Month: July 2017 | the Wakefield Doctrine Month: July 2017 | the Wakefield Doctrine

TToT -the Wakefield Doctrine-

July 29, 2017 By

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

‘Flowers, Deck, Roses and Garden’ (Landscape format) Left lower quarter is the corner of the deck at the back of the house. Like a flat arrow, the bench that defines the corner of the deck is pointing to a rose bush that, by luck and happenstance, occupies the graphic (if not artistic) center of the picture. The rose bush is a variant of the Rosa rugosa (beach rose) and, apparently blossoms (or blooms or flowers or whatever you call it) more than once a season. New red flowers among old and missing flowers, whats not to like? Anchoring the bottom left are some sun flowers. Along the top half of the scene is the much-grown, Una’s garden. (Why yes, everything at our house, or at least outside our house has a name and/or place in the family life.)

 

Welcome to the Ten Things of Thankful (TToT). Josie’s weekly evocation and celebration of all things gratitudinistic*. Come, join the growing crowd who realize, (not that they forgot it, but with the constant drone of the angry, but stinger-less bees that grow increasing in numbers in some corners of the virtual world, sometimes we misplace our healthy centers), that looking back, (and isn’t all reality and life really series of remembrances, sequences long and infinitesimally brief, postcards from our own lives), and celebrating (and sharing) the good (and the bad) is way better than trying to fight the voice inside that says, ‘But….(fear)… be careful…(fear)’

ya know?

This, like anyone other than a New Reader would not have guessed, is the Wakefield Doctrine. This is our TToT.

1-3) Ola’s Bridge complete

‘As a matter of fact, she does have a hammer’ Phyllis beginning the final phase of construction of the bridge. She is kneeling at the edge of the newly attached boards that form the decking of the bridge. She is reaching with her right hand for a hammer that is lying on the newly cut board, (a pale, pine white-into-wood hue). Next to the hammer is a red carpenter’s pencil, used to keep the spacing between the planks consistent. Just below the hammer (from our perspective) is the box of nails that will create a whole from the multiple parts. The box is fire engine red with a surprisingly bright yellow label.

Phyllis on the Other Side (Portrait format) Phyllis crossing the bridge from the far side. The surrounding is shades of green. The bridge is a blonde-on-light-brown rectangle. It’s long enough to show a narrowing (due to perspective, Red Shift or the curvature of the Earth) as it appears in the center-right fore ground and recedes up the center of the scene.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Form Follows Function (A Woman, a Dog, a Bridge)

4) Phyllis, Una and Denise: Constructionae Extrodinare  for the success of the current iteration of Ola’s Bridge.

5) Seeing as we mentioned her, one of the most iconic, (to the breed and to the individual dog), photos in our possession,

‘Big Smile, Big Teeth’ A photo of our first dog, Ola. Ola is the center of the photo (quite characteristically, as she was the most photogenic of all our dogs). She is lying her right side on a couch. The couch cushions rise and form a backdrop, half (of this backdrop) is a dark brown corduroy quilt. Ola has her head up (there is a pillow to her right), it is easy to imagine that, before the photo was taken, she was asleep, her head on the pillow. She is, however, quite awake. She is looking at the camera and she is smiling, in the way that all dogs have, but some breeds, not the least of which, German Shepherds, have the coloring that totally makes you see a smiling dog. Ola had light brown and black colorings. In fact, her back disappears against the dark brown of the quilt on the back of the couch. From her shoulders upwards, the predominate color is light brown. Her ears are quite prominent and totally alert (the hint that this is not a harmless, half-groggy from sleep animal). The conical triangles of her ears have a black bordering, enough to highlight the pinkish inner ears. (Like a bunny rabbit, provided the bunny rabbit could run as fast a man on a bicycle and was un-abashedly carnivorous.) Her eyes are dark, and she has an accent of light brown, arching over her eyes, but with two sharp black eye brows right above the inner corner of her eyes. (If Rene Russo were to reincarnate as a German Shepherd, everyone, family and the AKC alike would approve.) Ola’s mouth is open in that smiling-so-unaffectedly-to-cause-the-lower-jaw-to-drop slightly sort of way. Her tongue is pink and her teeth are white. There is an intelligence in her eyes that is, imo, startling. (But then again, each year for a week or so after her birthday, when Phyllis’s car would appear coming down the driveway, Ola would go to her toy box, find the birthday present toy among the laundry basket full of others and stand at the door. (I would be in and out of the house all day and nary a glance at the toy… but for Phyllis, who got home once a day, it was a whole different matter.)

