Welcome to the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers)

Item A: I’m grateful for receiving the following Link  to answer Stephanie’s Question on yesterday’s Post. She was asking about Lou Reed:  Raised on Radio Post by Lance Burson   That I could provide this ‘response’ is a very good example of how cool the internet is. When I realized that I did not feel up to giving Stephanie a proper answer, I thought to myself, I thought, ‘well, who do I know that not only knows music but writes good?’ So I reached out to Jen Kehl and Linda Roy, who reminded me that they have a blog, Raised on Radio that they publish with Lance (and… and! ‘our own’ Richard Rumple).  How virtually cool is that?

Item B: Line dances. No, I’m not grateful for line dances, per se, I ‘m grateful to Lizzi for mentioning them in her Comment last night. It totally triggered a flashback to when I played in a band that worked the ‘Wedding Reception Circuit’ back in the 70s.  The band’s name was ‘Brass Tacks’ (‘when you’re ready to get serious about music, it’s to get down to Brass Tacks‘  pretty long for a tagline! ) We were a 5 piece band: keyboards, bass, guitar (moi), drums ( he did most of the vocals) and a sax player (which is why we were playing weddings and not bars..lol). Anyway, Lizzi’s Comment about line dances brought it all back. The gigs we played had two objectives: line dances. Actually we played music for people to eat to and immediately thereafter, played music for the ‘hey this is the Bride and Groom’ sort of stuff. Then came the drinking and the dancing… ” hey play Green Dolphin Street!!!”…  “play ‘Misty’ for me”  we did a standard set of covers including the theme to the Rockford Files (?!?… it was a TV show  here listen). Towards the scheduled end of the evening is where we made our money, as a small group would start to demand the ‘Hully Gully’ and other dances for slightly drunk people and the chance for the clarks to get lucky music. We almost always get someone to give us as much for the overtime as we got for the gig.    The only regret I have is that I didn’t save the shirt!  Flowered! Polyester!!! Colorful!!! I would stand there all flower-shirted and play guitar into the evening and early morning.

Item C: last night’s Wakefield Doctrine Saturday Night Drive Cyndi and Denise were on the call… and it was everything that a call-in is intended to be, good conversation…catching up with the latest about work and blogs and such from the week past and like that.

Item E: looking forward, (in principle), to the coming work week. Huge frickin challenges ( hey, since we’re talking about how old a person can be and still type for more than 40 minutes in a row)… I ‘was there’ when they started screwing with the language, at least when they came out in the open and said:  “hey! the word, ‘problem’  lets use the word ‘challenge’ instead…then you won’t get so intimidated and bummed out and such”  There were a lot of ‘advancements in the late 70’s and early 80’s  in the area of shaping the message.  I thought I had a longer, more interesting Item here… apparently not!  lol

Item M: glad that I am comfortable just totally abandoning what little structure I thought I had for today’s Post.  I will say at this point, there are 10 things in my Post today that I am either: grateful for, look forward to or hate like hell

Item G: grateful for whatever came over me last week to make the conscious effort to get back to Doctrine in my blogging. Not that I don’t reference it in virtually everything I right, but I have of late found myself spending more time writing about the Doctrine somewhat… obliquely, usually in the context of a bloghop. Which is not, in and of itself, a bad thing. But there is something, and this may be part and parcel with having a niche blog (as opposed to a personal blog), that makes the writing more… risky?  exciting?  something.  Bloghops will always be part of what I enjoy, but the Wakefield Doctrine and the effort to present it effectively to as many people as I possibly can, will always be the reason I am out here in the blogosphere. And that I am grateful for (…and the hope of acquiring skills at this ‘writing thing’. What’s the deal with the more I seem to try and learn, the more deficiencies I can find in my own writing? what the hell?)

Item 9: I suspect, but hope not, that I have lost Dyanne and Christine… their input, as good students of the Doctrine will attest to, is distinctive, valued, difficult to appreciate at times… (now, if the Doctrine is worth anything, they will somehow pick up the scent again!  lol… no! Christine…that’s a compliment.

Item J: Lizzi’s Comment this morning was very, very… helpful?  useful? valuable?  something-able. …no wait a minute! I do know what that quality is.. it is a demonstration of possibility. Most clarks hate the word ‘potential’, at least when used in the context, ‘but clark, why are you being that way? you have such potential’.  Ayiiee!! arrgg  (Warning: the following will not only not makes sense to Readers who live in the scottian or rogerian worldview, it may piss you off.)  How many time have we clarks, heard that admonition, ‘but you have so much potential and talent, you’re working against yourself. Why do you have to wear those clothes, hang around with those people, listen to that music, spend so much time by yourself, slouch so much, ignore what we are saying, we are doing this for your own good, must you always be so…. that way.

yes, yes we do. That is not the same as saying that clarks are totally satisfied with what we do, think, try and hope for, but we are trying. Lets put it this way: you’re a scott or a roger, ok? You want certain things, be happy, not be sad, have a family, be loved, earn a living, live a good life…right? And left to your devices you will try and get these things, you will look around you and do what everyone else is doing and get on with it.
…suppose, when you look for ‘the first step’ you saw a hundred, a thousand… a million different sets of foot prints?  And this is not really what I am trying to describe, we clarks don’t really see the path to our lives laid out as a myriad of footprints leading into the future…that would  be too damn easy.  No, what we have to contend is two things: a) it’s always possible that (fill in the blank) and 2) the fact (in our reality) that we are apart from the world, that we are, in fact, Outsiders and the belief that the ‘answer’ lies in something we don’t know/haven’t thought of yet/totally missed and if we ever do find the missing information, then we can be real people.

Number 10: you Readers

Ok  need to edit this a little but it’s time for the Video Brunch!!!