary that clarkhood causes.  Not knowing what is real is absolutely terrifying.  Nothing makes sense—or everything makes its own contradictory sense –all the fucking time.  No respite.  Constant disorientation.  Every day a new nightmare.  Fuck that!  Let me be a roger for just a day.  I’ll cry, be a victim, try to fit in, be emotionally whiny and immature—I can handle a day of that much more easily than I can handle the utter ambiguity of a clark’s world.

(clark) Well, speaking for the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers) and my two very able associates, thanks a lot for a look into the post Cambrian, mid-equatorial savannah-like environment that you people call home.

(Not to get too Columbo on you…but if you been watching the stats (the little red dots on the globe thing), then you know that we are getting all international at the Doctrine.  I added to the Tips to First Time Readers that: the Doctrine ‘is both gender and culture neutral’.  You being the ‘travelling Downspring  anything you want to say to our international Readers that might help them ‘get the Doctrine’ quicker?
(Glenn) Ok.  All you foreign jabakies, here’s how it is.  Three types of people.  Scotts, clarks, and rogers.  Scotts DO stuff. Clarks THINK stuff.  Rogers FEEL stuff.  Try to figure out which you are—and then determine which one other people are.  It is fun, and will help you understand the idiocy of other people more goodishly.  Scotts are salesmen.  Rogers are machine operators.  Clarks are scientists.  It’s remarkably simple and yet universally applicable.  Even in YOUR fucked up country.

Well, that was a refreshing change from the usual, ‘I would prefer to…blah…blah…(parentheses)…doctrine…ha ha’ Post, wasn’t it? (Don’t make me go get some parentheses, we are having such a good time).
I was originally going to do some kind of ‘lecture hall set-up’ complete with an implied dialogue with  late arrivals to a lecture hall.  But I got to the point where I was looking up the latin for ‘cast of characters’¹, and I caught myself. ‘Trying a bit too hard, clark?’  Fortunately I swiped and backspaced that shit away.

This ‘Interview’ did, in fact, occur involving the following real people: Glenn one of the original (scottian)Downsprings and Denise a (clarklike) Downspring and AKH(Almost Katherine Hepburn) who is one of the first to join us as a result of this blog.  She (AKH) has caught on to the Doctrine pretty damn quick and has made valuable contributions in such a way as to be a credit to her people.
What we did was start with original set of questions emailed to Glenn, his answers sent to Denise and AKH, their responses added, back to Glenn and done.

For any New Readers, the Wakefield Doctrine is a fun and interesting way to understand human behavior.  This blog has pages and Posts with information and insight that will give you the opportunity to see the people around you in a whole new light.  This ‘Interview’ is an illustration of the ‘worldview’ of a scott, but as you will see, there is no single set-in-stone description of a scott (or a roger or a clark), as much as the rogers out there may want to believe.  But to hear ‘a scott’ and ‘a couple of clarks‘ actually interact is helpful in understanding what the Wakefield Doctrine is all about.

So Welcome!  Read, learn, enjoy and leave a damn Comment.  Seriously, I know you are out there because that globe thing in the left-hand column says you are…

(Despite how Glenn sounds, (after all he is a scott) all are welcome and invited to participate in this noble venture.

(And you get to hang out with Slovinannssss!!)

Shit, for that matter you get to be associated with Virtual People along with Foreign People, how cool is that?  I did add that part above about ‘culture neutral’ simply because it is true.  The Virtual People reference is to ‘Friends of the Doctrine‘ from SL: Jen and Kino and Delilah(who has a blog of her own, listed in our blogroll.)

Ten Four

…Speaking of ‘ten four’, for any of our international readers (and for that matter some of our domestic fans) this Post’s subtitle is a couple of lines from a damn cultural treasure, “Hot Rod Lincoln’.  You need to hear the song performed in order to really get the rhythm of the lyrics, which is the genius of this song and makes it so much fun. Click here  (you’re welcome Glenn)

1) dramatis personae

Hello again from the clarkside of the universe!