6) The un-named detective in the work-in-progress, ‘The Mystery of the Missing Starr’, has a name. Finally! His name is Ian Devereaux and, well, maybe this excerpt will give you an idea of the man, “I live alone in a house meant for a large family. I used to have a dog. I used to have a wife. My wife divorced me and my dog died. I really miss the dog.”

7) Speaking of discontinuous hopes and realizations: theres trouble in Toemahtoe City (photo at 11*) One dead, one dying, one holding out and last being stalked by Bambi and her band of vegan cannibals.

8) (Sunday Supplement)

9) the Book of Secret Rules (aka Secret Book of Rules) It is both the rabbit hole, the little cake with ‘Eat Me’ icing, a free-form Thesaurus, a (non)TV Guide, Cliff Notes, and ‘Life and Everything Else for Dummies’. Fun. Not sure when to use the SBoR/BoSR? Whenever you can cite an appropriate Rule.***

10) SR 1.3

Click This (Alice and every other fictional and non-fictional explorer)

 

* not a ‘real’ word

**11 am Sunday,  that is

*** preferred citation guidelines for use of Secret Rule(s): Chapter, verse, (chorus, if there is one) and an op.cit. (if ya think you can pull it off). Extra standing attributed if you can manage [t]hose crazy parenthesis that you know someone at the Chicago Manuel of Style stuck in there, just to mess with us.

 

(song in head, of a more modern vintage)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share
Filed Under: Featured, Psychology, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With:

Six Sentence Story -the Wakefield Doctrine-

July 27, 2017 By

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

John W Jones

The Six Sentence Story is a bloghop hosted by zoe. Each and every week she invites all those, so inclined, to write a story relating/related to a new prompt word. The stories are limited only by the number of sentences it has. Six. No more and no less. Otherwise it’s left to us, the writers, to decide what makes a story. And that’s where the fun is.  The Six Sentence Story can be anything, fiction, autobiographical, non-fiction or any combination of all. It’s an opportunity to witness ideas gathering words and forming tales, that others can enjoy. As has happened before, this week I got well into Wednesday with the belief I knew exactly (well, sketchy-exactly) what my Six would be about. And then my clarklike nature exerted it’s power. One reference in a comment on ‘the Facebook’ lead to ‘the Civil War’ and then to Andersonville and then Elmira (both prison camps). But the idea still had not sunk it’s ink-stained teeth into me until I got to a reference to the above picture man. …it then wouldn’t let go.

….slip

Each morning that might slip from night’s tenebrous grasp, the sun would blaze over the clouds of mist that would, each summers day, rise from Foster’s Pond. Columns of new sunlight lightly balanced on the surface of the stagnant water, suggesting a delicate crystal formation; yet the stench that floated down over dry land, whispered of disease and death. Both the terrain and the Earth’s pull on all things conspired to draw the water that fell from the sky and the fluids that flowed from un-healed battle wounds, down from the hills and through the canvas ghettos that were home to thousands of Confederate soldiers.

In A-tents housing six or more prisoners, at least two would die of disease before bullet wounds or shattered limbs, the older prisoners (and increasingly the guards) called this place in rural New York State, ‘Helmira’ and would tell dark, cautionary tales as welcome to newly interred, “Ah swear it’s true. God may be white, but his angel of death is a old colored man who moves through the camp collectin the dead and when he passes, ain’t not a sign of boot pressed in the mud.”

In every culture, even one grounded in a makeshift prisoner-of-war camp, rise tales intended to give comfort; fighting the goblin-clutch of diarrhea and small pox, dying men would grasp the nearest arm and beg,  “Jus promise that John W Jones will tend me when my time comes. I got no regrets, but that my mother won’t never know what became of me, Sexton Jones’ll make sure she knows her boy died brave.”

 

 

 

 

 

 

Source Credits: ‘The Elmira Prison Camp; a history of the military prison at Elmira NY’ by Clay W Holmes 1912      (p. 140-150)

John W Jones Museum

Share
Filed Under: Featured, Psychology, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: , ,

Wensdae -the Wakefield Doctrine- ‘…of nonfictional fiction and learning from others’

July 26, 2017 By

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

Here at the Wakefield Doctrine we say the process of using the perspective (of the Doctrine) only begins when we accept ‘how we relate ourselves to the world around us’. (Without fail, an admonition is appended: ‘Be sure to notice the exact wording. We didn’t say, ‘… how we relate to the world around us’, we said, ‘… how we relate ourselves to the world around us.’ All the difference in the world.)

