welcome to the first Post of the rest of the Second year

June 28, 2010 By Leave a Comment

Yeah, well no one said that these things have to make sense.

I have chosen to write another Post, not the smallest part of that decision is that (possibly an inbred characteristic of the ego of an individual of the maleular persuasion in the current culture) I don’t want to “break the streak”.  But for today we are throwing away excessive reflection and just, in the words of a cultural icon, “goin for it”.

The Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers) is a unique, productive and fun way to see the behavior of others and by doing so, understand why people do the things they do.  Fine.  It is a tool to be used in understanding the behavior of others.  And it is a tool to understand ourselves.  A very, very effective tool.  And through understanding (ourselves) we can then change and enhance and improve what we do and how we do it and what we are and how we live our lives.

(That’s not too ambitious, is it?) No, no it is not.

Unfortunately (or not) two thirds of our little group totally do not see/understand/get/imagine/’yeah, even for the fun of it’/say what? the need to ‘change or improve’ themselves.  And you know what?  That’s fine.
No, that’s not just ‘fine’, that’s great!  That scotts and rogers, while both curious and find the Doctrine fun and amusing do not see a need to use this thing of ours for the purpose of self-improvement serves as (further) validation of the whole thing.

Of course they don’t need to improve.  (The Doctrine predicts that they would take that position).  But…

Remember a few Posts (actually quite a few Posts) ago, where we talked about how everyone starts with the qualities of all three types and at some point, early on become predominantly one (over the other two)?  Well, that’s not the point I am trying to make here.  The point (I am trying to make here) is that anyone Reading and/or following this blog is a slightly (or not so slightly) mutated form of their own type.  It takes a certain level of flexible curiosity, combined with a intellectual self-confidence to read and enjoy the concepts that comprise the Wakefield Doctrine.
So when DownSpring glenn insists that he has no interest in his clarklike or rogerian aspects and believes that he is only building up his scottian aspect, he is, to use a technical term….wrong.
I spoke to the Progenitor roger yesterday on the same topic and he agrees that he has no need to develope his scottian or clarklike potential, he knows there can be no gain to focusing on those two other facets to his being.  (To his credit, he did accept that while what he said was true for ‘un-enlightened’ rogers, he recognised that he was not a normal roger).

My response was simple.  By their responses both glenn and roger demonstrated that their clarklike/rogerian and scottian/clarklike aspects (respectively) are  developing as a result of their involvement in the Wakefield Doctrine.  And as further proof, how they both framed their arguments that they were not doing so only served to make the contrary point.

(What? I have to go to work?  And act like a real person?  wtf…damn…got to stop…there is something to be said about having a blog and there is something to be said about earning a living.  It is a tribute and an indictment of the cost of having both while being a clark that I am trying to write these things and then go into a workplace that so does not find this kind of thinking a positive character trait.)

Let’s close the Post with the question (which if you have been following the Doctrine long enough, you know right now that it will not really be a question). What is the point, the practical value of the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers?  This question is framed to apply to those of you reading this thing and not to the general population of clarks, scotts and rogers.  How does any of what you find here impact your life?  Negatively or positively, either one.  (at this point I would proceed to give the answer on behalf of everyone, but I really am out of time this morning)

Mister B? if you would find us some Monday morning appropriate music and if I can find a photo or two will/can wrap this thing up.  What was that? Miss Sullivan is touring Europe this Summer?  How nice…you have a Postcard…perhaps we need to talk about your interaction with the student body here at Mill Fill…

Ciao tutti! L’Italia è il nostro primo arresto… vederà tutte le statue nude famose ed avrà un pubblico del papel domani! (nessun Britney… quel significa il papa non…) il lol che ha divertimento, dice Jimmy desideriamo che sia stato qui e comprerò il sig. B una certa viola mette insieme… dai gatti reali come ha chiesto… il lol Na dell’AT fa
 
YouTube Preview Image
 
 
Share
Filed Under: Featured, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: , , , ,

till my seas are dried up

June 25, 2010 By 6 Comments

Short Post this morning, much to do.  Not much time to do it in.

