clarkscottroger | the Wakefield Doctrine - Part 85 clarkscottroger | the Wakefield Doctrine - Part 85

I never give you my pillow, I only send you my invitations

December 21, 2009 By

Just to start the week on a more reasoned basis, this will be a short Post. With the simple goal of stating the Premise and the Principles, the Goal(s) and the Guidelines (of) the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers).

Originally conceived from the  observations of three friends and their distinctive yet complementary worldviews, the Doctrine has evolved into a coherent and cohesive description of the worldview of all people everywhere, as divided into three groups: clarks, scotts and rogers. The key premise to this, thing of ours, is that the way we perceive the world around us is the predicate to all behavior. Further, that while all people, male and female, foreign and domestic are born with the potential, the capacities represented by the three groups (clarks, scotts and rogers) it is only by the end of early childhood (ages 3 to 5) do we ‘become’ predominately one of the three of these personality types. Throughout our lives we repeat and practice and make ourselves completely a clark or a scott or a roger.

There are a certain percentage of clarks and scotts and rogers, who not completely and totally conditioned, are capable of seeing and accepting the possibility of differing worldviews (or more tellingly, imaging differing realities) that will be able to read this Wakefield Doctrine and get something from it. (Amusement, break from boredom, maybe even a baby-satori leading to a samadhi-ette like state). Suffice it to say, this blog has as it’s purpose, the presentation of the theory of clark, scotts and rogers to as wide an audience as possible.

So, whether you are new to this site or have been here before, Welcome to the Doctrine. Read, Learn, Enjoy (and buy a hat).

There will be longer Posts (mostly) and shorter Posts (like this one). Funnier ones and more serious ones. These Posts change, the contents of the Pages is more lasting. You will see tabs at the top of the page labeled clarks, scotts, rogers, so, which am I, about. Here is the more stable content, very helpful to ‘flesh out’ what we talk about in these Posts.

These Posts are intended to be ‘an overheard conversation’, a conversation between people familiar with the Wakefield Doctrine. Sometimes you will see Interviews, sometimes you will see pieces of opera (can’t explain that). But what is written in these Posts is more of a down-to-earth, easier to apply to ‘real life’ parts of the Doctrine. In fact, it is our belief that if we write a Post that is a faithful representation of the conversations we (here at the Wakefield Doctrine) actually have, it will be much easier to assimilate the whole damn mess. You should know very quickly what is meant by an expression like, ‘he is such a roger‘ or ‘she is so scottian’.

So thats all for this Post.

(Also we often refer to ‘Sloviiiaaannnsss’ that is an affectionate reference to the fact that we are seeing increasing numbers of foreign Visitors/Readers, among them folks logging in from Slovenia).

Any Questions, leave as a Comment. All will be responded to…

(The Doctrine is also beginning to makes it’s prescence felt in SL. So we like to say hello to Friends of the Doctrine there as well. Congrats to Jen on her good tidings, to Delilhah the very sucessful (and supportive) Creator and Landlady of Old NYC and Kino, a friend who has been selfless in listening to my endless questions and ‘thought’. Hey y’all!)

…And if nothing else is true about the Doctrine, this is: ‘we likes our music’ so here is a little from ‘the youtube’

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8-1G8LUteFo
Share
Filed Under: the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: , , ,

Il Barbiere di Siviglia

December 19, 2009 By

(“La ran la le ra la ran la la.”)
Largo al factotum della città.
Presto a bottega, ché l’alba è già.
Ah, che bel vivere, che bel piacere
per un barbiere di qualità!

Ah, bravo Figaro!
Bravo, brayissimo;
fortunatissimo per verità!
Pronto a far tutto,
la notte e il giorno
sempre d’intorno,
in giro sta.

Miglior cuccagna per un barbiere,
vita più nobile, no, non si dà.
Rasori e pettini, lancette e forbici,
al mio comando tutto qui sta.

V’è la risorsa, poi, del mestiere
colla donnetta col cavaliere
Ah, che bel vivere, che bel piacere
per un barbiere di qualità!

Tutti mi chiedono, tutti mi vogliono,
donne, ragazzi, vecchi, fanciulle:
Qua la parrucca. Presto la barba
Qua la sanguigna. Presto il biglietto
Figaro … Figaro
Son qua, son qua.
Figaro… Figaro…
Eccomi qua.
Ahimè, che furia!
Ahimè, che folla!
Una alla volta, per carità!
Figaro su, Figaro giù
Pronto prontissimo son come il fulmine:
sono il factotum della città.
Ah, bravo Figaro!
Bravo, bravissimo;
a te fortuna non mancherà. ‘
(The above is from a Libretto from different source, if any Italian speaking Readers would Comment if above is even close to video lyrics)

I can explain!  Really, I can give you a rational basis for todays…Post?