It’s an easy mistake to make. We’re all bombarded with advice on relating to situations, we’re asked if we can relate to this idea or that directive. Even (our) own best efforts to get along with the people in our world, the focus is entirely on the relationship, i.e. how we relate. The Wakefield Doctrine will, by necessity, nature and design, require those who would employ its principles to take themselves into account, (and thereby accounting for themselves) when assessing the relationship between themselves and the world (around them).

Kinda unavoidable, when you think about it. The Doctrine is about nothing if it’s not about the proposition that we all live and interact with the world and the people around us from within our own personal realities. The immediate benefit of this view is that it tends to eliminate the stress of cognitive dissonance that inevitably occurs when a person (in our world) acts in a manner inconsistent with what we believe is obviously true. We all have at least one friend, relative, or co-worker who we know to be mature, intelligent and good-natured people. Yet they exhibit, maintain and otherwise seem to find compatible one attitude/strongly-held belief/persistent-despite-overwhelming-evidence-to-the-contrary opinion. This is where the stress begins. ‘How,’ we ask ourselves (or anyone nearby), ‘can they believe that/maintain that position?’ It makes no sense. And yet there it is. Once we can bring ourselves to accept that, within this other person’s reality, the unreasonable is not as unreasonable, in fact, the unreasonable may make perfect sense, in their experience, we are able to stop twisting ourselves up trying to reconcile the irreconcilable. (Note to new Readers: temper this example. If you have a voice that is interrupting the sense of understanding that is growing within, that is only your ego, the part of your world that insists that there is only one world, one reality, or, at least, only one real reality. Read on and ask questions.)

Of course, the instant we concede the validity of this viewpoint, we’re forced to accept the (relative) truth about ourselves, the ‘ourselves’ in ‘how we relate ourselves to the world around us’. It is way hard, but totally worth the effort. To know the world can be a path to knowing ourselves, provided we have the stomach for it. We say that for the obvious (or not so obvious reason): if it is true, in our example above, that the personal characteristics of one’s reality allows a person to know, for a fact, a thing is correct despite the evidence to the contrary, what does that imply about our own world? (Yeah, I know! But this part is only as upside-down as you would let it be. Remember, there’s a part of all of us that will maintain, at all costs, that the world we know is the way it is, no matter what anyone else says.)

Good news! Even as you tackle the effort of a lifetime, the Wakefield Doctrine makes the better understanding the people in our lives, way fun. And, when it comes to actually self-improving ourselves? It’s as easy as circular dessert pastry! You have within, the capacity to experience the world from the perspective of all three personality types, which means the strengths of each are available to develop and express. très cool.

Speaking of cool, Friend of the Doctrine, Cynthia is on her own path to discover and self-develop herself, recently wrote of her adventures along the path,

“The comfort zone is an illusion, y’all. It’s the ego talking to keep us from reaching our full potential in the name of relative safety” (from ‘The Benefits of a Personal Retreat’ ) Get on over to Intuitive and Spiritual, tell her the Doctrine sent ya.

 

Don’t forget to get out your short pencil and scrap paper! Tomorrow is Thursday and that means one thing, Six Sentence Story! zoe (and her able assistant Joules) will have a prompt word and you are invited to find the best six sentences you can and put it in story form. It’s fun.

Share
Filed Under: Featured, Psychology, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: , , , , ,

