clarkscottroger | the Wakefield Doctrine

“But if it be a sin to covet honour, I am the most offending soul alive…yo” (or) “…just give me some of that old-time Doctrine, an I’ll be yours”

November 7, 2010 By clarkscottroger

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

Warning! On a number of occasions we have made a point of saying that, try as we might, writing a Post over a period of time exceeding ‘one sitting’ results in nothing good. One sitting meaning, turn on computer, go to page where Posts are written and start. This process can take as little as one hour or as much as 4 hours, but always it ends in hitting Publish and sending into posterity the Post. It is these, ‘more than one sitting Posts’ that spell trouble.
In any event, I usually will do a strike-through on the old content and keep it, while following it with the ‘new’ Post. Hey! Wait just a darn minute, the Wakefield Doctrine recycles!! How Green is the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers!! Now why don’t we get picked up my the major blog networks for that? Easy enough to imagine the Headlines:

“Wakefield Doctrine goes GREEN, first blog to be awarded the LEEDS designation (Uranium level) for eco-conservo-litera-savism work. The Institute for the Responsible Recycling of Words, Ideas, Premises and Inspiring Thoughts is pleased to announce the awarding of this coveted designation to the first blog to apply responsible word-use. Showing a dedication and discipline to not only make responsible choices in the use of adverbly nouns but also complying with the responsible use of Sustainable Prepositional Phrase(s), the Wakefield Doctrine, is blazing a trail (responsibly) for Readers and showing us the future of the blogosphere.”
(This newstory would then go on to quote people responding to the event),
“Well, it seemed like the responsible thing to do“, stated the author of the Wakefield Doctrine when asked by this reporter, ” after all we all have our things to do and this was…the most…responsible”.
“Hey wait!”, a person identifying himself only as I-was-at-old-mountain-field-too-you-know, “So why don’t you interview me too!, Look at my face, listen to my voice, am I not comforting?” (“Hey!!! Fuck you! Fuck everyone! You do notice me right“?, was heard coming from across the street).
This reporter made an effort to interview other Readers of blogs, “Well, I would agree that if they can have sustainable buildings and recycled food packaging, it just makes sense that those blog-writer people get on board. Mother Earth is not getting any younger and it is about time to get these writer-people to give up the breastfeeding and go sit at the little folk table and eat by themselves, like when I was young and learning things in the wheat fields of Wisconsin“, stated a bystander wearing an apron and draggin whiteboard-on-wheels behind him, “hey got an idea?, maybe a extra childhood dream? come on mister! can ya spare me a premise“?

What? or yeah, but that is just a daydream. This is a Post so we better get to it, yo.

(If we are real quiet and not make any sudden moves, we can look in on the Post that was started last night. A retrospective/reflective sort of thing, the idea was to bring in the Exchange Students at Millard Fillmore High and have Principal Clark and (possibly AKH and glenn) reflect on the past year or so that the Wakefield Doctrine has been out in the blogosphere.)

(…”You newer exchange students were not around in the early days of the Doctrine… ) ( …Miguel Aiyee! que el principal miedo Clark, parece ser que quieren Tak o nosotros … Sagrada Madre de la Cassarole, es de esperar que no voy a hablar mucho tiempo …) ( …well to tell you the truth, it has not always been so much fun! No, kids in the early days here at Millard Fillmore High most of those subtitles were out of context quotes from long dead writers…the thinking was that with enough cleverness and literary allusion, the world would beat a path to the door of this fine institution!…but those were more simple days …) ( … why look! its the newest addition to the faculty, Ms. AKH!! ask her what it was like back in the early days, when the Wakefield Doctrine was still an elective course… ) ( …Hey Miguel! Se pierda AKH el maestro nuevo caliente, usted ha dicho que pediría su salida. Nows su oportunidad, vaya por delante a hacerlo! El principio desea ella a hablar con nosotros… )

Ms AKH!, some of our exchange students here were wondering what it was like to be a student teacher here, back when the Doctrine was new. Can you come over here and talk to us a moment? Is that Mr. Miller with you? Please! Come over and talk to our Exchange Students (from the Autonomous Region of Madrid), tell what it was like in the old days! ( …Aiyee Miguel, que hace el Sr. Principio hablar? No veo a nadie! Vamos a decir una oración a la Virgen de Cantalope … )

Ms. AKH:
Mr. Miller:

I remember the early days of the Doctrine, you were quite the find, Ms. AKH so much energy, so much enthusiasm…could barely restrain you…
Mr. Miller:
That will be quite enough of that, Mr. Miller I still have a record of your little Career Day talk you gave to the class!

