Featured | the Wakefield Doctrine - Part 27 Featured | the Wakefield Doctrine - Part 27

whyday -the Wakefield Doctrine- [a tale of the Stone and the Crone]

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

This is the Wakefield Doctrine’s contribution to the Unicorn Challenge, jenne and ceayr‘s weekly photo prompt bloghop. Simple enough: new photo each week and a two hundred and fifty word limit on our story-ettes.

(Hey! We haven’t visited with our favorite (“Are they who I think they are? Nah, now way. Even that Doctrine guy wouldn’t reach that far!“) couple, ‘the Stone and the Crone’. (Previous Installments: Here   …oh, yeah, and: Here)

This week:

 

“You know, I been thinkin…”

The man paused, the conversational backleading found in couples of only the longest tenures; bent-knee of one leg an additional support to the woman slightly behind him.

“Now, what have I always said…” the woman, an age and adversity-drawn caricature of Nature’s male-female size discrepancy, drew a breath that seemed to cling to her body like passengers on a slowly sinking ship.

“Only one of us can be the brains and the other…”  her words trailed as she leaned towards the man. The absence of the expected sharp retort sparked a sad alarm in her companion’s eyes.

“Let’s sit here a minute, I’m tired,” the easy lies couples exchange, like monetary instruments or favored talismans, have never been immune to the wear-and-tear of time.

Crouching, his right knee an inverted ‘V’,  the man did his best to position his trailing leg at a right angle, perpendicular to the other, creating, at least to a child’s eye, every bit a throne of ivied-timbers; the woman leaned back, her eyes trapped by the incline below the two fleeing anachronisms.

“Has it occurred to you that walking up stairs is god reminding us of the difference between man and angels? That, should we only recover the part we left behind in the Garden, hills and steep staircases would be celebrations of our wings and not a curse of our aging bodies.”

The man paused, a patient waiting. Time now a comforting breeze, no longer an endless headwind.

 

Share

Six Sentence Story -the Wakefield Doctrine- [a Brother Abbott and the Order of Lilith 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 there is but one rule: the story (inspired by the week’s prompt word) must be six sentences in length.

(the subtitle reference is to a character in a serial Six ‘The Order of Lilith‘. Brother Abbott was in charge of the day-to-day operation of the London branch of the Order in Victorian London.)

Prompt word:

FAINT

“Forgive my confusion,” Brother Abbott smiled, despite an abundant beard and unabashedly assertive brows, a steely glint in his eyes gave lie to his words, “I am a man of the cloth and study the life of the spirit, I know nothing about furniture.”

The parlor of the Godwin’s London home was dark and sparsely furnished, testimony to the need to maintain social position; the inadequate number of gas lighting fixtures allowed a passerby to be impressed and the owners to feel secure.

“My former business partners assured me that you are as knowledgeable in matters of the spirit world as you are discrete,” Wallace Goodwin stood next to his wife Iris and did his best to sound confident which was her cue to become actively involved in the conversation;

“This chaise was delivered a fortnight ago,” nodding at the new green couch, oddly placed in the middle of the room, she relaxed slightly as her large guest in the brown sackcloth robe focused on the item in question, and continued, “I have not been able to sit, relax or otherwise use my very expensive couch since it arrived.”

Without waiting for the obvious question, the former Iris Montgomery, stepped to the green tufted seat, turned and sat… on the floor.

The mute alert of an eyebrow the only sign of concern on Brother Abbott’s face, “That’s curious, the couch moved itself out of the way before you could sit.”

Kneeling in front of carved wood scrolling running between the feet of the chaise he pulled a cloth tag free and standing, turned to his hosts, “Here is your problem… perhaps a misreading of your original purchase order, but this label clearly identifies this as a feinting couch, not a fainting….”

*

Share

“Tuesday Afternoon” -the Wakefield Doctrine- “…is never ending.”

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

Damn! This* is dry. Interesting. Bordering on witty, slipping into boredom.

See?!?! Right there!

ok. pencils down. No, this will not be on the text.

the Wakefield Doctrine is an additional perspective on life, the world and the people who make it up. It is both tool and map. (Not instructions or hot assistant wearing a provocative outfit/clothing). It is presented as a theory of personality though there is no particular drive to justify suppositions, validate inferences or don a cap and gown (or tweed sports coat with leather patches). The terminology is used to justifiy using the term personality types, of which there are three. clarks, scotts and rogers.

{Spoiler Alert! New Readers, if you’re hoping for a fun narrative, outlandish metaphors, out-fricken’-rageous descriptions of behavior set in a rhetorical setting like a turnip in a museum display of Fabergé Eggy-weggs this is not the post. Go back to this post… or this one. Read it. Come back and ask your questions}

The Wakefield Doctrine is but one of countless attempts to make sense of the world, the human condition and how-to-get-through-Life-relatively-un-scathed.

The Beauty-part of who the Doctrine is intended to help is that, (and thank god! for the concept of secondary and tertiary aspects), the only people still reading are those who have a certain quality: once referred to as ‘flexible intelligence’, at time derided as, ‘jeez will you ever stop dreaming and apply yourself‘ or, even, “No! There never was a place called Kansas. This is as real as it is ever going to get.’ In other words clarks (or scotts with a significant secondary clarklike aspect / roger with a significant secondary clarklike aspect).

scotts and rogers have no particular need for the Wakefield Doctrine. Why? Why should they? Go find your (favorite, longest-standing) scottian friend and tell them about the Wakefield Doctrine. Go find your leading rogerian friend (the one who will spend time with you without requiring the presence of others) and explain the Wakefield Doctrine.

The result? They will laugh. (And we’re intending to characterize this reaction as laughing / laughing.)

