Yes, I could publish a Post with only a subtitle and some aquisified1 music videos.
But that would be cheating2 and as we all know it is wrong3 to do that/this. So we won’t. But since we are on the subject of shortcuts as found in blogs of theories of personalities it would seem to beg the question4 which is a journalistic style of saying, hey fuck you I won the debate on the initial premise that I did not bring up and now, as the old joke goes, “we’re just haggling over price”.
Where was I? Shit! I forget…started doing the footnote thing which, which requires spending time to go and do some extra format thing so that the little number thingie shows up and then go back to the bottom of the page to write the footnotes5 which are the supposed punchline6. Damn, lost the thread.
When all else fails, get back to the reason for this blog: the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers)!
(…ok…I’m here….hellooo anyone around?….shit…don’t make me wake up the only imaginary character that is still around…Jimmy, of course! everyone else is off somewhere for the Summer Vacation).
Better now, back to our topic/theme/point-less Post.
What’s the deal with rogers? They always act so put upon. You know, you go up to one, ask for some help or (even) offer some help and what’s the first thing you get? Is it:
a) “why no I don’t mind giving you a hand”…
b) ” Hey! love to have the extra help on that, really appreciate it…” (or)
c) “What do you want? Can’t you see how busy I am? Man, you are really slowing me down, sure if you really, really need to lend a hand…wait you got that all wrong God…how did you get this far…this is the second time today this has happened to me…why does this always happen to me…everytime I go out of my way to help you people it is always the same thing, I have to do it all myself…I probably will have to do it all myself…yeah…thanks a lot.
Ok, Wakefield Doctrine Lesson of the Day!!! After seeing the above multiple choice question in print7 it became immediately clear that one of the trickier ways to know the type you are either dealing with or are observing is the different way a person responds to the other two types. Which is the long way8 to say, “the roger cited above is responding to either a clark or a scott, which of the two is it?
….put down your pencils.
The correct answer is “D” a clark. (Of course the other person is a clark, if the roger in this example were interacting with a scott, response “C” would have been the metaphorical equivalent of reaching out, grabbing salt and pepper, sprinkling it on his own head.)
The more interesting question is why is that a characteristic of the clark/roger interaction as opposed to the scott/roger interaction. And we will save that for another day. Right now I have to come up with a few more, “Man! how do they come up with this shit”!! Too funny” footnotes, some pictures or images to do the Lead in with and finally try to frame the music videos in a manner that will elicit a Comment from you people.
So on with the music. First up is the original and the second is a cover (by Prince). (Tell me Prince does not have style! Not just the girl rhythm section, anyone would think of that, it’s the initial setup with the bass player sitting on a couch. That is the creativity that is the hallmarks of those wacky clarks.)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1asHIOmHoQs1 (ah-quiz-if-fied) to use with or without specific and/or appropriate permissions
2 (chi-ting) to take advantage of/utilize resources from unsuspected and/or surprised suppliers
3 (roar-awng) the complementational aspect to conventional and/or societal approval
4 The Latin phrase for “beg the question” is petitio principii, which means “assume the initial point.”
5 Footnotes are most often used as an alternative to long explanatory notes that can be distracting to readers. Most literary style guidelines (including the Modern Language Association and the American Psychological Association) (lol) recommend limited use of foot and endnotes. However, publishers often encourage note references in lieu of parenthetical references. Aside from use as a bibliographic element, footnotes are used for additional information or explanatory notes that might be too digressive for the main text…Yeah I so totally agree!!
6 The final part of a joke; the word, sentence, or exchange of sentences that is intended to be funny and provokes laughter from the listeners.
That was quite a build-up for such a puny punch line.
7 …as opposed to ‘on screen’ in turn as opposed to represented by fuckin, heisenbergian, non-locational specific, frickin electrons
About clarkscottroger
Hey, Glenn baby – I need a script re-write ASAP. Can ya help me out?
(have you seen the rabbit lately…………rabbit?)
?
Anything for you, dollface. Tell old Uncle Glenn what the poblem is–and presto–I will craft an elegant solution. Have not seen the rabbit lately, but I DID see him–once. Years ago. Changed my life. So, what script needs a re-write? i can do it. Or is it a casting problem? (Not always the script). Quick–Alfred Hitchcock–clark, scott or roger?
why a roger, of course! (on the surface would seem to be counter-intuituve) but most film directors are rogers…
…tell about the rabbit…glenn, tell again about the rabbit…
Yes, do tell.
