Welcome to the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers)
We all know that:
- clarks think
- scotts act
- rogers feel
(and) ..we all know that scotts are the confident ones, they are the ones who do not hesitate to act, scotts are the natural leaders and when they shout to the group (and there is always a group around them), when it comes into the head of a scott to move, to act, to do something (because they are bored) and they say, “Hey!! Lets go this way! (most) people follow immediately, without hesitation or question.
(and) we all know that rogers are the confident ones, they are the ones who know all about the matter at hand, the whys and the wherefores and most importantly, they know about who else has been/is/or will be involved in the activity that you are curious about, rogers are the organized ones and when they say, “You should do it this way, (most) people will follow (the directions).
So what about the clarks?
(well) everyone knows that clarks are:
- possessed of/by/with a really great sense of humor, well …better make that a rather odd sense of humor
- a very caring and sensitive person, well …at least once you get to know her and not be put off by the weirdness
- smart, so smart that its, well …not smart in terms of grades or day-to-day real life decisions, but in every other way!
- organized, has everything in his head, well organized on some level but if you need to remember something you said last year or the name of the actor in a 23 year old movie!
- attractive, well not in what you might call the conventional way, but when you see how she offsets the tattoos with the boots and it, somehow ties together, kinda spooky actually
- creative really more than anyone, well if creative is about the things that never were and will never be, then you have the right person
- intuitive, she has a way of, well, I think she holds back how much she understands
- weird well duh!
If you are (still) reading, then you are what we call a scott or a roger or a clark with a certain level of flexible intelligence*… and in an effort to increase the odds that you will continue reading, we will say this: if you are a scott then you have what we call a secondary clarklike aspect and if you are a roger, then you have what we call a secondary clarklike aspect. As you know, while we all develop as one predominant type (clark or scott or roger ) we always retain the capacity to experience the world as the ‘other two’ types. We call these two types the secondary aspect and the tertiary aspect. They have an effect on how you express your predominant personality type, but that is beyond the scope of this here Post here. Suffice to say, if you are not a (predominant) clark, then your secondary aspect most likely is clarklike because it is the insatiable curiosity and tolerance of the unknown that keeps you reading, despite all your instincts to the contrary.
So about the music that follows… the fun of totally enjoying a song by Bill Monroe, then hearing something like the Fred Hammond tune from yesterday’s Post and then having ‘Blue Rondo a la Turk’ come on the radio and smiling for the pure joy of the wonderful and horrifying variety of things to appreciate that is available to you, when you are a clark.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kc34Uj8wlmE
*the ability to imagine another damn reality, without getting scared or mad
About clarkscottroger
STOP RIGHT THERE BUDDY! TAKE IT BACK! I am a clarklike female and I never once thought of getting a tattoo!….a nose ring maybe…a re-eally long time ago……
But let’s talk about why we like people want to do these things……
we believe you! but will stand by the sentence that was made… and as to your never getting… two words: age
@DS1:
The following excerpt would support your adamant statement about never thinking about getting a tattoo. Most good tattoos are not from a book of pictures, but rather from one’s own imagination. Ergo, “things that never were and never will be…” Your creativity just never happened to focus on a tattoo. And if it did, well it never evolved and never will. But I’d put money on it that if you DID ever consider a tattoo it would be quite unusual and beautiful. Simple assessment. Make sense?
“…Creative really more than anyone, well if creative is about the things that never were and will never be, then you have the right person…”
Hey! This is my strong secondary aspect! Anyone want to venture a guess as to which one that is as well as my true day to day aspect? One word hint…
(I have a little fish one my shoulder and once thought about getting a coral reef along the bottom of my back hip to hip.)