Look, some Posts are well planned and (hopefully) well executed expositions of an idea or a theme, something that says, ‘we have all been thinking about… now that you mention it… since you asked, the answer to your question is…’ A Post that answers questions or provides valuable information.
The previous Post (‘…Pulled out of San Pedro late one night..’) is a perfect example of a rational and reasonable little Post.

Today’s Post….maybe not as much.
But hey, there was the (…when the moon hit your eye like a big pizza pie…) that was a little bit of the, (as roger might say)  ‘spontaneous conception.’ school of Post writing. And there have been other Posts that seem to show up in the morning, screaming like a chicken with it’s head cut off “…write about this…write about this!!” (Apologies to any PETA PALS, my sub-conscious apparently has managed to get an ‘outside line’, as we used to say in the day of rotary dial phones.)

But it is my Post and you are (my) Readers, so the least I can do is come up with some explanation as to why we are watching opera, lyrics in Italian, video with English sub-titles. Surely there is something in the path I followed this morning (to end up here) that will lend even the slightest patina of rationality.

No, no there isn’t.

So screw it. Here is how it all went down.
Minding my own business this morning and decided to listen to the ‘famous Barber of Seville song’. (There has got to be a secret ‘sons of Rossini’ sect out there planning to attack Warner Brothers and steal all the Looney Tune archives.  Bugs and Company having single-handedly destroyed most of this (and other reasonably enjoyable) opera by having Bugs or Elmer (in drag no doubt) doing an acceptable (to my 6 year old Saturday morning cartoon watching ears) rendition of this and other Great Music.

Anyway, not really a fan of opera, but this particular morning as I listened to (Figaro’s Aria), I could hear lyrics! Not just ‘figaro, figaro’. Sure, the lyrics have been there all along, but this time I heard them. This Figaro guy, he was telling a damn story!

And whatever, sub-conscious energy switch was thrown, I was stuck.
I mean, it was instant the hell with work! Find out more about the opera, find a video, do whatever has to be done so that I can to do Post all about this fine piece of music.

So, here you have it. Figaro’s Aria with libretto included.

And, yes  Figaro was totally a roger.

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

Pulled out of San Pedro late one night, and the moon and the stars were shining bright

December 18, 2009 By

The Opinions expressed in the ‘Interview’ portion of this Post are solely those of the participants, and may or may not reflect the beliefs, assumptions or precepts represented by the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers), its Progenitors or anyone else.  This ‘Interview’ is presented for educational and informational purposes, and may not be reproduced in any medium without the express written permission of the Owners, Progenitors and/or Creators.  The ‘Interview’ section of this Post is not meant to prevent or treat any diseases or conditions, side effects may include, dizziness, confusion, increased thoughts of suicide and sexual activity.  If these conditions worsen or persist for more than 4 hours immediately consult a professional.  Assumptions and conclusions are for comparison purposes, your conclusions and or assumptions may vary.  Read carefully and follow the yellow brick wall, binyons.

(clark) “Glenn, how are you doing?  I’ll be the one conducting this ‘interview’ for the purposes of illustrating certain aspects of the Wakefield Doctrine.  And with me are Denise and AKH. Denise you know cause she is one of the group of Downsprings, AKH has been writing Comments and ‘what not’ and is way ‘up on the Doctrine.’  They may ask a few ‘follow-up questions, you don’t mind, do you?

(clark)   How are you ‘today’?
(Glenn)   I’m alright Little Buddy. How are you?

(clark)   Lets start with music.  What do you think about music? Take it/Leave it?  Why…
(Glenn)  Cannot live without music. Love Rock and Roll—Anything prior to 1967.  Love good singer songwriters—John Prine, Fred Eaglesmith, Tom Russell.  Love Big Sandy and his Fly-Rite Boys.  Crazy about Los Straitjackets.

(clark)  They say we can pick our friends but we can’t pick our family. (You have heard that saying right?)  Trade 2 family members for 2 friends.  Tell us why (both getting rid of and picking up option on…like baseball).
(Glenn)  Trade away mother—Pick up a mother who really wants her children to be happy rather than one who dishes out guilt and victimhood.  I would replace her with anyone else’s mother.  Father—Trade him away for being a blank space and replace him with my deceased friend, Al, who was more of a father to me than most fathers are to most sons.