The reason? As scotts and rogers with the minimum level of clarklike secondary aspect they enjoy what you seem to get out of the Doctrine. But, on the most fundamental level, they’re fish puzzled by your fixation on this ‘water’ thing (or quality or secret insight), if only you’d keep a consistent description, but hey, that’s the thing they like about you. You’re so crazy …and you don’t try to compete.

So what the hell is this!!! ?!?!

Thank god we sent away the New Readers!

Where’s the good-natured fun, the silly metaphors of the early years?

Here’s a question: (Despite the voice in our heads going all, ‘You know what they’re gonna say man’).  Do we look upon our change in writing style as a deficit or an asset. Clearly our posts are far more self-aware and, arguably less fun/funny. But, what about the New Reader? Do we assume they’ve grown up over the years or do we need to incorporate the early style into our current in the hope of providing an insight into our little personality theory that is sufficient to the task of providing enough for them to start seeing the clarks, scotts and rogers in their world?

… tomorrow we’ll return to the task of discussing why practicing seeing the Wakefield Doctrine at work in your own reality will dramatically enhance the benefits you derive.

ya know?

 

* renewed resolve to present the Wakefield Doctrine to a new generation of Readers

 

 

*

Share

Monday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

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

Well, we’re back.1 Trust all had non-lethal weekends. That said, we had several constructive/instructive conversations revolving around a variety of uses and applications of our little personality theory.

Lets start with what’s considered by some as nearly a ‘Mission Statement’:

‘With the perspective afforded by the application of the principles of the Wakefield Doctrine, we are better able to see the world as the other person is experiencing it‘.

At the heart of this ambition is the concept of translation (kinda). The thing of it is, the Doctrine maintains that we, all of us, experience reality, to a small, but significant extent as personal. Not an excessively outré concept anymore.  Example: last week we described a situation in which three people stood on the sidewalk opposite a popular restaurant. There was a line of people waiting to get. From this scenario we offered a certain insight, but don’t take our word for it! Go read what we said HERE. (The exercise posited the three people being a clark, a scott and a roger. This made it doubly useful. a) as a demonstration/illustration of personal reality and 2) the differences inherent among the three personality types (aka predominant worldviews) of the Wakefield Doctrine.

But first: New Readers? The Wakefield Doctrine posits three personality types:

  1. clarks (Outsider) if you wake up in the morning, optimistic or pessimistic matters not, and start the day with the idea of dealing with ‘the world out there’, there’s a better than even chance your worldview is that of the Outsider.
  2. scotts (Predator) the one of your friends who is the most fun, exciting to be with but can be exhausting, (in a good way), they are never not paying attention (ProTip: focus on their eyes, see what we mean?)
  3. rogers (Herd Members) most of the population. You have the exactly correct number of rogers as a close friend. (Yeah, total trick question.) (No, don’t get mad, you know the answer. ok one hint: ‘You know the answer but still rather run it by your focus group.)

Here’s the quick Monday morning def: Everyone reading this post is experiencing the world from the perspective of one, (and only one), of the three aforementioned ‘predominant worldviews’. While you have ‘the other two’ (the non-predominant worldviews) as a potential you are a clark or a scott or a roger. (And no, you are not the exception to the rule. roger. Lets make this our little secret aiight?)

Helpful hint: the word perspective is all over this here personality theory here. Most often accompanied by the qualifier (or whatever the grammaticon*) ‘additional’. The reason is that the Wakefield Doctrine does not purport to be the Answer. It is simply one more of the endless encounters we all have with multiple choice exams.

 

1) We are resuming our little discussion kinda where we left off Here last week

* lol damn! how did we not stumble on that joke-lette before now?

 

 

 

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) Phyllis

2) Una

3) the Wakefield Doctrine We continue with the efforts to write  ‘This is the Wakefield Doctrine; posts on weekdays. While we totally enjoy, (and benefit from), our fiction writing, this blog has, in the final analysis a singular mission: explaining the principles of the Wakefield Doctrine and the benefits of applying them to one’s life to as many people as possible. Of late we find our selfs thinking, “Damn! Random New Readers shouldn’t have to hold their forearm up against the blinding glare of the klieg lights attendant to our bloghop posts each Thursday and Friday. (This part of our writing week is totally essential to developing our skills with the wordifying and such). New Readers are the lifeblood of this blog, so if you’re out in the world this week and you hear someone say, “I really thought I knew them better than that, how could they say such a thing?” Do us a solid, stop them and say, ‘Not for nothin’ but there’s this place/site/blog online that may be the answer to your conundrum. Go there, look around and, if anyone asks, tell them, “(Your Name Here) Sent ya”

4) the Mow-or-Meadow Project See photation in Grat 7

5) the Six Sentence Story bloghop. Six-Pick of the Week: ‘Back in her Cubbyhole‘  by Chris Hall

6) the Unicorn Challenge bloghop. the Ear of Delight(?!!) (lol): ‘Party of Unusual Proportion‘ by Liz H

7) front ‘lawn’

8) bridge project still in pre-luminary stage, aka thinking about it. consensus: build new bridge first. primary benefits are twofold: a) simplicity of planning, conservation of energy (there’s an odd, ‘project fatigue’ effect when it comes to requisitioning, allocationing and otherwise working-up energy for large scale home projects that is not enhanced by the passing of time; 2) shorter timeframe schedule for functionality, (of streamlette crossing), and finally iii) the post-apocalyptic effect of building the new in the shadow of the ancient, decrepit.  (The bridge, not the builders!) …ok, maybe a little.)

9) something, something

10) Secret Rule 1.3

 

Music Vids

*

*

*

*

You are invited to the Inlinkz link party!

Click here to enter

Share