Glenn: Find something to like and admire about every one of your subordinates—Hard for a scott. But totally necessary.
(Janie? Already know what I like and admire about you. Yes. I will be available after class for..questions.)

Leadership can be lonely. Scotts are lone hunters, but also pack animals. So, when you assume a leadership position in an organization you will LOSE your former relationships with your colleagues. For a roger, this can be devastating. Membership in the herd is everything to a roger. But if you hold a position in which YOU decide who gets promoted, who gets a raise, Etc…you can no longer be a friend. It just doesn’t work. You may find yourself left out of conversations. The room goes silent when you walk in.
For a roger, this is the most difficult adjustment following a promotion.
For a clark—the room already goes silent when you walk in. No adjustment needed.
For a scott—the silence means they respect (and maybe just a little fear) me. That’s a good thing…

Glenn: oh..alright Jimmy? … how to deal with your coach…why you are not on the starters bench? You are not a starter because …you suck, frankly. Sports is a very scottian world. If you could help the team win, you would start. If you are a scott, you would accept this and enjoy knowing your place in the pack. If you are a roger, you will feel hurt and victimized. If you are a clark—you only play sports that are played by one person. (Teams do not interest clarks.)

Yes, Britney? How kind of you to say, Britney… You’re right, Britney. Principal Clark is a dedicated protector of decency and good taste…He’s not much fun, but he does “police” this environment and stamp out indecency every chance he gets—the prick. Did I say that out loud or just think it? No, age is not really a significant factor in the application in the Wakefield Doctrine? oh sure, ask him the question directly…

What’s that Britney? Yes, I have noticed Janie back there. Yes.. Uh –uh. Well I’ll tell you this…The second thing that comes to mind is that she probably ought not to wear such a short skirt in school. The first thing? I don’t think Principal Clark would like me to answer that question.

Principle Clark: Okay! Class, let’s all thank Mr. Miller for his time and expert opinions.

My god! They actually went and copied the content from an old Post and displayed it in green! Do these people have no shame at all?

No, no we do not.

Lets call it a wrap. Cute idea, losing interest…again! But we wait for Ms. AKH and glenn to send in their contributions to our on-going conversation, “What was it like in the early days of the Doctrine?”

Mr. B?

Since we are in music appreciation mode, attend:

Filed Under: Featured, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: clarkscottroger, Personal, personality types, psychology of personality, relationships, the Wakefield Doctrine

fun? you want to have fun here? wtf?! this is some serious psycholicious shit, here

November 4, 2010 By clarkscottroger

Welcome to the Wakefield Doctrine, (the theory of clark, scotts…blah, blah and blah)

Remember that Post last fall with Robin Trower? (“sun don’t shine, the gods look down in anger“) well the fact of the matter is that (that) whole Post was generated by a morning that looked a whole lot like today. And you know how we keep talking about trying to let new Readers find out how much fun this Wakefield Doctrine thing really is? Well, that’s the kind of morning it is, here at Doctrine Central ( …Miguel de Aiyeee ¿qué es esta doctrina central? ¿No tenemos los documentos de derechos? ¿Se vienen y nos hacen volver a casa?… ). If memory serves me, that Trower Post was where AKH was starting to really participate in this thing of ours. So let’s just sit back in whatever form of support you are currently entangled with, listen to some music and maybe a quick Lesson of the Day. Sound good to you all?

Hey! someone go get glenn, (lol) he’s probably down the corridor making fun of how someone talks to compensate for how much he hates the previous video ( …¿Que se burlan de cómo algunos pueblos hablan? ¿Quién es este hombre, no creo que como él tanto, Miguel!… )

Ok before we lose all our new Readers, (…”what do I mean, new Readers”…very funny AKH) let’s get some Doctrine learnin done, so’s we can watch another video…(You know, it just occurred to me, does a person become a perfect clark, scott or roger just before they die or would they become as they were before, back when they was chillun? Great question!)

Wakefield Doctrine Lesson of the Day. (Actually this is more of a study of the current body of knowledge of the Wakefield Doctrine than it is a Lesson). Let us all consider the question: what does the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers) tell us about the end of life?
Well, we know certain things; a) everyone is born with the potential to experience the world as a clark or as a scott or as a roger; 2) at some point early in life (say around 2-5 y.o.) we all settle into one of the three and therefore begin to experience the world as a clark does or as a scott would see the world or the herd-society of the roger and c) we continue along life, not knowing that other people ( clarks, scotts or rogers) were experiencing a slightly different world even as we lived/loved/hated/fought/worked with/were devoted to them from our own personal perspective.
So what happens at the end?

I propose that we devolve back into whatever that original person was, before the “choice” was made to live in (the) world of a clark or a scott or roger.

