the Wakefield Doctrine | the Wakefield Doctrine - Part 36 the Wakefield Doctrine | the Wakefield Doctrine - Part 36

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

Fraedie -the Wakefield Doctrine-

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

 

This is the Doctrine’s contribution-of-the-weak to jenne and ceayr‘s bloghop, ‘the Unicorn Challenge‘.

A mirror of unreliable silvering, all invitees are told one thing: ‘this is an image, now tell your Readers and we few, we creatively-driven few, we band of bloggers a two-hundred and fifty word story.

“Shit.”

Surely the most concise and, therefore, powerful of invective.

The human animal often holds up language as its crowning achievement and distinguishing characteristic. Above all other animals, on a throne supported by a stubborn consistency of sound, at once remarkable and, yet, in it’s tendency to branch off into dialects and pidgin in fact, diminishing. Nothing is more emblematic of the curse of the fruit of a certain Garden than to choose, among the countless choices of sounds… words, than this:

“Shit.”

I looked down over the terrain. The blue of the sky made more the abyss by banks of grey-on-white clouds. The first to navigate the River of Time and my first impression is ‘an Artist’s studio minus the nude’. Of course I recognized the buildings, there was no mistaking my location.

When I was, as the Bard so tactilely invoked, there’s the rub.

The Mound was as it must be. The approach to the Baths was as conspicuously missing. Compounding my sense of dislocation were black pathways running in too-even rows among trees that had shed circumference by a factor not possible to yet remain alive. The afterbirth of Man’s effort to sire Nor Loch was there, but possessed the smoothed contours expected of the very young and the too-old.

“Damn that Professor Egmont and his infernal machine!”

*

 

Share

Six Sentence Story -the Wakefield Doctrine- [an Ian Devereaux Six]

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

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

Hosted by Denise. Regulated by the Department of Sentenae Limitation, Ordinal Section; Sextuplet Division.

Prompt Word:

ENGAGEMENT

“Hey, teach, nice to meetcha,”

Lou Caesare is many things; a complete list would necessarily involve contact with a variety of law enforcement organizations and, if a totally comprehensive measure of the man was the goal, employing a medium wouldn’t hurt as some biographical resources were, ‘at-a-distance’; but for all of his societal-shortcomings, being a poor host was not one.

I pride myself on my sense of people when, early the previous week I said, ‘Sure, it’ll be fun,” in response to Leanne’s suggestion that we have dinner at the Bottom of the Sea Strip Club and Lounge.

Chair of the Department of Advanced Anthropology and Cultural Semiotics, friend, former client, sometime lover, Leanne had driven down from Radcliffe to lead a symposium at Brown University; Dr. Leanne Thunberg, ever the considerate houseguest for the weekend insisted on having dinner at my favorite ‘restaurant’ and ‘meeting my friends and dancers and mobsters’; what could I say other than, “Of course!”

“Tell me one thing about Devereux that you know he doesn’t and one thing I do,” Lou offered his Great White grin, an elevation of his shoulders and the slightest of nods, all from his side of the last booth on the right; the gestalt was as direct and formal as a bow over a ladies hand in a Victorian parlor.

Returning his smile, Leanne did something with her voice and eyebrows that put ivy on the walls of the Lounge side and caused the bump ‘n grind music from the strip club to acquire a baroque lilt,

“The woman is always right and hearing someone begin a sentence with, ‘Rules of Engagement’, tells you who’s the first to cheat and on top of that, a fuckin’ hilarious oxymoron.”

Lou Caesare laughed with characteristic lack of restraint that made a person want to be funny, it was full-bodied and totally disarming;

“Hey Devereaux, first of all, you’re clearly playing way, way out of your league with your lady-friend here and second, you better pray I don’t take it to mind to open a branch Bottom of the Sea up Cambridge way,” Leanne and Lou lead the ensuing laughter.

 

 

 

 

 

Share

Midweeksday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

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

New Readers?

There’s this thing we’ve discovered about our Readership over the years that’s encouraging  to most (Readers) and challenging to some. At least to the extent that this insight has been validated by all who come here and stay for any length of time.

Of all the Readers who come back here more than twice, most are either clarks or scotts with a significant secondary clarklike aspect or rogerswith a significant secondary clarklike aspect.

Sure, you’re thinking, ‘Well, duh. That pretty much includes all three personality types. Where’s the 411 in that?’

Hey, we have established that clarks consume ‘new’ like starved monkeys in a banana factory, right? The thing about insatiable appetites is theys always in a hurry. That’s why clarks do so poorly at tasks/jobs/hobbies/relationships that require a careful reading of concise and mandatory-for-success instructions. We* get it. We see the parts all in a box and such. Unfold the instructions. Read the first page, the top of the rest of the pages and then, if the pictures at all resemble what we have held in our minds since we started the assembly process… no! wait! make that ‘since we imagined having whatever it is that involves this task/job/hobbies/relationship’ then we’re all set.

Sure. Take all the time you need, New Readers** We’ll pause and, hell, why not lets stick a music vid here while you process the preceding paragraphs. (A little courtsey from your friends here at the Doctrine. Allows those for whom the thought is dawning, ‘Jeez that stuff in the other posts wasn’t, like for effect, where’s the door?’)

Lets what say we provide a little cognitive dissonance: the clarks (those whose predominant worldview is the of the Outsider) more often than not have greater difficulty getting anything useful from this little thought experiment than do the scott or roger (for each, the presence of a significant secondary clarklike aspect is totally sine qua non.) All that ‘Hurry up and lets get to the next thing that might have the Answer!’ don’cha know.

BEgin… NOw

Pencils down…

ok

be sure to tune in*** tomorrow. that, being Thursday, you, New Readers, are invited to participate in the Six Sentence Story bloghop. Go ahead! Join in! Instructions are right there on the landing page. What you got to lose? (other than self-respect and the dream of being considered a legitimate writer, of course. lol)

The point of our post. The ‘takeaway’ is twofold: a) the presence of a secondary clarklike aspect cranks up the curiosity factor in scotts and rogers and 2) of the three, only clarks perceive out little personality theory as something not only interesting, but potentially useful.

 

 

* yes, we are a clark… we know you knew, but just wanted to crank up the ‘Annoy’ on the rogerian Readers and distract the scottian ones. Best of intentions, a course.

** totally grateful for your presence, yo. If for no other reason that our own fluency improves ever time we try to explain this here personality theory here to a stranger

*** ayiiee such a ‘How did so much time pass so quickly that this idiom is a frickin’ Rosetta-fricken-Stone for just about every one you’ll encounter today… (the polite ones will look slightly-unbored and say, “This ‘Dial’, you mean you watched ‘tele’ ‘Vision’ in the shower?!!’)

Share