… so a clarklike tatoo would look like?
hmmm…. well because I was prompted by DS#1’s comment I’m going to go with a tattoo apropos to a female clark. It would be obscure yet intriguing to a scott. A roger would look at it and try to deduce it’s history as it applies to DS#1’s life of timelines. Of course to the tattooee it would make perfect sense. I’m thinking other-worldy. Celestial. Floating. With an element of no ending…
Or we could just go with a fish since Ms. DS#1 is a pisces… (as am I)
…I admit that I do not ‘know of’ tattoos, so I am curious, what is the purpose of a tattoo? I will assume that individual people have individual reasons for getting them, it is seems that it almost has to be one of two ‘reasons’ a) to say something to the world or 2) to remind oneself (the tatooee) of belonging to something
I will accept the idea that I am brushing up against a reasonable assumption
Pisces. My wife, my brother, my son-in-law. Surrounded. Tho it has nada to do with WD, their characteristics are eerily similar. Peace makers, love order and peace. But, beware of the hidden aspect of such astrological beings. They all have a ‘button’ if pushed, look out! Tattoo you. I am confused to the reasoning behind tattoo’s, as they scream “look at me!” However, I have none, so can’t really weigh in. Familiar with the tramp stamp, but the other reasons escape me. Like writing on your hand with a sharpie.
To each his own. I don’t know. Maybe it’s a boredom thing. Anyone with CSR tats?
your wife… intuitive, good judge of character (with total strangers) funny sense of humor (delay laugh, not guffaw)?
there is one movie that is a sure test for roger or scott: Slacker (Richard Linklater, one of your fellow Texas-kin) his first movie will drive a roger out of the room in 3 minutes or less, leaving clarks watching and saying things to the effect that this is so a clark making this movie…
more interesting, Linklater eventually did a movie that everyone (rogers and scotts love) Dazed and Confused… this being watchable by roger, is full of clarks worth the time
not necessarily either one. though very common.
You are correct on both counts a and b – the saying something and the belonging. Perhaps it is also about control. Kinda like: “No one “higher over” me can keep me from doing this to myself.”
From a socio/economic/regional perspective I would guess that the south has the most number of individuals sporting body art. Or maybe it just seems to me… because I live in Florida. There is nothing more unattractive, in my opinion, than an old woman whose forearms are covered in ancient ink. Just sayin.
But then it’s not about being attractive. Back to the statement the previous statement only maybe it’s simply a personal reminder.
Oh yeah, seem there’s 2 camps. The pictorial tats and the written tats. Would I be off base saying that scotts would be more inclined towards the written tats? lol Like “Fuck you”, “So’s your momma”, etc.
“...Anyone with CSR tats?”
damn! there’s an idea!
(lol relax DownSprings! not a requirement… yet)
…and still, there is a certain… attraction to the idea and it (the attraction) is in sync with both ‘motivations’ although less of the advertise/promote to the world and more of the ‘belonging to’ drives
Personally (as a scott) I would never consider a written tat. Especially one with a boyfriend’s or husband’s name. Voodoo. DON’T DO IT….
… and I was about to say, the best (written) tatoo would be quite simple:
….Property of…
lol
Fuck that. I ain’t nobody’s property. lol
On to rogers (uh oh). What kind of tat would they have? “Go Team Go!” ha ha
lol or words to that effect
(any deliberate association with larg(er) group or organization, i.e. herd)
In order to confuse predators, the herds long ago instituted the use of washable tattoos. That’s right…the spots can be in different places…a committee has been formed to look into why that doesn’t seem to be working as planned.
lol
for some reason what comes to mind is/are (in no particular order): those tropical fish with the color pattern on their fins that look like eyes, and Curley (of the Three Stooges) who drew eyeballs on his eyelids…
Hey Steve. No CSR tats for me fer shure…but! I can well picture a scottian male doing the letters on the fingers thing (starting with the index finger of course). Just enough fingers to spell “scott”.
“Count ’em dammit 1, 2, 3, 4, 5” (then they make a fist and shove their word hand in your face). LOL
Calling in this Saturday again? Hope so.
P.S. What be your wife, brother and son-on-law Doctrinistically speaking?
@ csr – Yes! Slacker is a surefire test to determine who is the roger in the room. There is NO ROGER ON THE PLANET who likes/will like the movie and who will not make some sort of insulting, especially in the presence of a clark who likes the movie, comment. I second the 3 minute test parameter. I am in 100% agreement on Dazed and Confused.
I challenge any and all rogers in the audience to please step forward if they enjoyed the movie Slacker.