Month: June 2018 | the Wakefield Doctrine - Part 3 Month: June 2018 | the Wakefield Doctrine - Part 3

Monday -the Wakefield Doctrine- “…and fun, too!2

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

quick post

Dedicated to two Friends of the Doctrine, Cynthia and Teachezwell, the following reprint, from 2010. They both have said/written things, this weekend passed, that reminded me of that which I already knew, yet am all too prone to forgetting.

And, that is the basis of the value of the Wakefield Doctrine, to offer one more tool that will make finding others of like mind more possible. And, through the truly remarkable power of identification, (re)-acquire that which I have, so that it might be available to another, at another time.

Time.

In the time it takes to write this, it is about time this subject is addressed, when will it be time to get serious….it’s about Time.

The un-marked Rolodex stopped spinning this morning and came up Chambers Brothers, which means the topic is Time. (I will say with pride  that I resisted the Pink Floyd and stayed with the original source.)

On with it then.  Everything can be seen in light of the Wakefield Doctrine, ever thang.  Even Time.  Especially Time.

(BTW I did make some New Year’s resolutions, and primary among them was to present the Doctrine in as effective a manner as possible, which means that every Post/any Post contain something of the ‘real world’ that will offer concrete and objective expressions of the Wakefield Doctrine.  And I will not stint to present the Doctrine in as many different ‘contexts’ as may make themselves available.)

Time to start?

clarks are of the future, scotts of the present and rogers of the past.
(for clarks) the future never arrives, (for scotts) the present is over too soon and (for rogers) the past is essential.

All very obvious, but what are we to learn about the ‘worldview’ of each of the three in this context?

clarks, as well known by now, live in their heads.  They inhabit the world as outsiders, for various reasons clarks feel the need to earn the respect and acceptance of virtually everyone else they encounter.  Implicit in this statement is the idea that they must make an extra effort, to compensate. Being clarks, they are perfectly suited to the task; come up with a plan, something no one has thought of, in order to do something to redeem themselves…in the future.  clarks are doomed by both the (false) premise and the un-manageable definition of success.  But clarks live in their heads and their strengths are their downfall.  They are trapped by an idea, false to the rest of the world, but true to circular logic inherent in a worldview of ‘me and the rest of the world’.  And as Time passes, the requirements of the gesture that earns the respect of everyone else, grows and grows. Impossible expectations become a way of life that trades effort for acceptance, surrenders any chance to realise the falseness of the original distinction in exchange for the illusion that one more plan might be the one to make it all worthwhile.

scotts, people of action, they are the ones that live in the here and now (without the serenity).  Actions speak louder than words? Actions speak in place of thought.  The very distinctive trait of scotts, their living in and of the present, imbues them with certainty.  If your mind is reflected in your acts and your acts are of the present then you will have a certainty of purpose, which is why, for good or (very, very often) bad, scotts are the leaders.  Most people, most of the time prefer to listen (and by extension, follow) the person with the most certainty, conviction, sureness.  That would be your nearby scott.
(There is a ‘test’ utilized in sales, specifically timeshare sales, in which the sales representative will meet the customers, talk about what they will be doing in the next couple of hours and then abruptly say “follow me”.  Without hesitation, without looking back to see if the customers are, the rep will walk off.  If they  follow a sale is a near certainty, if one or both people have not followed the rep knows there is work to be done.)
The negative aspect of Time to a scott?  (One word: ‘getting old’).  Age. scotts are not the ones who ‘age well’.  Since most of their lives are lived physically, in action/in motion the decline of health and physical prowess is anathema to the scott, both male and female, (for parallel but slightly different reasons).  Want to scare a scott? tell them they are getting old. (might want to be sure your exit path is clear first, though).

rogers? too easy. (Is there a genealogist in the house?) Call from the Department of Redundancy Department1, for the first rogers  to pick of the courtesy phone…As we know the strength of rogers is the source of their limitations.  They organise and they preserve (for posterity).  But Everything a roger deems valuable enough to preserve is considered Perfect.  (As in, ‘improve on this? are you crazy didn’t you just hear the guy say Perfect?). For a roger, ‘if it is worth doing it is worth repeating,…without change or alteration’.

Damn, what a busy morning we gots here.

BREAKTIME!!!!

OK,  back to work.

Let’s consider the ‘point’ of todays’ Post.  Time is the universal, inescapable common experience.  Only problem is that we all live through it differently and more importantly, we all view the effects of Time in very different ways(or to be more exact, three different ways).  And the Wakefield Doctrine is nothing if it is not an effort to find new ways to see the world through the eyes of another person.

(Hey Slovinanss!, it’s snowing out.  Early class!  Go out there and step into the shoes of the others, have some fun.)

