clarkscottroger | the Wakefield Doctrine - Part 21 clarkscottroger | the Wakefield Doctrine - Part 21

RePrint Monday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

August 14, 2023 By

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

Simplest of search parameters for today’s eponymous post.: the earliest 14th of August available.

Full Disclosure: Interesting search results. This (Publish)Date yielded what seems an inordinately-high level of August fourteenths. No, we didn’t survey, correlate, gather, analyze and dramatize the numbers. (My rogerian aspect is tertiary and quite faint. You’re welcome to go and do the research with your sines, cosine chi squares and margins of error. Really?!? Margins of Error?!?! Who other than our Herd brethren would include the precise measure of how wrong they are in their calculations as making the product of their effort more convincing!?)

Seriously.

That said, this post is about the Outsider. We’d be risking the perception of exaggeration (by our Readers) if we were to now digress into what it is about the ‘Margin of Error’ concept that would make a sane person want to throw the keyboard down on the ground. So, we will not. If you really want to know, ask in the Comments.

be more of a clark? on purpose? are you serious?!? the Wakefield Doctrine

August 14, 2012

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

We all know that:

  • clarks think
  • scotts act
  • rogers feel
(and)  ..we all know that scotts are the confident ones, they are the ones who do not hesitate to act, scotts are the natural leaders and when they shout to the group (and there is always a group around them), when it comes into the head of a scott to move, to act, to do something (because they are bored) and they say,  “Hey!! Lets go this way! (most) people follow immediately, without hesitation or  question.
(and) we all know that rogers are the confident ones, they are the ones who know all about the matter at hand, the whys and the wherefores and most importantly, they know about who else has been/is/or will be involved in the activity that you are curious about, rogers are the organized ones  and when they say, “You should do it this way, (most) people will follow (the directions).
So what about the clarks?
(well) everyone knows that clarks are:
  • possessed of/by/with a really great sense of humor, well  …better make that a rather odd sense of humor
  • a very caring and sensitive person, well …at least once you get to know her and not be put off by the weirdness
  • smart, so smart that its, well  …not smart in terms of grades or day-to-day real life decisions,  but in every otherway!
  • organized, has everything in his head, well organized on some level but if you need to remember something you said last year or the name of the actor in a 23 year old movie!
  • attractive, well not in what you might call the conventional way, but when you see how she offsets the tattoos with the boots and it, somehow ties together, kinda spooky actually
  • creative really more than anyone, well if creative is about the things that never were and will never be,  then you have the right person
  • intuitive, she has a way of, well, I  think she holds back how much she understands
  • weird  well duh!
If you are (still) reading, then you are what we call a scott or a roger or a clark with a certain level of flexible intelligence*… and in an effort to increase the odds that you will continue reading, we will say this:  if you are a scott then you have what we call a secondary clarklike aspect and if you are a roger, then you have what we call a secondary clarklike aspect.  As you know, while we all develop as one predominant type (clark or scott or roger ) we always retain the capacity to experience the world as the ‘other two’ types. We call these two types the secondary aspect and the tertiary aspect. They have an effect on how you express your predominant personality type, but that is beyond the scope of this here Post here. Suffice to say, if you are not a (predominant) clark, then your secondary aspect most likely is clarklike because it is the insatiable curiosity and tolerance of the unknown that keeps you reading, despite all your instincts to the contrary.
So about the music that follows… the fun of totally enjoying a song by Bill Monroe, then hearing something like the Fred Hammond tune from yesterday’s Post and then having ‘Blue Rondo a la Turk’ come on the radio and smiling for the pure joy of the wonderful and horrifying variety of things to appreciate that is available to you, when you are a clark.

*

 

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

Six Sentence Story -the Wakefield Doctrine- [a Café Six]

August 11, 2023 By

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, it is governed by one and only one Rule, (the ‘hop, not the host): make that story exactly six sentences in length.

Full Disclosure: this is a ‘true Six’. At the start of writing yesterday’s Six, (having Lou as a character in it, what can we say, ‘easy-peasy’ am I right?). Trouble was, I got the beginning of a song in my head that insisted it should be included. Only the first ten notes. Turns out I guessed the group who did the song correctly, but the song itself, incorrectly. Today we have the correct song (by Cream).

… and a thoroughly weird-assed Six Sentence Story.

This week’s prompt word:

SEAL

“”Thank god, I know the name of the song!!”

The other Proprietors, (not counting jenne or Ford or Chris, who were on sabbatical, furlough and sick leave, respectively), were standing in a semi-circle at the edge of the small stage nearest to the bar; they were facing an object emitting a multi-colored light that: imparted a carnelian hue to the Gatekeeper‘s face, like a sunrise in the Carpathian mountains; sent a pale cast of celadon to the Barkeeper, making one think of nested porcelain dolls; Mimi, who stood between the bar and the small group, owing to her leaving her Off-White sneakers (with the lifts) at her stool, had to accept a pale blue halo; Tom just stepping out of the kitchen was hypnotized by a spare ray of gold, rendering him speechless, but he still managed to turn to shield his guest, Nancy, who, having been shanghaied by the short-order-chef of the Six Sentence Café & Bistro, had the protection of her white garb to reflect all spectra, save a spare rose beam.