TToT -the Wakefield Doctrine-

July 22, 2017 By

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

‘Ola’s Tree’ (Landscape orientation) A photo of the area of our property we designated for Ola’s grave. The view is from just beyond the enclosed area, facing back towards the house, which dominates the upper third (center) of the photo. It (the house) is prominent as it’s an ‘orangey’ brown, while almost everything else is green. The eye is drawn first, however, to the rising diagonal line of a rail fence entering the scene from the lower right center. Only one rail is visible until it encounters a round, vertical post. The rail is inset into an oval hole about six inches from the top of the post, which in turns shows it’s post-like nature with the skewed circle of it’s top surface. The up slanting path of the fence has advanced enough that we can see two rails continue on past the post (like one of the fork-things in the kitchen that look cool but only get used when the cook is trying to lift something hot from a roasting pan and you know whatever is being moved is gonna try and escape). Both rails extend to the right at an up-slant until they terminate in an end post. The rails and the posts are light-wood color (which means ‘once brown, now faded pale-into-white brown’). The undersides of the rails have the darkness that lets us know they are round (as opposed to angular). Thin dark green squares overlay the trapezoid shape of the fence section. The squares are very regular and once enough of them are detected, they connect and look like what they are, interconnected space manifesting as green vinyl wire fencing. (Think: a strip of bubble wrap, except not rounded and doesn’t make the irresistibly fun sound when you squeeze them.) The central feature of the scene is not Ola’s grave, which is in the left center, and shows as three quarters of a rectangle. Even though there’s a young pine tree obscuring the lower left side-corner of the grave which, in turn is a mottled sand-color rectangle with a light gray border, it’s not what captures the viewer’s interest. The center of the photo (or perhaps better to say, center of attention) is what at first glance seems to be a tilted pine tree with a prominent, if not narrow trunk. Following the dark two-tone trunk (light on the top, darker on the lower half of it’s cylindrical shape) up, to the left it finally shows branches, like the brushes used by chimney sweeps, only green instead of black. If one follows the trunk downwards, slanting to the ground, an oblong of light catches the eye. (Another case of a dark cylinder lit from above, the light doesn’t bounce off the tree trunk as much as it embraces it.) The line of this new section rises in an arc and then immediately dives back to earth. Now the pre-cortical brain is in full archetype mode…. snake? (“nah, too big!’), pipe stuck in the ground?!’ (“yeah, right this is a well-thought out yard feature.“) Dragon? (?! … now that you mention it!”) lol

Each week Josie Two-Shoes invites all to share whatever experiences that may have elicited a sense of gratitude. The standards for inclusion (of ‘Things of Thankful’) on a list are very liberal. Items, (for inclusion – on a list – in a post – linked to Josie’s blog) might arise as the result of encountering people (due to deliberate intention or frivolous whim), visiting places (familiar or exotic) or confronting things/events (both planned and spontaneous). The underlying theme is two-fold (ish): by reflecting on circumstances that create a feeling of gratitude, one is more likely to encounter it again. And by posting it (here in the bloghop) one has the opportunity (privilege) to see a portion of another’s world. (As the followers of the Doctrine will attest to, the more you can appreciate the reality of another, the more enhanced is your capability to not be limited by the time-worn shackles of ‘everyone knows’ and ‘that’s just the way things are’. We accept that we all live in a what is, to a degree, a personal reality and, paradoxically, it is only by developing the capacity to accept that fact, are we able to change in improve how our own personal lives play out. ya know?)

Suspect I don’t need to include a comforting statement about how this here bloghop here is totally ‘Freedom Hall’ and the only requirement for acceptance is good intent. Now that I think of it, ‘I think we’re all bozos on this bus‘. (Totally beyond the chronological reach of most, if not all readers, at least in the direct, contemporaneous experience. That last line is from the incredible Firesign Theatre. Go ahead click on the first link, it won’t be awful…ok, maybe confusing, but funny. I think I’ll make that Item One!)

So on with the show!

1) The Firesign Theatre the only true comedy album(s)

2) Exception to implied (but not intended) inference of Item 1, the albums of Bob Newhart. Now, before someone says, ‘yeah, but Robert Klein, David Steinberg and Albert Brooks, all funny guys, they had albums! What about them? Well, the thing is, what (imo) Bob Newhart did as comedy was meant to be heard and was, (still imo) independent of the visual element. Think about any comedian/comedienne, you watch them as much as listen to them, because they’re constantly sending all sorts of non-verbal messages. Very much a part of what makes us laugh.

3) (Keeping in the theme of the things of the distant past), shout out to zoe and her Six Sentence Story bloghop. The writers who participate in her bloghop cover the waterfront in terms of writing styles and, of importance to me, remarkable writing skill. That last is important to me, as, ever since coming to this place, I’ve been trying to learn the writing thing. Nothing better than to hang out with them whats got the thing you seek.