Mr. Chambers, if you will…

1) phrase from the totally wonderful Firesign Theater (just find an old person, ask them), specifically from a line in the ‘I Think We Are All Bozos On This Bus’ album. (Album? hey I did say old person)

2)  oh, man! You need to read what I just read. At the risk of citing what some may finding oblique (yeah, like that ever happens ’round here)…. I was reading a magazine for real estate agents and they were asking young agents about their thoughts and I laughed outloud* at what I read:

Miss Young real estate agent’s style centers on “being present'” with her clients, which is not as simple as it sounds. “I go deep with people. I help them figure out what they want out of life and what kind of lifestyle they want to have,” she says, “And they get to know the real me as well. It’s hard for us not to be vulnerable with each other.”

 

* yes, that is a clue as to the person’s predominant worldview (hint as to clue, rhymes with progression)

Share

TToT -the Wakefield Doctrine- ( A ‘live’ post) (Typos? blame the Beatles for giving me only 39:45 to write, edit and publish.)

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

‘Una sitting at the dining room table’ “Let me tell you something about these people”

1) oh, man…. this Post ain’t gonna go nowhere other that Nostalgiaville, USA… (trying to write while listening to the album… quick Thankful: Josie for having this place to flaunt the digital rights regime of this Brave Strange New World.  (thanks, J  save me some soma)

2) at the risk of sounding like every ‘previous generation’ that ever walked-in-slipper-clad-feet-around-a-Saturday-morning-house, I can’t resist saying, ‘No matter how old you are, what is there not to like about this here record here?’

3) Holy Smoke! According to our digital delphi, Wikipedious, the album we have ‘borrowed’ today, was released June 2, 1967.  (can I get a ‘damn!’?)

4) So, for the purposes of contextualizing: I would have been in high school at the time of the release of this album. (Institution of High School motto, “Open buffet for the scotts with their newly discovered forks and knives, shiny new fencing for the rogers and the clarks, (they’re there, you just have to look closely), not such a nice place.”)

5) I am grateful for the realization (or delusion) that many of you Readers are thinking, ‘Hurry! Mr Wakefield Doctrine’ you have only as long as the album plays for your indulgence in what is surely like being home alone with friends, parents on the way back.’

6) The Wakefield Doctrine. Because although the Doctrine was twenty years in the future, in this present world it does provide me with some degree of acceptance of the memories of those days. We will, as clarks, at any rate, defy anyone to say that all their memories of the stage of life represented in this post are of a positive, peaceful nature. The Doctrine, as we all know, is ‘for me, not them’.

7) (OK!  Got some time, ‘Within You Without You’ just started! That gives us some time. So, we do, of course, acknowledge that all of us grow up at different times (lol) and therefore the context of our memories are framed differently. I will, however, indulge in the conceit that we, all of us, are similar as clarks, scotts and rogers. We encounter the world and whether that world has the internet (Cynthia and Lizzi) or it has horses and carriages (Pat and zoe*) we all are more similar than different. The Wakefield Doctrine talks about how ‘we relate ourselves to the world around us‘. And if we do it with pen and paper of the virtual megaphone of the internet, we are all telling each other tales of our lives. I use the metaphor (or analogy of whatever the heck it is) of tales of our lives. The internet is far more encouraging of this sharing than is the ‘real’ world, if for no other reason than it is easier for us to ‘write the tales of our lives’ than it is to act it out in front of people. Enough! We’re at Rita, time to wrap this thing up.

8) THIS SPACE AVAILABLE (Anyone wishing to get their feet wet (and if you just had a ‘visual’ of a foot over an old-fashioned writing desk, big-toe suspended over one of those like glass ink bottles? Well, we want to hear from you!)

9) Sunday Supplement

Courtesy of Friend of the Doctrine, Cynthia:

THERE! THAT’S IT! We made it to 10:43.

10) Secret Rule 1.3 (from the Book of Secret Rules (aka the Secret Book of Rules)) This, (SR1.3), states in part, “…[t]he completion (or anticipated completion1) of a list of Ten Items2 shall qualify as an Item and therefore can be inferred and used as an Item on said List. Tradition holds that this ‘completion item’ (L. Lewis, 2016 ‘here we can see the end, so, go ahead and put ‘er right in that list,”) be place as the final item. ( 1.) meaning nine items established; it is not considered legal to extend beyond the one, sometimes referred to as a ‘reverse Faberge’  (2.) Ten is the most commonly accepted number for a List to be considered complete, there are, however cases and situations in which a lesser or greater (‘a minore ad mains‘) number might be submitted.

* I kind ’em  but mean only the best

One of the top five albums of my (semi)adult life.


Share