The tall, thin man moved with surprising urgency from the entrance of the hallway that lead to the Managers office even as Hunga tilted his head in that uniquely-canine, non-verbal interrogative, which caused the Manger to cease his frantic progress to the empty-except-for-the-necessary-to-get-away-with-the-narrative, people, crouch to offer a Mini Milk Bone© to him; the dog accepted the gift but raised his ears at the repeating ten notes the well-dressed man was humming.

“Wait! I get the next choice of song… No, you had the turn before last… Yeah, but I have a cigar…. sure, but have you noticed I’m holding one of those little, curved knifes that heaven-only-knows is the preferred utencil for slicing lemons… well, (from back at the bar), I’ll see your lemon knife and raise you a…..a. colandar!!! (err,  I’m new here, but does that make any sense?)… Please, everyone will get a chance to pick a song from the new jukebox (the letters scrolled in an obviously-strained, yet ultimately patient manner across the computer display set on the small stage... I believe the man who established this patently-contrived, if-not-undeniably-good-natured-premise should have first pick...”

…the small crowd of virtual people became silent in their assent to the wisdom.

....but then, I’m next and I’m going with S7 Seal’s Kiss from a Rose!

The tall, thin manager stepped up to the glass of the jukebox, his reflection in the glass front a portrait of inexplicable relief and the hint of a smile that lingered like a memory fragment of a time too long ago.

*

*

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

TToT -the Wakefield Doctrine-

August 6, 2023 By

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

This is the Doctrine’s weakly contribution to the Ten Things of Thankful (TToT) bloghop. (That’s not, however, a Wakefield Doctrine deer. They just pass through, from time-to-time.

1) Una

2) Phyllis

3) the Wakefield Doctrine

4) the Six Sentence Story bloghop

5) the Unicorn Challenge photo-prompt bloghop

6) (the Doctrine’s two hundred-fity word story for the challenge):

“Man, what’re we gonna do with all these extra model car parts”?

Two friends sat on the floor of the most kid-friendly of the two’s house. It was Saturday. It was raining. The house was empty of parents and siblings.

Spread out on the bedroom floor was the detritus of countless Aurora™ model car kits, at least to the extent of the spare parts that remained after assembly was complete. The problem of what to do with the extra pieces demanded resolution. That the growing urgency each pre-adolescent boy felt, sitting on a bedroom floor on a Saturday afternoon, foreshadowed choices and demanded-decisions neither boy yet felt.

For one, (whose bedroom it was), the arrival of an initially strange world was one year away; for the other, (whose superfluous collection of parts without use or function constituted, at the moment, their best hope for entertainment), it was an indeterminate number of months in his future. More than the twelve of his best friend, less than thirty-six; with any luck and the intercession of a heartless god. Of course, in matters of boys, girls and puberty, the calendar was more often than not written in chalk. This transition would be the first, (but surely not last), experience with being left at the metaphorical train station.

But for the two friends, the afternoon together with nothing more than: their friendship, more little plastic hood-ornaments than needed and a near-lethal parts-per-thousand count of airplane glue, practiced the better parts of relationships.

7) sneak peak at Fall Shoe Fashion Collection from the House of Khafka

8) Something, something.  (oh, yeah. the TToT is taking the month off. As the old saying reminds us, “Habit is the foundation of wisdom” so, since ‘dollars-to-donuts’ our friend Mimi is writing a TToT post… here’s the Link to Mimi’s Blog.

9) Progress in the Grass

10) Secret Rule 1.3

 

music vids

*

*

*

 

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

Wednesday -the Wakefield Doctrine- (RePrint, as promised)

August 2, 2023 By

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

 

… as promised*.

Hey! While we have you ‘on the line’** don’t forget, tonight is Wednesday night which means the gates open for the Six Sentence Story bloghop. Ever ones gonna be there, you should stop in. Serially! While not the most skillful of prompt-post writers, we have been told by unnamed others that the Doctrine’s contributions have a certain, je ne sais quoi, no matter what the weekly prompt word might be. Be that as you may*** stop by and check it out. You can thank us later.

[We won’t take offense if anyone feels that the premise of the following is outdated and without value in the contemporary blogosphere. But, we always assumed there is a value to links-out to other bloggers. Maybe the algorithm that ‘more-links-the-better-for-the-linkee‘ has long since sailed. Until convinced otherwise, we’ll keep at it. So, keeping with our mention above of many talented writers at Denise’s Six Sentence Story ‘hop, lets see if this shortcut/combined link works: Sixarians from last week.