Trying to come up with something totally cool and catchy cause it will be one year tomorrow when this thing started.  Nothin.  Not only do I have nothing, I am feeling my clarklike aspect start to kick in…in reaction to the perceived pressure of commemorating/celebrating/whatever the hell it is that one is supposed to do on significant milestones. (Sounds like a Lesson of the Day).

the Wakefield Doctrine Lesson of the Day.  Not so much a lesson as an observation of the differences between clarks, scotts and rogers in response to societally designated important days. (Which include birthdays, wedding anniversaries, retirement and funerals).  On second thought, let’s start with the point of this whole exercise in blogation which is to present a way of thinking about stuff, mostly people.  This way of thinking is called the Wakefield Doctrine and it is done along the lines of ‘personality types’, as in astrology, phrenology, scientology; you know it’s an ‘ology’ which means it’s scientific and you should read it and believe it. (Plus it is a theory, as in the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers) so it surely has to have something interesting to it.  And it does.  Not unlike a supermarket magazine rack, the Wakefield Doctrine has something interesting, something that should be true about it.  And even though pages and pages are spent on talking about the basis or, the underlying principles, the supporting evidence and uses words like ‘habitual perception’ and ‘predeliction’ it is still just one of those things that have enough ‘truth’ to it to make people remember it.  It all comes down to getting up from your computer and going to work and hearing some ‘middle management’ type person hold forth on action lists, performance paradigms all while sucking up to their boss in public (and without the slightest bit of self-consciousness) and then 30 minutes later find that same person gossiping in the break room.  The goal of this blog is to have you at this point say to yourself, “what a roger“, or be with friends and the person sitting on the fringe of the group even though they have been part of that gathering for years, suddenly noticing that that person has been saying things and somehow their words evaporate in the air (like cartoon dialog balloons fading as they move) only to hear those very words come out of the mouth of that really noticeable person, much to the delight of the crowd, who are all laughing and saying things like, “they are the funniest person how do thy think of that stuff” and you look back to the person on the fringe and you see the secret smile and you say to yourself, “I believe I have just caught a glimpse of a clark“…(the scott was there all along, a hub around which the social structure rotates).

That’s what I think I want to say on the (clark: “whatever”; scott: “fuckin aye big day partay”!!!; roger: “I have done a great job, but it hasn’t been easy and you are all so lucky”) First Anniversary of the Wakefield Doctrine (the theroy of clarks, scotts and rogers) blog.

But I guess I will be talking about how far we have come, and where we might be going, blah, etc, blah.  The tone of this Post is attributable to my clarklike aspect, the eternally disappointed, why can’t I be more like, I really need this thing to make up for all my shortcomings, part of me that was really exacerbated by my going out into the blogsosphere ( looking for images for today’s Post) and, by virtue of the search terms (anniversary, birthday, celebrations etc) I was neck fuckin deep in (successful), (self-promoting), (thousands of Readers for year after year), and (did I mention I am the best of all blog-writers?), blogs.  And believe it or not, my reaction was that I need to make the Wakefield Doctrine work even better, faster cause all of what I see in terms of successful, high-profile blogs have a rogerian self-promotion combined with a scottian aggressive confidence behind them.  I need to do better for the Doctrine.

Talk stop.  Music start.

(Since we clearly are of an age that makes the Beatles irristable, let’s get the obvious tune out of the way.  Damn it, this is the Wakefield Doctrine and if we are nothing else we are not going to be (too) predictable, so there is no fuckin way we will be doing the vids that you would think one might might do on Firsaversary Day)

YouTube Preview Image

(I need to tell you, I like the live vids better but the only one I could find was Paul McCartney in recent times and though it was quite a good, faithful rendition of the song…he just looks so very, very old…lol so much for not caring about age.)

Yes? Britney? …Sure why not?

http://www.metacafe.com/watch/2641655/
Share
Filed Under: Featured, the Wakefield Doctrine Tagged With: , , , , , , , ,

what’s past is prologue; what to come

June 16, 2010 By 2 Comments

 

It’s a Post being written at 2:30 am, what can I say? Have come to rely on the photos at the beginning of these Posts to impart a certain…frission*

At any rate, the practise of late has been to write these first thing in the morning, against the deadline** which is based on the condition of having to leave the house to earn a living. But tonight this morning, thought I would try to get up earl(ier) and see if, by getting away from the pressure of a deadline, I could produce a Post of more interest. (So far…not so much.)