(clark) Let’s shift gears here (ha ha).  You are on the road, car behind you starts the tailgate thing, when you don’t get out of their way they do the high beam thing, what do you do?  (Same questions but this time you have your children and kids in the car.)
(Glenn) Slow way the fuck down and change lanes in front of them if they try to pass.  Keep doing it until they back off. Ideal ending: They pull out to pass recklessly and ram a gas truck head on resulting in a giant fireball explosion killing both drivers and lots of nearby helpless villagers.

 ****(AKH) Hey wait! You didn’t answer the question if you had kids in your car! It’s one thing to risk your ‘life’ but what about your children? (And I don’t mean in the other car, that’s their problem but you have your children in the car…) So?
(Glenn) Didn’t see that additional part of the question.  Same answer.  I’ve done it.  Probably not right to do it, but you can’t let some dipshit disrespect you on the highway, man.  You gotta respond.  Let the fucker know he picked the wrong guy to act like a fucking two year old with.  But, no finger.  That is a helpless, impotent gesture best left to the rogers.  Just look away as you finally drive on.  Like you never knew he was there.  Infuriating.  Flipping the bird lets him know he got to you and that you have no idea what to do about it.  Slowing way down and changing lanes is ….I don’t know…ominous.  You’re willing to get dangerous that way—so what else are you capable of?

****(Denise):  Seriously? Wow.  Hm. 
(Glenn)   Do my answers shock you, Denise?   

(clark)The Wakefield Doctrine…what do you think about it? strengths? weaknesses? (Glenn)It is fun and useful.  It helps me know myself better.  It also help me understand why some people piss me off.

****(AKH)   Hey, I get my dose of Wakefield Doctrine every day, you got to admit it is really something, don’t you?  Seems like pretty weak praise from the ‘high energy scottian personality type’
(Glenn) Good point AKH.  So, let me elaborate( or let me elongate as the rogers might say..). (parentheses for you Clark)—It IS fun.  It is internally consistent and logical.  It’s weakness?  Any system that REDUCES the complexity of the world as this surely does—necessarily  leaves out important data.  It is something of a backwards telescope.  But to simplify, you must eliminate—so it only makes sense that any such system would have this weakness.  One of the things that appeals to me about the doctrine is that it is a SECRET way to understand people.  Most people do not possess this perspective.  It is like a hidden advantage.

****(Denise):  But you didn’t answer the question completely. Everyone knows it’s fun and obviously it can be useful.  Do you really care that now (w/the help of the WD) you can know why some people piss you off?  Do you think it helps you be a better person?
(Glenn)It is not my goal to be a better person.  What a fucking rogerian goal!  I’m a pretty good person as I am.  I’m not in a campaign to improve.  It does make me a (slightly) more effective person.  It also amuses me.  Hence, it is fun.  If I ever decide I want to be a “better person” (whatever that is), I’ll look elsewhere, not to the doctrine.  In fact, the doctrine might be the last place to look.  Because one of its weaknesses is it seems to let people off the hook.  Nobody is an asshole anymore. “Oh that’s just how rogers are..” Or, “All scotts are pushy”, or “ don’t expect a lot of enthusiasm from her, She’s a clark”.  The doctrine is morally neutral.  That is both a strength and a limitation.  But, it seems to me that it therefore cannot be used to “be a better person”—again whatever the fuck THAT is..

 (clark) Last question: You can do anything you want tomorrow.  A day without consequences. Still all of the same people and places, but you can do anything you want with that day.  What do you do and why don’t you do it today?
(Glenn)I get sex from new partners. Lots of wild uninhibited crazy sex.  Later, I jump on a plane and go to Key West just because I can.  I won’t do it today because there are consequences.  Job, marriage, finances, –all that Rogerian shit.

****(Denise):  :) You make me laugh!  Ah, so you adhere to the constraints put on you by “all that Rogerian shit”.  Are you sure you are a scott?  Well, are ya punk?
(Glenn) I’m a scott, but I’m not a fool.  I DO take more chances with all of the consequences listed above than most people do—but I try to be smart about it.  I adhere to some constraints, usually grudgingly, because my self- interest requires that of me.  But clarks question posited no consequences.  So, therefore total hedonism is the only response possible.  In THAT circumstance, my self-interest demands total self-indulgence.  In the real world, where scotts actually live, one must pursue one’s self-interests with a bit more calculation.  By the way, Denise, I love when you call me punk like that.  Kinda turns me on…

(clark)Thanks for your time. You are fairly interesting and much more polite than I thought a scott would be…
(Glenn) Fuck you!