 

the Wakefield Doctrine just like Summers of old… a re-run! …Post from August 2011

August 5, 2014

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

Rizzoli and Isles ain't got nothin on these two...

Rizzoli and Isles ain’t got nothin on these two…

From August 2011….  You know what’s funny? This (reprint) references a failed collaborative writing project.  Well, if you go to his blog now, and the Wakefield Doctrine does, in fact, recommend that you do, you will find an un-failed collaborative writing project! Denise (over at Girlie is co-writing a story with the Progenitor roger. And it’s getting pretty good! the roger, being the wildly creative, blog-risk taker that he is, is posting each chapter as they are written. So, when you go over there to read it, you might want to scroll down to Chapter 1 and ‘read your way back to the top’. Be sure to Comment (tell ’em ‘the Doctrine’ sent ya!).

As we all know, the Progenitor roger ( nom de plumage RCoyne ) started his little blog in the hopes of creating a Collaborative Writing Project. Attracting and combining (the efforts) of the full range of  talents,  that seem in so plentiful supply in cyberspace, it was RCoyne’s hope to produce a totally original literary work, (and)  given the apparent variety of interests  found among people in the blogosphere, it  would have been one helluva a blog.
….It failed, of course.

This is not to disparage  RCoyne’s idea nor his Intent. It is a reflection upon the fact that he is a roger….or more precisely, it is a reflection upon the inherent limitations of the aspects of being a roger. Do not misinterpret our feelings on the matter, we are making this statement without placing the onus entirely on roger (or his people). This statement  is equally true of the other two personality types, the clarks and the scotts. Each of the three personality types, that comprise the Wakefield Doctrine, represent a worldview, a ‘reality’, if you will; each a perspective  that is unique and (one) that has great strengths and terrible weaknesses.
(Readers! Remember that the Doctrine maintains that all people are possessed of the qualities/the potentials of each of these three ‘types’ and while we  become predominately one of the three, the other two aspects are always within us, waiting to be called upon by the dominant personality. At times of extreme duress or peril they are available to be called upon.)
We call this…the…. Mystery of the Wakefield Doctrine and the Proof of the 3 Personalities

What is the mystery of the rogerian personality type that prevented RCoyne’s blog from taking off?

What should have the roger done, in order to be successful with the Seccesscessionisticalationist Rag?

Why are we picking on the roger so much?

Lets start with what we do know, about rogers:

  • they believe that Life has rules and that if followed everything will be as it should be
  • rogers believe that reality is essentially quantifiable, that 2 + 2 equals 4 is true now and will always be true, even after the human race is extinct
  • the world is perfect to a roger, we use the word in the sense that implies completeness and order, as opposed to virtuous or good
  • rogers experience the world in general and people in particular with an organizational bias predicated on the herd mentality, ‘like gathers with like and excludes that which is not like’ (or some such nonsense)
  • for a roger, the ‘backstory’ is more attractive than the narrative, (an example from the progenitor roger: early in the days of this blog, one particular Post drew an exceptional number of Comments, we asked  roger what he thought about it and he indicated that he didn’t bother reading the Post, he only read  the Comments)
  • rogers are responsible for civilization, for the development of civilized society, for all social development and refinements beginning with cavemen and moving forward to the Present
  • in expressing their perception of the world as a place of rules, rogers become: Doctors and Lawyers, Accountants and Engineers, Surveyors and Writers of Popular Fiction, Missionary Families and Dynastic Families, Pioneers (geographically), High Priests and Politicians, Homemakers and Trendsetters, Judges and Executioners

The rogerian component of the Proof of the 3 Personalities?  rogers are the only ones who can  ‘ manage and maintain‘  the scottian element of the population. Without rogers, we would all be living under bushes, darting out to drink from nearby streams at dawn and duck, shoulders hunched in anticipation of the attack from the nearby  Umbrella Thorn Acacia tree.  Damn!  The thing about scotts, they are all drive, instinct, appetite. Someone, ( I think it was Claire ), was recently musing about the three-ness of the Wakefield Doctrine and that got me to thinking about Freud (have not got a clue) and his Id, Ego and Super Ego. Who out there does not see that our scottian element is so the Id. And while it is essential to life,  appetite and impulsivity, left un-checked would be kinda short-term.