(What? music? what do you mean the gloomy day outside the window is not going to last?…alright Mr. B. Seein’ how you the resident roger, you make a selection)

OK!! OK!! Recess over. Come on now, if this is a Lesson we need to be certain. What happens to us when we get to that last stage? Do we go back to the beginning or do we go out as we spent our lives or maybe we combine all three…damn, there’s a concept. You know I am not sure…any Comments? (lol)

(Hypersonic whistle) Hey boy! here girl…good doggie!

Come back!! Post is not over yet! (Actually I must be honest with you Readers, this is an ‘afterthought’ part of this thing, as in …later that day)

So, while I will stand by my position about what happens to us as we face our death, let’s back this badboy up and ask another question entirely. What is the characteristic style of death for each of the three types?

clarks: suicide or sacrificing their life for another, but in a quiet un-assuming way….
scotts: pretty much any of your violent, makes-a-good-front-page-photo-story (provided the publication in question is the Police Gazette or the National Enquirer) death big n loud
rogers: slow and annoying (annoying to the people being left behind, the roger would be totally in their glory…these guys like hospitals!!?!)

So there you go, binyons. Cradle to frickin grave! The Wakefield Doctrine has it all!! Tell me I’m lying.

Filed Under: Featured, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: clarkscottroger, Personal, personality types, relationships, the Wakefield Doctrine

yeah, I write most of these…you got a problem with that?

November 2, 2010 By clarkscottroger

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

Today is the start of the First Annual Wakefield DoctrineReader/Membership Drive-athon-abration!!

We start with a word from our most excellent DownSpring, who is also our current speaker-for-the-scotts, lets all have a round of applause for Ms. AKH! She is the authoress-ette of her own damn column, the “Hey, a scott is talking! Thats the one in the middle of the homepage, sort a center column.

Damn, please excuse the above strikethroughs, while the sentiments expressed are sincere, (more about that in a bit), the thing that prompts the harsh language ( lol, frickin glenn) is the difficulty I have had since creating this blog, which is an inability to write a Post in anything in more than one ‘sitting’. The section above I started last night, it read well for an opening of a Post and I left it thinking, ‘ok, sound premise, those others are working really hard on this Doctrine thing, never hurts to remind that passive bunch of Readers that the Wakefield Doctrine marches on, yo’. (I actually thought the word “yo” and took the time to laugh to myself as I shut off my computer and left the office… “you are such a clark“, I said to the dark and empty office, laughing, I went home.)
But then I woke this morning, pulled up the draft Post and stared at the screen. “Goodness gracious“!! I snarled at the computer, it has happened again!! The words were there, the sentiment was still proper, but I did not have a sense of what comes next. So I did what I suspect most writer wannabes do, I went to read what the Friends of the Doctrine blogwriters have written on their sites. Over at the Recession Accession, the Progenitor roger had a decent piece about writing and aging, admired one ‘tie-in’ lick that he did (…All right. I admit it. I am not the brightest bulb in the shed…Well, must run…got to go to the store. What to wear??). Then I went on over to ‘the Spatula‘ see what Mel was up to, something about a new show on TV. Well written as usual, but that got me off on a tangent about this fuckin awful show that I saw the commercial for, “your Fairy Jobmother” and for whatever reason the music in the background was a most excellent Audioslave tune, and I was off and running.

So… Welcome to the Wakefield Doctrine. We have something for everyone!! And considering the fact that “everyone” consists of three types of personality, that is not such a hyperbolic statement, is it now?
The Wakefield Doctrine says to you, “Hey!! people experience the world in one of three ways. When you are born you have the potential to see and experience, react to and respond in any of these three ways. For one reason or another we all settle into one of these three ways of experiencing/seeing the world. Once we do this, our actions and reactions, perceptions and decisions are all based on this particular way of seeing the world. We settle into one of the three ways very early in our lives, so everything we do, our interests, our talents our likes and dislikes, our loves and our hates, our friends and our enemies are shaped by this choice. Here at the Doctrine we say, hey!! you don’t practice acting a certain way and that becomes your personality, here at the Doctrine we say, depending on how you experience and see the world and everything in it, you act in a way that is the only reasonable way to act. Your “personality” is a result of the way you percieve the world not some genetic predispositional, my parents made me act this way. No way, the choices you make in reacting to the world, in living your life, these choices are the only ones reasonable. We call these ways of seeing the world, we call it being a clark or a scott or roger.

Know how you chose to view the world when you were just little and you will know how you will respond to the world when you are very old.
Know how your spouse/friend/enemy/co-worker/total stranger views the world, know if they are a clark or a scott or a roger and you will know how they will react in any situation.

