Welcome to the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers )
After a week of mis-leading and suggestive/inflammatory Post Titles, replete with challenging tests and examples of the Doctrine and it’s various applications, we thought it might be kind of nice to kick back a little and get ourselfs ready for the weekend. And while Friday has always been a favorite day ’round the Doctrine, it is even more exciting because the next day is Saturday and that means Saturday Night Drive!!
Consider the plight of the clarks, as we approach the weekend. They have survived the workweek, avoided embarrassment by rogers or personal peril at the hands of the scotts. Clarks would like to believe that, like rogers and scotts, they are entitled to relax and enjoy themselves over the weekend. Of course, we know better than that. They (the clarks) will approach the weekend with as much un-justified optimism, exaggerated enthusiasm and un-realistic expectations as is humanly possible.
While rogers look forward to the weekend as a time for hangin with a slightly different herd, engaging in ritual and chores, that while they protest that they have too much to do on Saturday and Sunday, they are throwing themselves into the weekend with the same un-reflective and total commitment that they do with the workweek.
As for scotts… If any of the Readers have ever had a puppy…you come home after work and take the dog out and they run around in large (or small) circles, fast as they can, simply for the fun of running, the exuberance of being alive and just running…thats a scott on the weekend… ‘cept with clothes…and maybe a car….but definitely with sports equipment…or rogers…lol
But our clarks…they see Friday coming like most people view a trip to the Dentist when they have a toothache, knowing it is necessary, knowing that the end result will be an improvement to their life situation but dreading it all the same. And yet, clarks have Hope. Damn, them folks cling to hope like one of them eel things that ride along on the sides of sharks 1 …good situation…just don’t fuck it up.
But we have a Saturday Night Drive coming up tomorrow, so mark your calendar (clark)…submit an entry on your iPad/Blackberry (roger)…make someone remind you tomorrow (scott).
We have heard from some of our friends over at Hub Pages and they might stop in..
the Time: 8:00 to 8:45 pm ET
the number to call (no charge) 218-339-0422 enter the code 512103 followed by the #sign
So get through today and call us tomorrow.
1) While pilot fish can be seen with all manner of sharks, they are said to prefer accompanying the oceanic whitetip, Carcharhinus longimanus. The pilot fish’s relationship with sharks is a mutualist one; the pilot fish gains protection from predators, while the shark gains freedom from parasites. It was often said by sailors that sharks and pilot fish share something like a “close companionship”; there were even tales of this fish following ships which had captured “their” shark for up to six weeks and showing signs of distress in its absence.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=At97qw6H7_s
About clarkscottroger
I also quote Wikipedia when I offer the following:
“The pilot fish (clark) very often congregates around sharks (scotts), rays (clarks), and sea turtles (rogers), where it (clark) eats ectoparasites (rogers) on and leftovers around the host species (scotts); [2] younger pilot fish(clarks) are usually associated with jellyfish (…?…..)and drifting seaweeds (open to interpretation?)…
The pilot fish (clark) is of a dark blue to blackish-silver colour (cutting edge, if not scary haircut, more often than not dramatically colored), with the belly being lighter in colour (shoes often matching)…. The pilot fish(clark) is also known to have a temporary variation of colour (excess of accessory adornment) when excited; its dark-coloured bars disappear and its body turns a silvery-white colour, with three broad blue patches on its back (clark trying to blend in with the scenery but the nose ring gives it away), .[11] It is easily recognisable by its distinctive traverse bands(adherence to his/her subjective/unique sense of fashion)…. The pilot fish can grow up to 60-70 cm in length (clarks often reach levels of success.)
The pilot fish (clark) is harmless to human beings (rarely threatening)[14] and is said to be good eating (by extremely aggressive scotts and extreme rogers) ;[15][16] however, the fish is difficult to land because of its erratic behaviour when caught.(focus and consistency are a perpetual challenge to clarks) [17]
… While pilot fish (clarks) can be seen with all manner of sharks (scotts), they are said to prefer accompanying the oceanic whitetip, Carcharhinus longimanus (dominant scotts).[18] The pilot fish’s (clark’s) relationship with sharks (scotts) is a mutualist one (somewhat symbiotic in a twisted way); the pilot fish (clarks) gains protection from predators (scotts), while the shark (scotts) gains freedom from parasites (rogers). [19] It was often said by sailors that sharks (scotts) and pilot fish (clarks) share something like a “close companionship”; (clark/scott affinity previously referred to somewhere in this blog)
Whatever the veracity of such reports, it is extremely rare that a shark (scott) will feed on a pilot fish (clark), but it can happen [24] and smaller pilot fish(less evolved clarks) are frequently observed swimming into sharks’ (scott’s) mouths to clean away fragments of food from between their teeth (self sacrificing clark attempting to “help” a scott “evolve”.
Will likely be off the dashboard on Sat. Mountain of stuff in storage returning today. Will try to chop it down with the edge of my hand, but not hopeful.
very apropo analogies. i bet that everyone who is not a scott secretly wishes they were.
joe jackson’s song “friday” always comes to mind.
btw, the 2nd video is hysterical. a hint perhaps that the progenitor and a couple of downsprings have birthdays coming up?
The Denizens of the Dashboard shall miss ye. I myself will be indentured by the overlords of Groceryland but being a clark, there is almost certain probablilty I can break free at such time, for a short time, so as to travel with the Progenitor clark and Downsprings on their Saturday Night Drive.
If for some unforeseen reason there is a “run on the bank” grocery style and I cannot contribute, my hope is that there are some daring individuals out there who will call in to the Wakefield Doctrine, Saturday Night Drive Time Show.
I never tire of Doctrine discussions, not usually. In fact, verbalizing certain facets of it can be challenging. Which is a good thing. Last night was like that. As readers know, Saturday night is when anyone in the werld (who reads this blog) can call in (for free) and speak with the Progenitor clark and Downspring glenn about the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers, as they engage in their Saturday Night Doctrine Driveabout (I like the term “driveabout” – reminds me of the term “walkabout”).
Last evening I was indentured to serve the drunk and otherwise disenfranchised, cashiering in a supermarket residing far, far across the tracks. Anyway, I called into the Doctrine Saturday Night Drive Show and spoke with Progenitor clark and Downspring glenn. I was not disappointed. Having a little less than 30 minutes of break time I figured what the hell. Why not sit in a dark parking lot on my “lunch” break, the sounds of the first official Bike Week as background noise, and “talk” about Wakefield Doctrine stuff.
Well, well, welly. Seems it was “grill a clark” night. No, make that grill a female clark night as the disussion was steered towards “why do female clarks wear the footwear that they do”. Seems that both the Progenitor clark and Downspring glenn insisted I speak as my shoes – Gestaldt style. Damn if I just couldn’t get it. Personally, I am more of an Existential kind of gal. Needless to say, it got a little heated as someone (I didn’t say it was you Progenitor clark) insisted I was “blocking” something. That I “knew” the answer but my mind was keeping it hidden for some reason. Neither of them could understand what I meant by “they (my shoes) speak to me”. I was attempting at how it is that female clarks, at least me anyway, aquire the footwear, clothing and otherwise “different” attire that we do. My simple answer is that clothing etc just speaks to me(at time of purchase). I know what it is to buy because I just “know” it. It’s an osmotic kind of thing. Really. But that answer just would not satisfy Pc and Dg. Therefore, I look forward to picking up the conversation again perhaps next Saturday Night or maybe even here, within the Wakefield Doctrine Blog.
Surely there are female clarks out there who will come to my aid with the reasoning behind why we dress and look like we do?
(No one can say that I do not dress in decent women’s daughters’ clothes. Dat.)