(clark)…yeah speaking of that, if you had to be one of the other 2 (clark or roger) which would you be for a day and why?
(Glenn) I have written in this blog that I have been both of the other two styles at times in my life before.  Being a clark was fucking scary.  Being a roger was humiliating.  I guess I would be the roger though.  I prefer humiliated to the kind of scary that clarkhood causes.  Not knowing what is real is absolutely terrifying.  Nothing makes sense—or everything makes its own contradictory sense –all the fucking time.  No respite.  Constant disorientation.  Every day a new nightmare.  Fuck that!  Let me be a roger for just a day.  I’ll cry, be a victim, try to fit in, be emotionally whiny and immature—I can handle a day of that much more easily than I can handle the utter ambiguity of a clark’s world.

(clark) Well, speaking for the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers) and my two very able associates, thanks a lot for a look into the post Cambrian, mid-equatorial savannah-like environment that you people call home.

(Not to get too Columbo on you…but if you been watching the stats (the little red dots on the globe thing), then you know that we are getting all international at the Doctrine.  I added to the Tips to First Time Readers that: the Doctrine ‘is both gender and culture neutral’.  You being the ‘travelling Downspring  anything you want to say to our international Readers that might help them ‘get the Doctrine’ quicker?
(Glenn) Ok.  All you foreign jabakies, here’s how it is.  Three types of people.  Scotts, clarks, and rogers.  Scotts DO stuff. Clarks THINK stuff.  Rogers FEEL stuff.  Try to figure out which you are—and then determine which one other people are.  It is fun, and will help you understand the idiocy of other people more goodishly.  Scotts are salesmen.  Rogers are machine operators.  Clarks are scientists.  It’s remarkably simple and yet universally applicable.  Even in YOUR fucked up country.

Well, that was a refreshing change from the usual, ‘I would prefer to…blah…blah…(parentheses)…doctrine…ha ha’ Post, wasn’t it? (Don’t make me go get some parentheses, we are having such a good time).
I was originally going to do some kind of ‘lecture hall set-up’ complete with an implied dialogue with  late arrivals to a lecture hall.  But I got to the point where I was looking up the latin for ‘cast of characters’1, and I caught myself. ‘Trying a bit too hard, clark?’  Fortunately I swiped and backspaced that shit away.

This ‘Interview’ did, in fact, occur involving the following real people: Glenn one of the original (scottian)Downsprings and Denise a (clarklike) Downspring and AKH(Almost Katherine Hepburn) who is one of the first to join us as a result of this blog.  She (AKH) has caught on to the Doctrine pretty damn quick and has made valuable contributions in such a way as to be a credit to her people.
What we did was start with original set of questions emailed to Glenn, his answers sent to Denise and AKH, their responses added, back to Glenn and done.

For any New Readers, the Wakefield Doctrine is a fun and interesting way to understand human behavior.  This blog has pages and Posts with information and insight that will give you the opportunity to see the people around you in a whole new light.  This ‘Interview’ is an illustration of the ‘worldview’ of a scott, but as you will see, there is no single set-in-stone description of a scott (or a roger or a clark), as much as the rogers out there may want to believe.  But to hear ‘a scott’ and ‘a couple of clarks‘ actually interact is helpful in understanding what the Wakefield Doctrine is all about.

So Welcome!  Read, learn, enjoy and leave a damn Comment.  Seriously, I know you are out there because that globe thing in the left-hand column says you are…

(Despite how Glenn sounds, (after all he is a scott) all are welcome and invited to participate in this noble venture.

(And you get to hang out with Slovinannssss!!)

Shit, for that matter you get to be associated with Virtual People along with Foreign People, how cool is that?  I did add that part above about ‘culture neutral’ simply because it is true.  The Virtual People reference is to ‘Friends of the Doctrine‘ from SL: Jen and Kino and Delilah(who has a blog of her own, listed in our blogroll.)

