Welcome to the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers)
Contest today!
A nearly free hat (for your damn head) to the Reader who provides the best ‘single line definition’ of clarks or scotts or rogers. (for example): a clark is a person who lives most of their lives inside their head, trying to figure out how they should act in the real world.
That sort of thing, nothing too complicated or too offensive or too personal. Of course that pretty much eliminates everyone! Be that as it may, the Contest runs through the weekend. Any and all entries will be included in a Post so that voting can be conducted in an open, fair and impartial manner. The Winner will be entitled to a nearly free1 Wakefield Doctrine hat (for their dam head).
Why? Why what? Why the Contest? Who wants to know? Well since you ask so politely. We will tell you. We wish to get some really catchy definitions so we can submit them to some online dictionaries. Which ones? What difference does it make? Will it make any difference which ones? When you send one in we will announce where we will want to place the definitions. We are getting tired of this ‘start with a W thing, now’. Won’t you just stop asking questions and send us what you got? Wonderful!
Enough with the ‘sperimental Writing 101. Today’s Contest is for real. All of us know what the goal of the Wakefield Doctrine blog. It (the goal) is to spread the awareness and understanding of the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers to as many people as possible. If enough people (probably the clarks ) ‘get’ this Doctrine thing and they tell their scottian friends who will in turn force all the nearby rogers to join in the game of find the clark, spot the scott, endure the roger in their own locality.
Attention Readers!! ( no, the person frickin standing behind you!…of course I mean you… ) It is being brought to my attention that you really only pay attention when it is a scott talking to you. Or maybe a roger when you are in the mood for story-telling. But if a clark is talking you find it so, so easy to ignore.
Why is that? Since we are in a Contest mode, lets add a Bonus Question!
For a totally free Wakefield Doctrine hat (for your damn head) the best answer to the following Question:
Why do people listen to scotts before they listen to clarks and/or rogers. (and does it matter how little sense the scott is making?)
Come on down.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=poiCzMOvkKkHey, Reader let’s see that scott that you always turn and pay attention to just because they are barking so loud, go ahead and ask them to come up with something like this next vid…go ahead I double dare you!!
1) the nearly free part refers to the requirement that winners agree to send in a photo of their hat (with or without their damn head underneath) taken in front of a recognizable local landmark. Contestants are reminded that by power vested in the ‘right of hat’ they are empowered to lay claim to any part of the world that has not already been claimed.
About clarkscottroger
Incroyable! Second vid does make me smile…….
I will recuse myself from answering the question: “Why do people listen to scotts before they listen to clarks and/or rogers. (and does it matter how little sense the scott is making?)”
HOWEVER, I will get back to you with a one line definition for…… Really:) and in this century….but not today…..if I wake up tomorrow…..
er…we want to thank the association-of-possibly-connected-by-a-whisper-and-a-prayer clarks for their vote.
Why don’t we put you down for a single, “after someone else votes I will vote too”…
rogers? (no, we actually enjoy ourselves)
scotts? (you’re welcome, don’t forget the A1 sauce)
Just a stab here, but it likely has to do with scotts making a definitive noise, even if it might be extraneous. Rogers don’t enjoy themselves nearly as much as you’d presume. And Clarks?….I think studies have shown that readers can only track one or two inside references, and then they just get lost, or wander off. To speak, and use cryptic references as a language, is …cryptic.
Completely agree with your explanation for why people will almost always listen to the scott first…although I might not give them the (implied) benefit of the word ‘definitive’, which I hear as having the virtue of being complete, exhustive, all-the-information-you-need. I like the word certainty. (online dictionary.com defines the word certain as: free from doubt or reservation; confident; sure)
The Doctrine has a saying somewhere here: a scott is often wrong, but never uncertain. And people seem to be irresistibly attracted to the certain.
clarks un-fortunately know better. for clarks the beauty and the whole challenge in life is to be aware of, and try to make others aware of the limitless possibilities of every damn thing.
rogers now, you, you.. you people seem to have the best balance in regards to the issue of certainty. You do not have the limiting need for a totally simple black or white reality, but your innate curiosity is anchored by your perfectly defined frame of reference, aka ‘the box that cannot be seen’ which allows you to be able to go off on field trips with clarks. (But, of course you always make sure you are home before the street lights come on, safe and secure in the homeplace. a place where the sky is up and the trees do not scream, not just most of the time, but all of the time.)
…as to cryptic, the cat knows I can’t imagine how you could accuse us of that.
He is an exemplary feline. His mother, I have heard, has a tattoo that says ” Cat.5″. He gets more done by 9 am than other cats do all day. And, he can fly. I’ve seen it.
Having lost the needle through which my creative thought was to pass….I cannot imagine “one” world. It must be a world balanced. How’s that for cryptic?:) “Cryptic” only to those just joining the conversation that is the Wakefield Doctrine.
I am in the “certainty” camp. If you pay careful attention to a scott’s behavior it is indeed certain, in a most spontaneous way. No need to “think” things out as a clark would or not see “other” options as rogers are inclined. scotts are of the moment. Very present.
I disagree in part with the Progenitor clark when he says: ” for clarks the beauty and the whole challenge in life is to be aware of, and try to make others aware of the limitless possibilities of every damn thing.” I do not see the “beauty”.
What I do see and enjoy is the “beauty” of clark on roger wordplay. It has been said that there is an affinity between clarks and scotts. This is true. But there is also an affinity between clarks and rogers when it comes to the written word (not the purview of scotts). Enjoyable. Simply enjoyable.
Before my mind wanders too far imagining how a triangle can be a triangle without three points…..
No one should doubt the cat is capable of doing anything one can imagine. He is afterall, the cat.
lol…just in case we were getting too accessible around here at the Doctrine…
‘Twas a “scottian” moment. lol
I had this other thought – the search/need for information. It is not only a clarklike thing. rogers are, in their own way, just as “focused” on the “need” for information.
no they are not
No, no they are not. In the way that I know why you say so.
But consider a roger with a particular interest (at whatever point in time – could be a temporary interest or a lifelong interest). They will read, watch a tv program, practice, etc until they know all there is to know about whatever it is they want to know. I am amazed at the ability of rogers to pursue a thing to the complete exclusion of any/everything/every one else until they are satisfied. “They will not stop until……”
no, you mean he did not, you don’t say no he to me…
you are confusing ‘confirmation’ with ‘information’… remember clarks are the scientists and rogers are the machine operators.
what you are calling a need for information (in a roger) is only their (need) to appreciate a given aspect of their world.
rogers live in a perfect world, there is nothing to learn, in sense of discovering something new, there is only the reading of the instructions on something that has always existed.
rogers live to enjoy the world that they know to be complete and perfect
clarks survive in the hopes of finding the key information to justify their existence
…just sayin
Need to go back to a statement made by RCoyne which peaked my interest: “rogers don’t enjoy themselves nearly as much as you’d presume”. Would you tanslate the sentence that you made, sir?
A bit cryptic your own self and besides, I think it would be helpful for those just tuning in and discovering the Wakefield Doctrine….