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

Early day today… want to put some content up, thought that, other than ivy (tbfkaz)* who arguably is the Margaret Meade of the Wakefield Doctrine sub-culture-to-be, most people have not read the following Post. I’ve been writing this blog for nearly 5 years or so, and when I came across the Post that is today’s content,  as I read it yesterday, (admittedly with a little ‘oh-shit-!-a-Post-from-the-first-year!’, I was relieved to find that it’s a surprisingly fun and minimally embarrassing example of early Doctrine Post. (To put it in a historical context, today’s reprint-Post was written at a time when the only comments on a Post came from a person I knew in real life.) My driving ambition was to present the principles and convey the simple fun of our little personality theory.  (Seeing how old most Readers these days are not… the woman on the lower left is Diane Keaton, from her Annie Hall days (she was nothing less than the Patron Saintessa of all clarklike female women… ), I often use clips from that particular movie because she is such a clark.

Enjoy yourselfs.

Wakefield Doctrine Field Guide

October 27, 2010 By clarkscottroger 2 Comments

( …”so if we establish the outward more obvious characteristics”… )Oh, hello!  Did not see you come on line…be right with you  ( …but the “fun factor” got to find a way to present the damn fun of this thing… ) just one more aside and we can get today’s Post started ( …good frickin job there, you just telegraphed your last remaining hook… goddamn it… ) Let me just try and put this little journal down. There.Welcome to the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers)!. This week we are starting to present the whole Doctrine in a simple, logical and easy to understand manner.  ( …sure keep up with the asides…is there nothing you won’t resort to in order to get through one of these Posts?…they know what you are doing, they ‘get’ it, dude…this is so over done…)  Yesterday we started with a clark, as subject of discussion. But let’s keep with the topic a little longer… ( … ’cause clarks are sooo interesting. ) clarks are the creative ones and as such…( …Hola Miguel, ¿qué pasa con el director Clark? No se ve tan bien, y creo que él está hablando a sí mismo … vamos que el hallazgo señorita Sullivan y Britney… )  ( …man! are you so totally shameless!   roll out the ‘Spanish exchange students’,  just to keep this Post limping alone?)I believe I was suggesting that we continue to look at the personality of clarks. Hell, since this Post insists on slouching towards ( …Yeates, I can’t frickin believe that you are so desperate to get done that you will pad this thing with a literary allusion that a sophomore high school student would be too embarrassed to use… but hey, who am I to criticize… ) Well, let’s get the words on the page, put in some pictures and get the hell out. ( …the way this thing is going you are likely to pander to the scotts and put some frickin childishly exuberant music just to draw a reaction. )

Ahem! as we have said before, the clarklike females are fairly easy to identify. Outlandishly dressed, creative with the make-up (with special attention to the face/eyes) and, to a woman,  something fairly strange on their feet. If you are trying to identify which of the three types a person is and you are thinking, possible clark, then concentrate on their eyes.  (The eyes) of the female clarks are quite distinctive, mostly in an un-mistakeable ’not-of-this-world’ intensity. Often (and unfairly) characterized as either the ‘ditsy broad’ or  ‘snooty/aloof/what-does-she-think-she-is-too-good-for-us?’, the clarklike female projects this image simply because they are distracted. A state common to all clarks, there is simply so much going on inside their heads that they barely have time to keep track of what is going on in front of their noses. If you find yourself  talking to a clark, watch their eyes. If you pay attention, you will see as (mentally) they go from topic to idea to implication to ramification (back to the conversation taking place) to how to conclude the interaction to implication…etc

In the spirit of turning this trainwreck into a valid Post about identifying clarks, let’s cut and paste some of the characteristics (found on the clarks page) and get some music and get out… after all there is a real world out there and it is totally full of clarks, scotts and rogers. And there is nothing more fun than going out there and seeing the Wakefield Doctrine “demonstrate itself”.
New Readers? It might seem difficult to figure who is which today, but take our word for it, this Doctrinething is a lot of fun.

 

Just to get you started, here are some photos of known clarks  

or  or maybe       …ok, we’re sure you get the idea, now get out there and find ‘em!

(DS#1 says we should stick with the ‘topic’ of female clarks) because they are out there in the everyday world and you can spot them with only a little practice. And who are we to disagree with the DownSprings? (the DownSprings are the life of this Doctrine, whatever they want they will always get), so let’s try to come up with a “Field Guide”:

Wakefield Doctrine Field Guide

scott(male):   picture that Tasmanian devil on the cartoons……or Joe Pesci in all of his movies
roger(male):  they’re frickin everywhere, watercooler? check…Fireman? check…look for the easy-going comfortable smile, inviting conversation…
scott(female): Ginger on Gilligan’s Island, the green chick on Star Trek (the 60′s version)
clark(female): read the damn Post! you can find the clarklike females
clark(male):  the office geek except without the marketable technical skills, probably under-employed, very funny, usually interesting, (in small doses), cannot do enough for any person who merely recognises their existence, never mind actually be nice to them
roger(female): tough call under the best of circumstances, examples Kathy Bates, most wholesomely attractive women (with an agenda), think Carrie Nation in SUV…

There you  have it, the Wakefield Doctrine  Field Guide (to spotting) clarks, scotts and rogers..

.