Ten Four

…Speaking of ‘ten four’, for any of our international readers (and for that matter some of our domestic fans) this Post’s subtitle is a couple of lines from a damn cultural treasure, “Hot Rod Lincoln’.  You need to hear the song performed in order to really get the rhythm of the lyrics, which is the genius of this song and makes it so much fun. Click here  (you’re welcome Glenn)

1) dramatis personae

 

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

Be sure to read, understand, and follow all the safety rules that come with your power tools. Knowing how to use your power tools properly will greatly reduce the risk of personal injury N. Abrams NYW

December 15, 2009 By

Just a quick Post….we are all hard at work on both the Interview Post (it’s looking like we have a frequent contributor (AKH) helping us and doing and interview with Downspring Glenn.) and  ‘the Test’,  something that will hopefully make it easier to decide if you are a clark or scott or roger. The process is taking longer than originally thought, but given that the group is comprised of 2 scotts,3 rogers and 3 clarks, we all  should be grateful if it comes together before the end of the year!

Anyway, always watching the ‘red dots’ on the Visitor Location widget on the front page (the little globe in the left hand column); happy to say we are seeing an  increase in the numbers of new Visitors/Readers from around Planet E!  Angola, United Arab Emirates, Brazil and the Philippines to name a few. Oh yeah, and Canada eh? (Sorry Del, couldn’t resist…)  
Given how this blog is designed, with most recent Posts at the top of the page, we want to say hello to all our new Readers and remind everyone to be sure to read the section in the right-hand column (Tips for the First Time Visitor). With an increasingly international demographic, it will be helpful to say a word or two about the cultural neutrality (of the Wakefield Doctrine). 

We make much, here at the Wakefield Doctrine, about being gender neutral. That it is not about being a female scott (or roger or clark) but it is about being a female who is a scott. Or to put it in Doctrine terms: a female with a scottian perceptual bias. In other words, the Doctrine says that we, as humans perceive the world in three basic/fundamental ways and the ways are labeled a clark or a scott or a roger. How we behave  is a result of how we perceive the world…so a (female) who has a scottian perception of the world will see it (the world) as much as a predator would, as does her scottian (male) counter part.

So, real quick. The Wakefield Doctrine is culture neutral. A clark is a clark in Angola or in Akron, a scott will be just as scottian in France as she would be in ‘philly and a roger is always rogerian. (Damn you can spot those guys right away/anywhere. They are ‘the people’, they are the townsfolk and village elders, they are actors and the accountants, no matter where you are, if there are more than 5 people, chances are 3 are rogers.)

So, tp paraphrase  today’s subtitle, ‘read and understand what you find in the Pages of this here blog here’. Leave questions and leave comments.

Read, learn have fun. They are out there!
Today, when you go to work or school, if you go shopping or stay at home with the kids, look at the people around you. Listen to how they talk, are they going on and on and on? or do they speak in short, ‘do this/do that’  phrases?, are they whining and complaining? You will begin to see distinctions in how the people around you act. The distinctions are telling you how (that other person) is viewing the world. Listen.

(If you have stayed with this Post this far, or better if you have read some of the Pages, then you will start to see the clarks, the scotts and the rogers around you. Guaranteed. At first it may be difficult to distinguish a roger from a scott, but just noticing the difference is the important step. The rest will follow.)

In fact, here a quick start guide to clarks, scotts and rogers.

Well, just wanted to get in a short Post (sure, short). Watch for the Interviews coming later this week.

(Hello to our SL friends!  Jen, Kino, Delilah you know who you are (I just mentioned your damn names, of course you know who you are!)

Almost forgot, (friend of the Doctrine) Mel has a rather excellent Post, at ‘the Spatula’  running today, about Family Christmas letters. Don’t know if he wants a huge number of Comments suggesting ‘opening lines of a family Christmas letter’ (but it do look tempting).

Share
Filed Under: the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: ,

defer not time, delays have dangerous ends

December 13, 2009 By

(Sunday Post…Take 5!!!)  

I have said, in a previous Post, that the key to happy and successful Post writing (for me) is a good subtitle. Well I have to say at this point, you know you are in trouble when, in search of an uplifting and inspiring subtitle, the best you can do is an obscure Shakespeare quote. Oh, well once more unto the breach.(?) (Sorry). 
Really, I would like you to feel bad for me! Since way early this morning I have tried: Bob Dylan (‘Times they are a’changin’), Charles Dickens ( a line from Christmas Carol about undigested food) and the Beatles (the Beatles! for crying out loud, they never let you down in the catchy song lyric department). But no, nothin, nada, zilch. Like the man says, ‘you gots ta have a subtitle, how can you write a Post if you don’t have a subtitle? If you don’t have a subtitle how can you write a Post?’  

So, I was forced to accept that it was time the bring out the big gun, nothing less than the  ‘how-f*ckin-erudite-can-you-get’ subtitle source…
‘Ladies and Gentlemen, the one, the only, you laughed at Puck, you cried with Juliet, you shouted ‘Look out” to Shylock, lets have a warm and heart-felt Doctrine-style round of applause for Willlliamm SSHaakespearrreee!!!!’  

