Month: July 2023 | the Wakefield Doctrine Month: July 2023 | the Wakefield Doctrine

Monday -the Wakefield Doctrine- “The RePrints must go on! …again, or is that implied by the ‘Re’?”

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

Today we have one of the earliest of the Last-Days-of-Summer* posts.

Busy weekend, this past couple of days. As you’d know if you read our TToT yesterday, we attended a concert. Lyle Lovett and his Large Band. Most excellent event. But that bit of diversion (last concert being in, like 2006) threatens to throw off our recent post-writing rhythm.

So, this post. (To any new Readers** the answer is: ‘Nope! Don’t have a problem going back and reading early posts.***)

how early? First-full-year writing, yo.    (for the record? Seeing the illustration I used… brought a smile, twenty-two three(!!) years later.

We know why you are reluctant to Comment

Welacome to the aWakefielda Docttrina (dis is da tearey of die clark and da scotts and dem rogers der). This is the place you can really get something really useful from the internet experience. Really. My Doctrine, she gonna make you so a happy that you, you’re gonna wanna say, where she been all my life, eh? Its twue, its weally twue.*Charismatic

When you  “get” this “Doctrine” you “will” finally understandwhy “everyone” acts like they “do”. What confused you about, these so-called “family members” and spouses (nyahh sp ow seses), all them who have been tormenting you while you try to understand what they want and give that to them. BUT! do they like WHAT you do for them? HUH? DO they? wait! wait! I can answer that question!! Call on me! Me!  The answer to your question is:
“No, no they do not”   (Thank you, thank you I studied so hard for this moment. I want to thank the Progenitor scott and the Progenitor roger and all the DownSprings, thank you! thank you! thank you!)

Welll… (as a leading scott would be heard to say, just before totally firing some poor college student who was only working at the timeshare resort for the summer, in the hopes of making some money for school). Little did they realise what they were getting themselves into… In fact, have I ever mentioned that I survived and even flourished in the totally insane, twisted-personality realm of timeshare sales? And that that was only because of my understanding of the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers)? Well, I did! Remind me sometime to tell y’all about it. It’s about half interesting.)

Anyway, I think I getting back to writing about what the current thinking at the Wakefield Doctrine is, vis ‘a vis getting Readers to Comment and participate and generally get us all famous and shit. Quick background, we know people are visiting and reading the Doctrine and we know that some people come back and read on a fairly regular basis. We also know that (other than Progenitors and DownSprings) there has not been a lot of participation from these putative Readers. So, what gives?
One opinion, offered by Friend of the Doctrine Mel, is that Commenting on a blog like this is kinda intimidating. Intimidating!?! What the hell is that supposed to mean??!! Wft we ask real, real nice for people to write a Comment, we even offer to give them a frickin, free, frickin hat (for their damn frickin heads)! How intimidating is that? Hey!! I asked you a goddamn question! How-Intimidating-Is-That??!!!

So, maybe there is some possibility that people might feel that they are expected to answer in a way that might be judged. But we do not mean that. When I say, “there are no stupid questions, there are just your questions”, I mean that in a kind and supportive way. We have all been where you are, and we truly invite  a reasoned and constructive response to our Posts, do you think you can manage to muster** a little initiative and write something? If we were all rogers here, we would come right out and ask you to Comment in a way that would sound like you would be the one missing out, if you did not Comment. But then, we are not all rogers here. Are we?

While that might be the reason (for the lack of participation) I have recently come to the conclusion that we have simply failed in conveying the basic concept of the Wakefield Doctrine to you Readers. When I think about how we got to this point (of the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers) I realise that most of the time has been spent ‘in person’ with people and saying things like, ‘look at that person, watch how they react, they are such clarks or scotts or rogers’. Even more basic than that, the beginning of spreading the word involved people who knew the Progenitors directly, so it was so easy to say, ‘you know how roger always does that’, or ‘now watch how mad scott gets when I…’ It was very easy to convey the elements of this theory of clarks, scotts and rogers, the (future) Wakefield Doctrine.

It is just that, after the immediate circle of friends learned this thing of ours, they were telling people they knew about clarks, scotts and rogers. It became apparent (or at least seemed apparent) that people liked it and were inclined to share it with others and the Doctrine was simply enough to spread that way. And so the Wakefield Doctrine blog came into existence. But the gap, the ‘one wayedness’ of writing a blog is a difficult hurdle to overcome. Combined with what we might charitably call rudimentary writing skills, we need to find a way to communicate the fun, the positive benefits, the value of the Wakefield Doctrine in such a way, that after reading this, people will say, “Yeah I know what those people mean!”