Let us end today’s Post with a little example that came up in a recent letter to Molly, in which we were discussing the difficulty encountered in distinguishing between a  (very) robust roger and a scott. Both are active, and charming and totally gregarious. But if we watch these two walk into a social gathering ( a party, a picnic, a business conference)  what we will see is:

the scott will make a noise (figurative or literal) immediately upon entering the space…this is meant as a first effort to flush-out any other scotts
the roger will stand in a prominant place at the entrance and wait for a sign of recognition from the various herds making up the crowd
the scott will go to the first person they can get to and start to tell a joke about the fact that they (the scott) are present
the roger will go immediately go to the first person they recognise (provided the person is another roger, if however, the first person they recognize is a clark, the roger will wait)
the scott will go from person to person and tell a joke or introduce themselves to each individual (if there are too many people, in which case the scott will treat each herd as a person)
the roger will either join a herd or gather clarks to start a herd….and wait for a scott.

Bottom line: the scott sees the social environment as a hunting ground, therefore everyone is either prey or predator. If the scott encounters other scotts then ranking must be established, either dominant or submissive, as long as they know where they stand.
The roger, on the other hand, sees the social environment as an expression of themselves. All that the roger encounters is either of the herd or not of the herd. Those that are ‘not of the herd’ are as important and valuable to the roger as the outsiders. Rogers cherish outsiders, they are the dross that accentuate the beauty of what the roger builds in his little herd.

Hey@!

* You remember, yesterday’s post!

** if you have to ask, ask your parents.

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

Tuesday -the Wakefield Doctrine-

August 1, 2023 By

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

Alright!

Who said, “Hey! Can you please find and post an old post today? We’d really like something from the era, more technical than readable and one where the focus is on ‘the other two’*.

Can you do that for us**?

Yes. Yes we can.

Guess what?

We’re outa time. (Yeah, all of us tipped out of true vertical by the application of aviary plumage.)

Be sure to return tomorrow. Same URL Same IP address and we’ll have a post from August 5, 2014

 

* a Doctrine phrase that refers to the ‘remaining worldviews’, after (an) individual’s predominant worldview is accounted for. This concept is important as it allows a deeper understanding of seemingly contradictory behaviors. Example: as Readers of this Sunday’s TToT post know, we went to see Lyle Lovett and his Large Band on Saturday. Lyle is, (imo and for instructional purposes only1, a clark with a secondary scottian aspect and a significant rogerian tertiary.

Well, had a New Reader been sitting next to us at the concert, they might’ve commented, (aloud as they probably wouldn’t have a keyboard…)

…Wait! What the hell!! omg!

We just ran into a fact-of-life as we typed that last semi-jokey characterization of a person recognizing the clarklike demeanor of Lyle.

Damn (* cont’d) we just came face-to-face with the reality of the passage of time. Specifically, when this blog started in June 2009 cell phones were available and used. Not, however, to the degree of pervasive-to-the-point-of-supplanting-traditional-modes-of-communication. (Semi case-in-point: our seats at the concert were 2nd row center mezzanine. A totally clear view of the ‘floor seats’. People without cell phones were the exception. A sea of TV-blue-glowing rectangles.)

So my joke was anachronistic. Out of date in a critical detail. So what.

We’ll tell you what.

We value comments from Readers who have recently joined us. This ‘recently’ is very relative, of course. We’re using it to compare those who started reading when the intended RePrint was new (2014) and those who have found us, say, in the last two, three years. Our mind goes to Mimi, Nick and them.

While they totally get the principles of our little personality theory, so much so that, more often than not their Comments generate new posts and Doctrine discussions. But on occasion there is something, more likely than not a reference to one particular stage or another of how we describe the Wakefield Doctrine, that they will say, what is (fill in the blank). Denise and Cynthia and Phyllis will not wait for me to write an update and just state: ‘You know, you haven’t reminded us that ‘the Wakefield Doctrine is gender, age and culture neutral’ in, like an age.”

The thing is, I don’t always stay mindful of the new (and newer) Readers.

Probably a classic mistake, i.e. forgetting that every Reader has not been here since the beginning.

And that’s the ‘learning moment’ for me this morning.

The joke about the concert-goer not having a keyboard with them implies that my ‘story premise’? / ‘narrative assumption’? or whatever the cool, Greco-Roman term in rhetoric that identifies this effect of the passage of time for a writer. Might as well start a post with “And Nick doffed his stovepipe hat as he handed Mimi down from the landau.

But, bottom line: thanks for the opportunity to remember what I occasionally  forget.

The Wakefield Doctrine, as an additional perspective on the world around us and the people who make it up, is meant to be used and enjoyed today. Whatever our circumstances may be, there is an opportunity to see the people around us as clarks, scotts and rogers. We do that and maybe, just maybe, we won’t find ourselfs saying, “What the heck! I really thought I knew them better than that.”

 

  1. one of the first ‘rules’ here was to the effect that one person cannot tell another person what their predominant worldview was, at least not with any force or authority. We do, however, for instructional purposes and practice (and fun among whatever group has gathered), try to figure out if a stranger is a clark or a scott or a roger. Good clean fun, ya know? But, in no way binding upon anyone.

** your hypothetical Readers! well, duh!

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