Pretty simple, isn’t it?

But not so fun sounding that you are reaching for your keyboards to send in your Comment: “Hey! Count me in!! I will send in my thoughts and oberservations, I will share with you all what I see today in terms of those ubiquitous rogers and those ravaging scotts and those darling clarks. Please tell me how I can get a nearly free hat (for my damn head) and I will send back a photo of both against a backdrop of the part of the world that I claim (by right of hat)! I can’t wait, yo”

We recognize this “fun-gap”, the enthusiasm deficit that seems to be holding you back, dear Readers. That is why we are grateful for DS#1 and Ms AKH both of whom contribute to Posts. Read them and tell me you don’t think this Doctrine would be too, too much fun. Go ahead, tell me that.

Time to leave for today. Go read “hey! a scott is talking“! and then go back and read “…a piece of the action“… and don’t forget Mel and the roger. After all, these people (real or imaginary) must be good for something!

Mr. B? some music that we might enjoy this fine, fine November morn?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KKv_vJks2gM

Filed Under: Featured, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: clarkscottroger, Personal, personality types, predicting human behavior, the Wakefield Doctrine

(“a piece of the action…”)

October 28, 2010 By clarkscottroger

Lady Downspring here. I’ve decided to suit up again. I quite enjoy it on occasion but I digress. My first and last Post for this blog was about a year ago. “What is wrong with that?” you may ask. Everything and nothing at all. I am, after all, a clark. It is within my purview to procrastinate, take for granted, lose urgency/energy, be fearful, wonder that there is anything pertinent I can contribute, castigate myself – wait, that’s reserved for my “other” friends….. to the conversation that is the Wakefield Doctrine, the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers. So why would I think I have nothing pertinent, nothing of value to say? What is it that keeps me reading but not writing? Could it be connected to how I view the world? (with fear CY – with fear. the clue to your clarklike nature lies within the domain of fear.)

The question and subsequent question of the day for the veteran “25” and new readers alike? “How does one learn to view the world differently?”, “Can I view the world differently?” This presupposes the desire (“shh… no, not now…”) to change how one views the world. First, let us assume the position (no glenn. get up!) that one has identified oneself as predominantly a clark, scott or roger. What would be next? If you identified yourself as having clarklike “symptoms” not to worry too much (yet). You will continue to read the Wakefield Doctrine as long as it amuses and challenges you, you can learn from it; you do not find yourself distracted by something else. If on the other hand you recognize your primary status as that of a scott, (no!. all egos must, I repeat must….….. check at the door) then it depends on how hungry you are and whether there is enough to satisfy you. Thirdly, if you lay claim to being of rogerian descent then it becomes a little more complex. Assumptions have been made. If the conversation that is the Wakefield Doctrine aligns with your interpretation, with your world view at the moment, Godspeed.

clarks! This session you may sit. I will speak of our little scottian friends. “You! In the seat by the door! Go get that roger and drag him back here! ” rogers do not like to be told what to do (unless it is by a scottian female – a male roger will always defer to the scottian female.) For more on how the Wakefield Doctrine can be applied to relationships I will refer you to our very own Ms. AKH.)

To be scottian is to be dominant or submissive (to another scott only). One or the other. There are dominant scotts and lesser scotts. (not in a diminutive way) Keep in mind: clarks think, scotts act and rogers feel, you will no doubt catch on quickly to the nuances of the many ways a clark views the world, how a scott views the immediate landscape, and how a roger views the world as it should be. scotts are high energy individuals with a short attention span. They make decisions quickly (because they are so certain of themselves). scotts can be quick to anger however they hardly ever hold a grudge. And why? scotts are of the present. They like to be the focus of attention. (down boy, almost finished)

scotts are often misunderstood. There is no delicate way to say it – they are often thought of as assholes. Many of them are but more often than not scotts possess a soft, tender side. My advice: learn the Wakefield Doctrine, the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers and you will learn how to handle not only the scotts in your life but the clarks and rogers as well. It may take a little time but once you catch on it can not only be fun but it can bring positive results to both your work life and home life. Who doesn’t want to live a less complicated life?

View the vid clip and take note to the scotts attempting to establish ranking. Take further note to the ultimate, good natured (but do not test me) roger that is our Capt. Kirk. (“No way like the Federation way”.)

Next session: Where there is a clark there is always a scott/where there is a scott there is always a clark.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WIiAtCD-gIM(a piece of the action….”)