As you see, we have the Raison-ettes writing and contributing in the hopes of providing as much of the sense of the Doctrine as is possible. Maybe the only answer is to take it on the road. Rent halls in large cities and train people directly to carry the message of the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers out to the world.
Sort of like Fight Club.***

*    Stolen from Blazing Saddles, one of the top three funniest movies of all time
**  A ‘muster’ is an assembling of military troops for inspection. This expression, dating from 1575, first referred to passing such a review successfully (Wiktionary)
*** But without the fighting****
**** And without being Brad Pitt*****
*****Hell, without being Edward Norton

 

*aka ‘so, did the weather person mention the chance of snow?

** New to this blog or, even better, new to writing a blog

*** which is more surprising, given that we’re clarks. Heck, clarks abhor scrutiny to the point that, for us, the idea of holding up early efforts in developing any skill is…well, abhorrent. But the Doctrine is, again, demonstrating it’s remarkable benefits, at least here, in the most personal of terms. We can read those posts and smile, seeing a certain writing style showing here and there. (Overlay your own metamorphosis …errr.  metaphor HERE). lol

The effect of the principles of this here personality theory here is amply demonstrated. At least to me. And I’m not just the curator of the Wakefield Doctrine, I’m an adherent!

Share

TToT -the Wakefield Doctrine-

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

This is the Wakefield Doctrine’s contribution to the Ten Things of Thankful (TToT) bloghop.

1) Una

2) Phyllis

3) the Wakefield Doctrine

4) Six Sentence Story

5) recently-developing tertiary rogerian aspect (See Grat 7 below)1

6) ever-so-rare concert attendance: Lyle Lovett and his Large Band (closed the show with the first of the music)

7) excerpt from the first chapter of ‘The Case of the Missing Fig Leaf’ Posted on 

“For a private investigator who divides his day between lunch with members of the underworld at a strip club and seeing clients in an office two doors down from a pawn shop, you come across very much at home here,” Dr. Leanne Thunberg, despite being a head shorter than my six feet, lead me across Harvard Yard, without once turning to make sure I followed.

I’d met Leanne last year, on a missing persons assignment and, despite her being the chair of the Department of Advanced Anthropology and Cultural Semiotics, we clicked; she had a Noomi Rapace thing going on and we all know that any self-respecting cobra falls in love with the mongoose, if only for a brief moment.

She’d emailed me an invitation to come to Cambridge, saying only she had a problem best served by talking to a private investigator; I stopped by her office and, with a smile, she informed me she had reservations at a new restaurant, ‘Craigie on Main’ that she was certain I would enjoy; Leanne had a way of making promises that carried the undertone of a dare.

The restaurant was everything she promised and, accepting her suggestion we have a drink at her home in West Cambridge, I found myself wondering who, among the founders of most established religions, was shrewd enough to insist that the devil was a man.

“Are you familiar with the story of Adam’s first wife?”

The whisper of silk drowned out all other thought and, not for the first time, I was amazed at how such an expensive fabric can be so costly; in the dark it sounded like both the cry of love and whisper of danger; I gave up all hope to steer the night, at least until dawn.

8) something, something

9) still Summer (ish)

10) Secret Rule 1.3

  1. clearly, not my first TToT

Music

*

*

*

 

You are invited to the Inlinkz link party!

Click here to enter

Share

Six Sentence Story -the Wakefield Doctrine- [a Rue DeNite Six]

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

This is the Doctrine’s contribution to the Six Sentence Story bloghop

Hosted by Denise

We last saw Rocco and Rue, they were having lunch overlooking the Atlantic Ocean. The evening ahead consisted of Rue having dinner with Cyrus St. Loreto and Rocco trying not to worry about his charge.

Prompt word:

GRID

The amber fluid, warmed to the perfect viscosity, began it’s cascade over the lip of the carafe. A single, stray beam of a Miami-dawn, released into the dark hotel room by a random gust of the air conditioner under the window, coinciding with a change in angle too subtle to be detected by the naked eye, created the briefest of flashes; like a slow-motion funnel cloud, the syrup touched and filled the center half-cuboid depression of the golden-brown grid.

“I take it things went well last night,” Rocco steepled his hands like a schoolboy at his first High Mass and, raising his left eyebrow for good measure, waited for Rue to respond.