…damn, thats what I like about writing these Posts…following is a video courtesy of the ‘left field’ portion of my brain.

 YouTube Preview Image

(Have to account for the timeframe. I did start at 2:30 am but got as far as the Civil War, Andersonville no less(!) and had to fall down on the ground and sleep. While the topic was generating so Post-worthy, I just could not get anything going. Fascinatingly awful subject/period in history…but nothing to hang a Post on. Now if a roger was writing this, he would have been all over that topic…(hey, did you just see something?)…as a matter of fact the Progenitor roger…(there! saw it again, didn’t you see it?) now he would have been the person to consult on the topic of Anderso….( gotcha!! ha!  a topic!!)

Apologies to rogers for the rather odd juxtaposition of images, initial topics and music videos…(damn catchy tune,  Katy); so lets talk about the oh so very rogerian quality of nostalgia (definition: a wistful or excessively sentimental yearning for return to or of some past period or irrecoverable condition.)
Yeah, I can accept that as the definition of the interest that rogers have for the past. However, that is only the ‘external’ description, what we should want to know is what does nostalgia mean to the roger. Now, “I’m just a lil ol country blog writer” (Deforest Kelly; 19xx) so I won’t address the technical end of things but I do know my rogers.
Theys love their old-time, historic periods. And the reason is simple.

It provides them with the perfect herd.

(Refresher: rogers are the social one of the three (of clarks, scotts and rogers, of course!) and as a social being, they live for the group. This grouping is a herd by virtue that it is not structured on a competitive basis, as say a pack of scotts would be; it definitely has a group identity, a clear us versus them as opposed to clarks who are all them versus me.  You know,  a herd).
So, to wrap this up, the reason that rogers yearn for the past is that the herd so comprised is perfect. Once identified and given a face, people of the past never change and are entirely dependent on the roger who has ‘created’ that herd.

…not such a bad topic!  I think I will try something a little different today. Will come back and add to the Post, once at ‘noon’ and once before Studley-time (which is about 5 pm EDT). If there are any rogers reading this and want to contribute to the topic ( the rogerian love of nostalgia), write damn it, write.

Heavvyyy!!

…Sorry, couldn’t wait ’til noon. You know that subtitle to yesterday”s Post? (…we can sing in the glow of… a star that I know of…) compelling rhythm for a song lyric. Was associated in my head with a fifties-greasy song by Dean (‘”hey everyone alcoholism isn’t just ugly, painful, humiliating and family destructive, it’s cool by the standards of a culture that is totally based in a form of elitism that forces its will on the people without even the benefit of making it’s own standard known) Martin.
…come on!! you know the song…lol
Anyway… liked the lyric so much I decided to find a video that I would not be ashamed of promoting…Come on lets hear it for the Gypsy Kings  (who is notgetting visuals from Robert Rodriguez’s Desperado (with Antonio and Salma)

YouTube Preview Image

Back.
Kinda not noon, definately out of touch with my own thought processes (that produced the above). But a promise is a promise. So here goes…

Let’s focus on the rogerian quality of nostalgia, as a opposed to nostalgesia, which would be more appropriate being applied to clarks (who wants to volunteer why that is?).
Anyway it has been proposed that rogers love the past because it is made up of dead people and dead people are much better herd members. And also rogers live in a perfect world which is both their strength and their total weaknesses.(Anyone want a shot at that one? ) Hey, come on, you think Post topics grow on the damn trees?

Go ahead be like that. I happened to know why the perfect world and why that is both the strength and the weakness of their types.

So write a Comment, convince me that you know the answer and I will send you a hat (for your damn head). (Sorry, Progenitors and Downsprings not qualified to enter)

* an emotion experienced in anticipation of some specific pain or danger (usually accompanied by a desire to flee or fight)
** “Seventeen feet from the inner stockade was the ‘dead-line,’ over which no man could pass and live.” [Lossing, 1868]

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

© 2009-2012 the Wakefield Doctrine All Rights Reserved -- Copyright notice by Blog Copyright