What script do you think?
yo glenn …the rabbit glenn…. come on. need to hear about the rabbit.
glenn, your audience awaits…yo (lol)
(since I think most of the fun of this blog is the ‘performance’ aspect of writing Comments, i.e. you know what you want to say, but can you write in such a manner that the Reader gets the point…)
and from a Doctrine perspective this should be fun (Ms. AKH excepted) you people (scotts) are more flap arms…jump up and down…”hey, hey!, Hey!!!…lol and given the nature of your topic, the rabbit, this should be fun…
“so may introduce to you, the act you’ve known for all these years”…
The fuckin’ rabbit….Hell of a story…Been a fucked-over, humped-up, distorted scott ever since the day I saw that fuckin’ rabbit. Driving down a highway..grey winter day. We drove by a newspaper box on the side of the road. I glanced at it as we passed. In the plexi-glass window I see what I swear is a fucking white and black rabbit jumping back and forth in the newspaper box. Weird thing to see. Thought about it for a few seconds and said to Clark..”Did you see a fucking rabbit in that box?” He did! We drove back and slowed down as we approached the box. The “rabbit” turned out to be just the play of light across the wavy plexiglass window. But clark told me that this was a profound, eye-opening moment for me. He said, “Glenn, for a little while, there really WAS a rabbit there–and you saw it” Some clarklike idea of perception is reality–something like that. I felt oddly excited thinking there would be a rabbit there. Then let down when it was not there.Then a little scared when clark said there WAS a rabbit–for a few seconds. Clark told me that clarks feel this way all the time. “Welcome to MY world, Buddy!”
That’s all bad enough. Two weeks later, we were driving in a rural section of the URI campus talking about that fucking rabbit. Just before dusk. A BLACK AND WHITE OVERSIZED RABBIT jumped right out in front of the car and ran in front of us for about a quarter of a mile. How often do you see black and white rabbits in the wild around here? I’ll tell you. FUCKING NEVER! The fabric of reality has always seemed a bit thin and tattery to me ever since. Fucking clark. I swear everything I just wrote is true. I’m still amazed and shocked by it. I tell people the story and they gasp when I tell about the rabbit in front of the car. Except Clark. He acts like he knew that fucking rabbit would show up–like it was fucking inevitable or something. What’s really scary? Clark does not see anything surprising, ironic, or unusual in the story. To Clark it just seemed like a normal occurence. That’s the trouble with fucking clarks. Evrything is possible–and nothing is impossible–and nothing is even improbable. LSD was invented so scotts and rogers could see what it feels like to be a clark for awhile. Clarks have no need for the drug. They already walk around seeing sounds and hearing colors. And for a couple of brief moments several years ago–I SAW THE RABBIT. Clark throws that phrase at me from time to time if get too dogmatically scottian. “But,Glenn….You saw the rabbit..” Meaning–“Don’t bullshit me that you don’t know what it feels like to be a clark.You saw the fucking rabbit, Glenn. Don’t try to convince me that you’re all scott!” Usually ends the argument. He’s right. I saw the fucking rabbit. Clark would explain it as time lines intersecting and crossing–or some bullshit like that. I don’t know. All I know is I saw the rabbit. Still makes me a bit queasy writing about it all these years later. To a scott, there are no timelines. There are no alternative realities. There’s the one reality–and my job is to eat it up. But…I saw the rabbit. I really did…
(true dat)
If I might, I would like to submit my recollection of ‘seeing the rabbit’.
We were driving up RT1 in South County (heading north to Wakefield)…(yes that Wakefield), the road at this point is 2 lanes each direction with a grassy median divide that is no more than 100 feet wide at any point (with turn arounds every 500 yards or so).
We were driving north when we passed the newspaper box. I saw what surely was a black and white rabbit, I did not say anything at first, until glenn said, ” Hey there was there a rabbit inside that box”? (or words to that effect lol)
I replied “damn there was…no way!” (we did not stop, were still driving north). “We better be sure of this, turn around” (one of us said).
We turned around, drove back past where the box was, found a turn-around and headed up RT 1 again and as we drove pass the box… it was still there!
I started laughing (normal response to the uncanny), and we made the decision to check one more time.
Turned around the third time (St Peter, yo I feel ya) and drove past the spot and came up on the newspaper box (at a much slower speed) and this time…nothin…
Damn that was fun.