Satisfied her careful flooding of the waffles was past the point of no return, she looked up at her bodyguard; the secondary effect of her change in posture was to cause the collars of her silk dressing gown, held open by gravity and mischievousness, to regain their proper, modesty-enhancing function,

“My job was to have dinner with our mutual boss’s proposed business partner, the original predatory-businessman and come out of it alive and…. unscathed.”

Without further preamble, the dancer known as Rue DeNite attacked the pile of waffles with the hotel’s sterling silver flatware and the glee of a ten-year-old girl on the first day of Summer.

“And,” looking over the rim of her coffee mug, “for the record, I scathe those who and when I choose, not because whatever man or woman feels entitled because of wealth, power or hotness.”

 

 

Share

Wednesday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

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

Why do clarks always (seem) to hedge-their-bets/hold-back/not-embrace-the-present/pay-the-price-but-leave-their-purchase-at-the-fufilment-center*.

The answer is at the heart of why clarks (and scotts/rogers with way too much secondary clarklike aspects) enjoy the Wakefield Doctrine.

The answer** lies in understanding the predominant worldview of the Outsider, aka clarks.

[Ran out of time. Need to work on Six. And go to work. Comments are always fun.]

* an actual word for the place you go (or used to go, pre-internet) in any sizable department store to gather up your purchase and toddle off home with a new portable entertainment center or Three-Speed SunBeam mixer

** we trust some of you have started waving your hands in the air like Prince and shouting ‘There are no Answers in the Doctrine!!’ ‘There are only additional perspectives… and, well ok, if you must, a few Rhetorical Questions, such as:

  • they say that clarks abhor being the center-of-attention, but will not tolerate being ignored
  • if they’re so curious, why don’t more clarks look into their tendency to procrastinate, at least on things that involve others
  • …what do you mean, ‘That last bullet point makes no sense?!’
  • of course it does… but, this post notwithstanding, the attitude remains: offer the tools to self-understanding yourself and let the Reader decide how to proceed
  • …no, we don’t think that this approach to what is, purportedly, at-least-in-part, a self-improvement system is a wee-bit on the laissezfaire
  • sure, and it might seem to some to be the equivalent to the Captain of the Titanic directing his crew to slide notes under the cabin doors of all the passengers informing them that ‘Skiing, rock-climbing and competitive Ice-Water-Swimming has been added to the ship’s athletic program…
  • no, we’re not goings to keep this up
  • yes, there is a coherent answer:
  • clarks, as Outsiders, tend to avoid accepting (things/people-who-seem-to-want-more/events that represent the culmination of a deliberate effort) because then others would be in a position to know us
  • …. we have to spell everything out?!?! ‘Know us without an allowance for a ‘makeup effort’ There is always something of a mystery about clarks and we are good with that because if everything is stated and we don’t measure up (to whatever standard) what’re we gonna do then?

*

 

(yeah, like Prince wasn’t no clark1)

  1. similar to Hendrix in the contrast between stage persona and… personal (at least in interviews and such). Even more (than Hendrix) in the contrast with lyrics and music…
Share

Tuesday -the Wakefield Doctrine- ‘…ok, ok!. this time an actual/’real’ RePrint!’

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

Of course, regular Readers know that the idea of posting an old Doctrine post is to prime the rhetorical pump, as opposed to merely to re-purpose old words, right?

Of course, as we type, the thought comes, ‘How can there be such a thing as an ‘old post?’ At least in the implied pejorative sense. And, the answer is, there is not. Since the core of the Wakefield Doctrine is the relationship (we have) with the world around us, then there can be ‘no getting it wrong’.

There are three characteristic relationships in the Doctrine and only three. Sometimes a person will come along and say, ‘Great system, but it needs one more personality type’.* Not to worry! Not only can you not get it wrong, you can’t break it.

Hey! Maybe we can find an old post that discusses one of the old standards: i.e. ‘the Wakefield Doctrine is gender, age and culture neutral’

(hold on….)

Well! We couldn’t quite find that, but we did find a post with bullet points!

A post from our second year online.

look no further! we have the answer you are searching for, provided of course, that the question you have is: How I can understand the behavior of others and better understand myself through a system comprised of only three personality types?