Interesting dynamic possibly getting established in these Posts,  i.e. more from the Progenitor roger which we are not reluctant to say is welcome news for many of our Readers and Visitors. While so far, relatively few in numbers, the Posts (from the roger) have a way about them that is enjoyable, different from the ‘always informative, frequently creatively amusing, but sometimes too much information’ from yours truly. (either the clark or the scott, can you guess which?)

Anyway, the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers) is nothing if it is not constantly shifting, changing and trying to evolve. So while most of the Posts will still come from the same source, already the beginnings of a ‘sense of conversation’ is making itself apparent. The beauty part (as a certain timeshare rep was often heard to say) is that the Doctrine is the Doctrine. Really quite simple once the basic premise is established. The challenge has been (and will continue to be) presenting it in a manner that allows people from all walks of life to understand, find application in their lives and have fun with it.

The Posts that involve others in the original Wakefield Doctrine group (you have seen the term Progenitors and Downsprings) have been well received, so expect to see more Posts that are built around interviews, even conversations among these people. The varied perspective and different contexts is most informative. (Yes, yes I know… not exactly rogerian in my writing style, lol.) Also, we have people joining the effort through the avenue of Comments and Replys who have been very helpful in our efforts to make the Wakefield Doctrine your one-stop blog for ‘the-simplest-way-to-understand-what-the-hell-the-people-around-you-are-trying-to-do!’

In fact ( to channel my inner gangsta…) lets chill and give some shout outs (‘Apesadumbrado mi dialecto de la cultura es poco una hoja de metal esta mañana.) to our Friends in the ‘sphere:   Mel at ‘the Spatula’ (http://spatulainthewilderness.com/) as far as consistent quality at a ridiculous ‘rate of production’ , Mel is the man;  Jason at Project: Enlightenment (http://projectenlightenment.wordpress.com/) I go there a lot and even make Comments. (Jason has a good sense of humor which is fortunate, as I have at times in order to illustrate the reasoning behind my Comment, (on a question of spirituallity no less, and used a reference to Helen Keller jokes. hehe).   And, of course,  ‘ronin (http://renaissanceronin.wordpress.com/) he has been a frequent contributor of Comments/Replies to Posts. (Not everyone gets ‘ronin’s take on things, but if there is a harder working blog guy out there, I haven’t met them.)

Oh, oh (cue: Horshack from ‘Welcome Back, Kotter); Do want to thank some (non-blog owners) for their contributions. AKH (aka Almost Katherine Hepburn) new to the Doctrine written some very insightful Comments, good shit. (I meant that in a complimentary, keep the Comments coming sort of way), and MJM who is a (new) voice from the rogerian side of the world.

(Have I filled up enough white space yet?)

The Doctrine? What can I say about the Doctrine that has not already been said?  Nothing comes to mind but I don’t think I can ever say it often enough:

We all start with the attributes of all three and by the time we are 5 years old  we are (predominantly) a clark or a scott or a roger. There are no gender differences in the Doctrine, only in how we as individuals express our natures, very much as there are cultural differences. But a scottian female is as much a ‘act first, think later, essentially predatory being as is a scottian male. And the same for the rogers and the clarks. Those of us here, reading this are not typical of our forms. Most rogers would not ‘get it’ (as with clarks and scott). What we share is a capacity to imagine beyond ourselves, we can allow that maybe we do not know the final definition of reality. But just about everyone who as ‘gotten’ the basic premise of the Doctrine, seem to get a kick out of seeing the clarks, scotts and rogers in (their) everyday world. And the expression: ‘he/she is such a roger‘ is getting heard more and more.

Almost forgot, we are working on a ‘test’ or survey for the Doctrine should be showing up in a week or so! Stay tuned.
(If the internet in general and blogs specifically are not all about surveys, then I am going to turn in my keyboard.) (I mean, really  “What kind of animal are You”, “Do you FIt IN”, “WHY do boys want to run me over with their cars all the time”…take our test and find out why!)

Also to any of our SL friends reading. (LOCAL CHAT: Hello  lol) Hi Jen and Kino and anyone else….and…wait for it…..So long for now Sloviniaannssss!!!