Welcome to the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers)
Yeah. 2014:
- Resolution #3 is to keep these Posts under 800 words.
- …well, because we have the Wakefield Doctrine Saturday Night Drive ( hey…Cyndi!! amazing job this past year illustrating successful clarks in a world full of scottian temptation and rogerian bridge trolls lol)
- and, …and! the first year with the Wakefield Doctrine Friday Night well-yeah,-I-could-be-out-with-friends-but-I-decided-to-stay-in-no!-seriously-my-choice! Vid Chats (Kristi!! thanks for that ‘tell us all a dirty joke’ idea! How can we miss with a feature like that!)
- Sunday’s Video Brunch, where it all started (Lizzi and Michelle… sine tu non, binyons!)
- the Book! someone out there remind me next February 17th that I better have a completed manuscript-tina
- thanks
- TToT …if the Wakefield Doctrine is Tom Swift Jr then the TToT is Nancy Drew
- watch out for the blogger formerly known as DownSpring#1… she will be demonstrating the Doctrine in terms that, like Jeff Beck listening to Jimi Hendrix, most of us will be lucky if we get a small portion of the magic to be seen in the path she has found herself on
- of dogs and life and the simple path, the thrilling adventures of zoe and skip (you know, Sherman and Mr. Peabody… )
- I suspect we will prevail on old friends to re-join us…not changing our forward path and not adding information, but enhancing the experience…thinking Molly and AKH and glenn
- new friends ( if you suspect I’m thinking of you, you are probably right….this is the Wakefield Doctrine, after all! did we say the thing about, how, with the Wakefield Doctrine you will know more about the other person than they know about themselves?? we did? well, did we say the thing about how, with the tools available in the Wakefield Doctrine, you will know things about that total stranger that you have totally no business knowing? that too, huh? wait, …wait! how about the part that we all have one predominant worldview and the capacity to experience the world as do the ‘other two’ which makes the Wakefield Doctrine the perfect path to self-developing ourselfs? damn!! you people know everything! (hey hey!!! there’s this ‘saying’ that I’ve always wanted to say or to have ‘come up in a conversation’….I know this is contrived but, seeing how Lizzi has provided encouragement to embrace my inner roger and such, I just say…. screw it! here goes), “hey DownSprings!! as we start this New Year, let me remind you that while I’ve taught you everything that you know about the Wakefield Doctrine, I haven’t taught you everything that I know about the Wakefield Doctrine’
- that felt good! damn! I may projectile vomit (metaphorically, of course) in the coming months as we push the boundaries of the Doctrine, but I know that with everyone heading out into the world with notepads in hand, coming back and adding to what we all can use and benefit from and have a laugh with… this should be a not-half bad year.
- …I will stop at word 458
About clarkscottroger
You’re welcome :D
I look forward to learning the rest (or at the very least, more). And my advice (accompanied, if useful, by a slap to the jowels with a glove) is to pick yourself a roger (not Michelle…too easy) and make friends :D On purpose.
And at some point down the road in the midst of the frustration and thrill of the chase and the desire to let the Machiavellian self come too much into the fore (alienating them doesn’t help in the long run, even if it makes you feel better about the frustration), you might just find that a change has occurred – that you *actually* like them. Then it gets worse, because you’re still on the outside, but you have genuine ‘feels’…and you know that your rogerian aspect just unwithered, its roots got deeper and it unfurled a cheeky little leaf.
Not sure what to do from there, being as I am getting hit repeatedly in the head by all these leaves, but at least it’s a jungle full of promise. And like every good botanist – I’ll take notes.
Lizzi
er thank you and …..ewww
(hey, can we start a little less ambitiously and I’ll resolve to say, out loud and before witnesses, “hey! that (particular roger is not as much an asshole as many others are!)
..agree, I am grateful we have Michelle to act as an ambassador from the crowded state of Rogeristan….
Okay. It’s a deal. As long as you state not only that they’re ‘not an asshole’, but bring it into the positive, and be SPECIFIC. And mean it :D
I’m glad we have Michelle, too. She puts up with many slights on her people, with remarkable buoyancy…
Lizzi
agreed!
Lizzi, you philospher-ette you! lol I agree. Michelle is a most agreeable roger and a fine representative of her people:) I feel as if this is the year of the clark. Yes! that is my proclamation this new year’s day 1. And….and I believe that the clarks among us “regulars” will learn to develop our rogerian aspects. I got to tell you, it can be most enjoyable! Sitting as I did at a business luncheon asking a stranger how much he loves Ken Burns and his documentaries and getting word version of a high five – priceless!
So, it’s on you now Clark. Time to get telling everyone what YOU know about this marvelous Wakfefield Doctrine. Truth be told it’s amazing.
Yo! Zoe! Sherman and Mr. Peabody. You up to that girl?! (yes, the answer is.. yes.)
458 words? Haha. We clarks tend to be verbose, me thinks.
Hope your New Year is FABULOUS!
Cyndi
thank you (for the new year, not necessarily the reminder of our love of words… lots of words!)
funny, how in the first couple of years of the Doctrine blog, 300 to 450 were enough… oh well!