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

Please make yourself comfortable, feel free to browse through the Table of Contents (over there on the right) or just flip through these Posts. There is a lot of information to cover and not a lot of time. So in a nutshell, seedpod, or lunchbox the Wakefield Doctrine is:

a fun and useful way to understand yourself and other people, a “theory” of personality that is much, much more than all those other theories you read about. The Doctrine says, “hey, there are three personality types in the whole damn world”. You and the person next to you and the folks back home can be seen as being one of these 3 types. They are clarks, scotts and rogers. Figure out which the person is and you will know a whole bunch about them. Figure out which of the three you are and you will not only know a whole lot about yourself, but you will be able to change whatever things (about yourself) that you have been trying (unsuccessfully) to change.

Really.  It’s true.

Of course, there’s a lot more to it than that, but for that you have to read more of what we have to say. But to get you started we will say this, the Wakefield Doctrine is gender and culture neutral and if you find yourself saying, “Hey, Mr Wakefield, sometimes I’m one of those scotts and sometimes I feel like one of those roger people.” To you we say, “whats the matter with feeling like a clark?, huh?”  (oh yeah, clarks not do that “I feel like” shit, do they?)
Anyway, we would say, “Welcome to the Wakefield Doctrine! You have all 3 personality types, of course, but you are mostly one of the three. Don’t worry about it.

Besides we like to think this Doctrine thing is a lot of fun. We might be talking about someone in the news and one of us will turn to the other and say, “Obama….what a roger!” or we might say to each other, “You know those Progressive Insurance commercials on TV? That Flo person, how much of a clark is she, huh?” So this is not just a website you go to and take a test and find out that your personality type is INTP/otter-with-malamute tendencies, hell no! We have fun because we see clarks and scotts and rogers out there in the world and they act just like the Wakefield Doctrine tells us they should act! And it’s getting like we don’t have to make any of this shit up anymore…the clarks and the scotts and the rogers prove that the theory is totally true. Try it your ownselfs!

Today I have copied a page out of the Table of Contents to show that the personality business is not all dry boring, reading stuff! Clearly we like to borrow stuff, here at the Doctrine. So it should not surprise anyone how we went an sort a used Jeff Foxworthy’s “you might be a redneck…” thing. But hey if it makes you laugh, then you will be learning the whole thing about which are clarks and which are scotts and which are rogers.

You immediately stop surfing the channels when you come upon a show that uses only black and white documentary photos and film…you might be a roger

You totally love Christmas lawn decorations and cannot imagine having too many lights… you might be a scott

You find a flier stuck under the windshield wiper of your car and you take the time to read it… you might be a clark.

You are asked a question and you start to answer with “in the beginning…”  you might be a clark.

You are addressed by the wrong name and you answer to it without correction… you might be a clark.

You are building model cars/ships/planes, you always put the extra parts  back in the box along with the re-folded instructions for future safekeeping…you might be a roger.

You think that Slacker was the greatest movie made in the 90s…you might be a clark

You think that Borat was one of the funniest movies of the year…you might be a scott

You think that the 107 episode,  Directors cut, 15 DVD un-abashed edition of the compilation (with Writers notes (including what he had for breakfast) and voice-over reading of the credits by someone who knew someone who was a re-enactor who actually got hurt at an event) of all Ken Burns films, PBS episodes and commercials that last longer than most readings of the Iliad is the greatest film of all time…you might be a roger

You have any inclination to wear hats for a fashion statement (for male rogers only) or a ‘fanny pack’ (either male or female rogers), or  any clothing designed specifically for riding a bicycle (branded or un-branded)…you might be a roger.

You happen to be at a golf tournament and feel that it is expected of the members of the gallery to yell anything (including but not limited to “get in the hole”)…you might be a scott.

You are contemplating a project of any sort; a new deck or a term paper, writing a resume or planting a garden and you:

…you look forward to making the list of things you need to buy/gather/acquire first more than anything else…you might be a clark

…you must know what your friends on the ’do it yourself’ shows have done, that is what you want…you might be a roger

…CONTEMPLATE? PLAN? I JUST FINISHED IT! FUCK YOU!! IT’S DONE NO THIS IS FINE THE WAY IT IS… you might be a scott

So, there you have it. You laugh…you join…pretty simple, isn’t it?

 

 

* if they’re laughing (in a good way), chances are they’re’ a scott; if they’re dreadfully concerned and sincere then you got yourself  a roger talking and if they preface it with ‘I know…’ and propose an enhancement, you’re dealing with a clark. damn! (further explication available upon Comment)**

** if any Reader shouted-out ‘the Everything Rule’ you’ll get a free DocTee***

*** Limit one per winner, quantities non-existent

Share