Filed Under: About the Wakefield Doctrine aka the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers, Featured Tagged With: clark, clarkscottroger, predicting human behavior, roger, the Wakefield Doctrine

Wakefield Doctrine Field Guide

October 27, 2010 By clarkscottroger

( …”so if we establish the outward more obvious characteristics”… )

Oh, hello! Did not see you come on line…be right with you ( …but the “fun factor” got to find a way to present the damn fun of this thing… ) just one more aside and we can get today’s Post started ( …good frickin job there, you just telegraphed your last remaining hook… goddamn it… ) Let me just try and put this little journal down. There.

Welcome to the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers)!. This week we are starting to present the whole Doctrine in a simple, logical and easy to understand manner. ( …sure keep up with the asides…is there nothing you won’t resort to in order to get through one of these Posts?…they know what you are doing, they ‘get’ it, dude…this is so over done…) Yesterday we started with a clark, as subject of discussion. But let’s keep with the topic a little longer… ( .. ’cause they are sooo interesting… )

clarks are the creative ones and as such…

( …Hola Miguel, ¿qué pasa con el director Clark? No se ve tan bien, y creo que él está hablando a sí mismo … vamos que el hallazgo señorita Sullivan y Britney… ) ( …man! are you so totally shameless! roll out the ‘Spanish exchange students’, just to keep this Post limping alone?… )

I believe I was suggesting that we continue to look at the personality of clarks. Hell, since this Post insists on slouching towards ( …Yeates, I can’t frickin believe that you are so desperate to get done that you will pad this thing with a literary allusion that a sophomore high school student would be too embarrassed to use… but hey, who am I to criticize… ) Well, let’s get the words on the page, put in some pictures and get the hell out. ( …the way this thing is going you are likely to pander to the scotts and put some frickin childishly exuberant music just to draw a reaction… )

Ahem! as we have said before, the clarklike females are fairly easy to identify. Outlandishly dressed, creative with the make-up (with special attention to the face/eyes) and to a woman, something fairly strange on their feet. If you are trying to identify which of the three types a person is and you are thinking possible clark, then concentrate on their eyes. (The eyes) of the female clarks are quite distinctive, mostly in an un-mistakeable ‘not-of-this-world’ intensity. Often (and unfairly) characterized as either the ‘ditsy broad’ or ‘snooty/aloof/what-does-she-think-she-is-too-good-for-us?’, the clarklike female projects this image simply because they are distracted. A state common to all clarks, there is simply so much going on inside their heads that they barely have time to keep track of what is going on in front of their noses. If you find yourself talking to a clark, watch their eyes. If you pay attention, you will see as (mentally) they go from topic to idea to implication to ramification (back to the conversation taking place) to how to conclude the interaction to implication…etc ( …they get it! stop with the word salad… )

In the spirit of turning this trainwreck into a valid Post about identifying clarks, let’s cut and paste some of the characteristics (found on the clarks page) and get some music and get out… after all there is a real world out there and it is totally full of clarks, scotts and rogers. And there is nothing more fun than going out there and seeing the Wakefield Doctrine “demonstrate itself”.
New Readers? It might seem difficult to figure who is which today, but take our word for it, this Doctrine thing is a lot of fun.

Just to get you started, here are some photos of known clarks

or or maybe …ok, we’re sure you get the idea, now get out there and find ’em!

(DS#1 says we should stick with the ‘topic’ of female clarks) because they are out there in the everyday world and you can spot them with only a little practice. And who are we to disagree with the DownSprings? (the DownSprings are the life of this Doctrine, whatever they want they will always get), so let’s try to come up with a “Field Guide”:

Wakefield Doctrine Field Guide

scott(male): picture that Tasmanian devil on the cartoons……or Joe Pesci in all of his movies
roger(male): they’re frickin everywhere, watercooler? check…Fireman? check…look for the easy-going comfortable smile, inviting conversation…
scott(female): Ginger on Gilligan’s Island, the green chick on Star Trek (the 60’s version)
clark(female): read the damn Post! you can find the clarklike females
clark(male): the office geek except without the marketable technical skills, probably near-employed, very funny, usually interesting (in small doses) cannot do enough for any person who merely recognises their existence, never mind actually be nice to them
roger(female): tough call under the best of circumstances, examples Kathy Bates, most wholesomely attractive women (with an agenda), think Carrie Nation in SUV…

There you have it, the Wakefield Doctrine Field Guide (to spotting) clarks, scotts and rogers.

( … “let’s ask our expert Commentator Mel, so, Mel our leading contestant has racked up 2 scotts (male and female) a rogerian male and a pair of clarks…still searching for the elusive rogerian female… but it looks like…what’s this? a female CPA…at a Church social function…being introduced to someone’s bachelor son!! this could be it!… ) Damn! got away.