4) Speaking of groups of remarkable humans, lets hear it for the Graviteers! Val, Joy, May, Lisa, Sarah and Kristi

5) Una

6) Una Garden, Phyllis and Una

Phyllis gathers produce and Una stands watch. *(landscape orientation) Center left: Una sits on the bench that runs along the edge of the deck on the back of the house. Her body is facing the camera (sorta) and, being fairly close is quite identifiable as a dog. As opposed to other, more at-a-distance photos, where she presents as a shiny black shape with legs and triangular ears. Una has her head turned to her left, watching Phyllis who is standing, (slightly bent at the waist), between the ‘n’ and the ‘a’ of the garden. She is adding a green vegetable-thing to the yellow vegetable-thing in her left hand. Phyllis is wearing a blue tee shirt and blue and white striped (vertical stripes) pants. Rumour has it that she’s wearing her pajamas to pick the morning harvest. But, for the record, you didn’t hear it from me. Una, as usual, is a study in black, with beige forelegs and paws. She is watching Phyllis intently, as although our backyard is not visible to the neighbors, it is sometimes the rabbit equivalent of the local burger joint (veggie burgers, of course). The grass surrounding the garden is varying shades of green and a bit over-grown. The background (behind Phyllis) is comprised of pine trees which show as telephone-pole-vertical-trunks of a variety of diameters, cross-hatched with green needled branches. If you stare just at the trees, it has a decidedly oriental painting feel.

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

8) (hey! what’s a reflective* post without a music video?)

9) * ‘reflective’: in this context, the word ‘reflective’ is what is referred to in the Wakefield Doctrine as a ‘rogerian expression’ (pronunciation: roe jeer ree ann) This linguistic filigree is the equivalent of the sparkling shiny teeth of the scott and the paralyzing complexity of (any) effort of a clark to explain the simplest of things. As readers should know, rogers are the personality type that are associated with being ‘a Herd Member’. The mainstay character of the reality that causes people to grow up as a roger is contained in a single word: quantifiable. (In the personal reality) of a roger, the world is quantifiable, understandable and… in that wildly out-of-left-field way that makes the Wakefield Doctrine the fun insight that it is, emotion, Yep! rogers exist in a reality grounded in emotion, yet manifestly quantifiable. Better take a run over to the page on rogers. (If you’re a new reader, it’ll help. Although, if you’re a new reader and you’ve read this far…. welcome to the Doctrine!)

Anyway, a rogerian expression is a delightfully incorrect use of a word, the ’10’ in the world of malapropisms. As a matter of fact, a sure sign that you’re being hit by a rogerian expression is the outburst of shocked laughter that serves as a buffer against the assault (of perfect incorrectness). Anyway, that link in the previous paragraph? The page on rogers will have an entire section on ‘rogerian expressions’. Try not to surpass on reading it.

10) SR 1.3

Click on this, yo

 

Share
Filed Under: Featured, Psychology, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: , , ,

Six Sentence Story -the Wakefield Doctrine- STAND

July 20, 2017 By

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

peabody

Wednesday morning warm-up for Thursday’s Six Sentence Story with clever graphic effects.

Zoe encourages, harangues and coaxes those of us with a jones for new arrangements of words to get our weekly fix with the Six Sentence Story. The prompt word is our starting point, where we end up… that’s the fun part.

This week thought I’d try something different. (lol when zoe stops laughing we’ll continue.) Old Egg often writes ‘Sixes’ that I read as remembrances of events from youth; they are both poignant and very engaging. So, this week I thought I’d try to write a ‘remembrance Six’ in the style of our friend from Down Under .

(Hey Old Egg! Dude! Not as easy as it you make it look.)

Stand

Through the endless last week of high school, the hallways echoed with the dissipation of stress, as exams were over, nothing left but to hand in textbooks and wait to be released into Summer; even the teachers were different, losing the rigid posture of authority, and a handful of the newer teachers even acted like regular people.

“Hey, could you give me a hand with this,” the boy looked up and down empty corridor, certain the girl was talking to someone else, “I need help to take this banner down.” The very pretty brunette, (the young man knew her name was Cindy, but then again, he also knew the names of all the Greek goddesses and the maiden names of most of the younger, attractive film stars), who stood in the doorway of an empty classroom inspired surprise, if for no other reason than the fact that she was: pretty, a senior, very popular and talking to him by choice.

With the boundless capacity of the adolescent mind to extrapolate, project, and imagine, all with total disregard for reason and reality, the boy watched a future life unfold involving love, sex (as much detail as his limited experience allowed) and most of all, acceptance by those around him…all in the time it took to walk five steps to the open classroom door.

He immediately noticed the record player on the desk at the front of the room and with an uncharacteristic disregard for consequences, lifted the tone arm over the rotating black disk and put the needle down at the very first track; Sly and the Family Stone, closer friends to the boy who spent his life in the social shadows and alleyways, began to sing, ‘…and in the end you’ll still be you.’

He looked up and the girl was still there and she was smiling…at him.

 

Share
Filed Under: Featured, Psychology, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: , , , ,
« Older Posts