(To any First Time Visitors: you have picked a hell of a day to start reading the Wakefield Doctrine (Lloyd Bridges, Airplane! 1980)  

Alright to the Post at hand. We might have a little trouble getting started but I think there is a solution: Flashback Post!  

( Most of what comprises my background, both social and cultural was beamed directly into my febrile young mind from since before I can remember and the lesson that I am benefitting from today is that I must look to the source of all that I have learned at the knee of my cultural nanny, (the kindly, always there for me, near constant companion growing up…my television). From whose loving blue gaze I have learned all about being: a Man and a Woman,  a good Friend and a wily Foe,  a Good Citizen and a Smart Shopper, A Concerned Parent and one of Jerry’s Kids. 
…..  When there is nothing fresh to write….do a Flashback!!)  

By the way, if you are new to the Doctrine, I am the one who (uses) all the parentheses I can when I write. And since you are new, here is your first Test!
Which of the three (clarks, scotts or rogers) must I be, given my proclivity for this grammatical device? 
Come on! You know this, go with the first thing that pops into your head!
Very good! Now to answer (this Question) leave a Comment (at the bottom of the Post) and you will be entered in our new “Identify the Writer Contest“!1

(On with the “Flash Back” Post).  

 (…Hello.) Welcome. (again…)  

 (You are somewhere in this blog.)  

 In the pages of this blog is the Wakefield Doctrine.  

 The Wakefield Doctrine is nothing less than the categorization of all people into 3 groups: clarks, scotts and rogers. As you read this blog you will see that while we all possess the qualities of all three groups, you are most predominantly one or the other or the other.  

 The special value of the Wakefield Doctrine is (that it is)based on characteristic way(s) of perceiving the world. Most other personality systems attempt to catalog behavior; we do not. Our system describes how a person perceives the world and therefore all subsequent behavior is extrapolated from this.  

 And it seems to work.  

 So read, contribute, whatever.  

The above is from our very first Post, in fact it is our very first Post. Writing is a funny and slippery activity, sometimes it is there, sometimes not so much. Not surprisingly, the fundamental idea on which the Doctrine is built is there (and not so much else): ‘based on…characteristic ways of perceiving the world…‘   The other key concept found in this first Post being expressed in the statement  that we all possess the potential to be any of the the three,  simply is a matter of being predominantly one (of the three).

Auspicious start no? Well, it took a while to start to get comfortable….

The end of July and we see some effort to provide a continuity to the Posts with this statement:

With a basic understanding of the characteristics of each group (clarks, scotts and rogers), anyone can understand everyone else!  You will know how those around you will  act in virtually any situation. Finally you can understand what has never made sense to you about the people you work with, live with and/or are friends with. The answer to the question, ‘Why on earth would you do that/say that/feel that way?’

But what is still quite missing is the sense of addressing a Reader (assumed or imagined). These early Posts were mostly concerned with trying harness the ‘enthusiasm’ of the original group of people referred to as Progenitors and Downsprings.

At the same time (as these Posts were being written), the early content of the Pages was being developed. Page content was initially perceived as being the key element to the Doctrine. The thinking then was that, if a Reader found their way to the Wakefield Doctrine, then they could learn all that was necessary to appreciate the beauty and wisdom of the Wakefield Doctrine, simply by reading the Pages. However, the current thinking places the emphasis on the Posts and in creating a sense of ‘conversation’ whereby the Doctrine is described in everyday terms and contexts.

But in the Pages there are some really fun teaching tools, my personal favorites are the two video clips on the ‘So which am I’ Page. One is a scene from the movie Casino and the other a scene from Wolf.  Lets put an end to this tortured Post with a look at these two clips. Who doesn’t enjoy watching video clips?

First up: A scott with a clark: Casino

Second: A scott and a roger in ‘conflict’ (as much as that ever happens) Wolf

So, it looks like our time is up (Thank god!).

Y’all don’t be strangers. We will now open the floor for questions….

(“Hey, Hey, say the thing about Slovenia!!”)

Alright, if you insist..’Thank you all for visiting the Wakefield Doctrine (the home of the theory of clark,scotts and rogers)  and a heartfelt:  ‘Goodnight Slloovviniaaannnnsss!!!’

1)Some restrictions may apply, Progenitors and Downsprings are not eligible to play, see contest Rules for complete instructions

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