Skip and I may be a bit more fractured fairy tales…nah…I guess you’re right…peabody WAS the smart one…
Loved nancy…tom not so much…more of a johnny quest gal…
I look forward to next feb…does that mean 2015?
zoe
hell no! (the following is certified by the Wakefield Doctrine as pure clark ) lol
no I mean the first of Wakefield Doctrine books… complete (as in beginning middle and end) manuscript… not necessarily publish-able or even publish worthy but to borrow from one of the blogs original goals, the ‘book’ needs to be readable by a total strange and have so knowledge of the Wakefield Doctrine transferred by the reading of… in other words, it can suck entirely, badly written in total need of re-writing* but complete.
the thing that my 8 year-old-self bought into was the idea that, if you had the idea, the execution was a mere formality… Tom and Bud built the earth side space port in a day or two mostly ’cause they had the plans and just got right to it! lol
* for grammar, syntax, and or coherency but not for the content of information
My goodness Clark, I feel the pressure caving in on you already…of course the first manuscript is gonna suck… what are you a Scott or something?… Every first manuscript sucks…I think the one I sent out still kinda sucks! I don’t think it was a typo however when you wrote “needs to be readable by a total strange …” without the “r.” (ahem…just sayin’)
zoe
I didn’t say it had to be proof read! lol
…actually that whole thing is an attempt to out-wit my own clarklike side as it manifests ambitions and goals and such* but, it’s good to have goals and deadlines and I don’t think too much about how much time it (reasonably) necessary to put together the ‘first book’ since I have so much of the material written down. The real trap I need to avoid is holding myself (not necessarily consciously) to a secret definition of ‘a book’ on the Wakefield Doctrine.
so I’ll say right now, the minimum definition is that it be a comprehensive explanation of the Wakefield Doctrine (how it came to be, core concepts, organization, the three personality types and some examples of how to use it in common everyday situations: trying to get a job, trying to keep a job, meeting new people and trying to get lucky…
*one of the most destructive mechanisms possible to people (in general) and clarks (in particular) is that thing were we defer the risks and the work to accomplish something and yet bring into play a certain kind of ‘accounting’ when we do set out goals… i.e. “alright I have so much to make up for this (goal/ambition) needs to be…. lol 700 feet tall!!
*** Yeah, but Johnny and Haji got to carry to channel their inner Scots… they got to carry weapons and hang with Race! lol
that frickin paedophile… he (Race) is a creepy as that Norman Rockwell fella… never could stand that Americana imagery that was jammed down the throat of the date-raped culture that was post-war america.
OMG! I think Im catching on to this Doctrine stuff! I totally predicted you’d say something like that! Im so proud! Woohoo! LOL!
zoe
“…stays in the Plain” By george, I think she’s got it!
lol very cool
Why thank you professor!
lol
Zoe – Johnny Quest..me too! But you forgot Bandit! Skip is your Bandit:)
Clark. Get the Book done. It is needed by so-o-o- many people. Really.
Having said that, there is a trap. It must be done properly and timely yet given your clarklike nature (predmoninant progentior self) the tendancy (“a” or “e” – see? lol) to edit and re-write and such is a thing to be mindful of. Just sayin’ Johnny. (re: the movie Ted. Funny)
omg he was the best guy in the show! How could I forget Bandit? At least he wasn’t as dumb as Dr. Quest who kept getting nabbed by some sicko… or as Clark would say that pedophile, Race! Hey I just read your last post to Zoey… I couldn’t comment for some reason… Who knows… but it was gorgeous!
As to No. 2 up there. I concur. Cyndi is most wonderful. Besides being a fantastic writer, an accomplished photographer and in general a genuine and creative person, she is indeed a beacon of hope for all clarks. She appears to approach life without hesitation and the “fear” that so many of us clarks allow to deter us from insisting on aquiring that which we deserve.
Happy New Year to you Cyndi and well, everyone.
Congrats on you Cyndi on your non-verbosity. Unlike me tonight. LOL
Here’s to embracing our inner rogers:)
Example #1- Bad Criticism: I hate what you wrote, I hate you, and I hate your little dog, too. Bad criticism is overwhelmingly subjective and biased, and should be simply disregarded.
Example #2- Good Criticism: ” Hey Roger, why did you write a 12-bar blues with an augmented chord in it? Doesn’t seem to fit.” This affords Roger the chance to defend his use of the augmented chord if he considered it worth putting there to begin with. This would be a conversation based on Form and Function, and that is always a good thing. The same principle would apply to writing.
So with that in mind, Clark old chap… I say take a piece of that manuscript and post it up in this here Doctrine thing here. There are some very sharp denizens in the Doctrine neighborhood, and I’ll bet you would be most appreciative of their observations. Do it! Do it! Do it!
roger
think i know what you mean, almost agree. Will probably do a new blog for the purposes of display and such, priority writingistically speaking is on the Wakefield Doctrine: the Book! project. I have 02/17/2014 to get all the words I believe I need to arrange themselves in the proper sequence and be ready to send off. The ‘number you have dialed’ project is fun and I suspect I’ll even learn some shit, but it must wait it’s turn.
…and besides, who the fuck, besides John Mayer, would stick a damned augmented chord in the simple blues song, do you know? I didn’t think so.
lol