>since you ask, yes there are 3 personality types in the Wakefield Doctrine schema (he said schema, huh huh)
>Welcome to the Wakefield Doctrine (the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers)
The last two weeks of the Year really kinda suck, don’t they? Not in the “the holidays are too commercial and that’s why they suck” kind of way, not even the “too much pressure to be friendly, when is this going to be over” and especially not in the “not enough time to shop, I must get more presents”. I do not mean that when I make this statement.
It is more of the, “have we written enough Christmas-themed Posts yet, or is there time for one more?” and “oh well, better start on the New Years in review and right after that the 2011 Wish List” Posts.
That’s kind of where we are today. Figure a few more days until Nackles1 puts in his appearance (or not, god willing). No, today is more the kind of day when I know I should be working harder on the Doctrine, but manage to allow myself to get distracted. (see the footnotes to this Post. Which I might add, took nearly as much time to write as the rest of this Post).
In any event. At first I thought I would do a Post with a Gift Theme, using music videos as the gift. But once I got past glenn and roger, I realized that as much as people like to see them in each Post, the music videos matter way more to me than they do to anyone else. So, ‘no go’ for the gift Post.
Lately have been giving a lot of thought to the idea of comfort levels. And the Doctrine. Blog. glenn enjoys taking the line, ‘hey you got to get edgy, shake things up you know do things to get the Reader’s attention’!!! Of course that is just glenn being as predictable and limited and repetitive a scott as I am being a predictable and limited a clark. While I do not dispute the need for the scottian approach (after all this is the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers) the flaw to what glenn is suggesting (whether he is aware of it or not) is that his (approach) is, in fact, a totally impersonal approach to the Readers.
Yeah, I know! And yes, yes I did just make that statement. Criticizing another for being impersonal…sort of like hearing a roger say, “screw the genealogy charts, let’s go out and just live for today“! But the problem of what glenn suggests is that it is a ‘script of outrageousness’ one created to make people notice that someone is saying something. Unfortunately his only (personal) contribution is ‘the nerve’ to say it. And to his credit, he does the shock stuff really well. I know, I have seen him act like that in public…the scottian bravado. But with no personal investment, it’s just shouting out the window of a moving car…someone else’s moving car, for christsake.
Even still, he is right about need to not get comfortable, with this thing of ours. Hell, I give much more credit to AKH, at least she has the nerve to move outside of her own natural environment (scottian female; visual left to Readers) and she doing much to help get the Wakefield Doctrine blog in front of people every day…behind the frickin scenes (to use one of her favorite expressions) The photo we use on her little column ( Hey! A scott is talking! )? It is fairly emblematic of the true nature of ‘KH’s approach to her work at the Doctrine.
The Doctrine does tell us that it is a natural tendency for all of us to stay with what we know, nothing revelatory there. But that does not mean that we have to. Stay. With the familiar routine. Which brings us around to my original concern that these Posts are suffering from the same slide into predictability that we are all heirs. You know what we say here at the Wakefield Doctrine:
“…as long as you remember that there is something you have forgotten, then you are not really, yet in trouble…”
Maybe another Post-A-Day thing might get the juices flowing. See? Right there! That expression, get the juices flowing! I need a show of hands now.
This expression is characteristic of which of the three personality types: a) cla….lol yeah right! b) scott or c) roger?
Alright, hands down, how many of you said “why a clark, of course! Yeah, I thought so. This is a perfect example of where my own comfort zone ends and therefore this is where I need to be. Hell I should run there, damnit. As glenn often makes mention of the fact that he, ‘doesn’t get how a clark will look for the un-comfortable in order to develop themselves, to overcome their limitations’.(Wait a minute. He has made that statement on a number of occasions. And he is a scott…furthermore, we know that them peoples live with excitment levels that would put most clarks and rogers to sleep faster than a tourist party of Samoans in NYC on 9/11.)
The Wakefield Doctrine tells us: as predators, scotts exist in a world of predator/prey, in a world that is essentially hostile. They do not build, they do not farm rather they are solitary hunters who, if the need arises, will gather in packs. However, once the need is removed they will return to the solitary hunt. And even the scottian female is, at the core a solitary lifeform . (As we have heard from AKH), the scottian female will utilize the enticement of the spider to lure her prey/food/aka rogers to her den (metaphorically etc). But think about that statement. When was the last time you saw a herd of female spiders roaming the countryside, stopping from time to time to have a web-spinning bee? I think not. I think that for a scott to experience that which they exhort the clarks to do, i.e. get out and get crazy, stir things up, these same scotts must spend some quiet time, alone in a group. Try being the blue monkey. As much as we find it difficult to write shit like this, I think I will no longer listen to a scott who has not demonstrated the willingness to go outside their forms. The ones that can do this are truly worthy of our attention.
Music Mr. B.!! According to the Wikipedia the Poster we have ‘out front’ came to the world circa 1968…do I hear… the…. Chambers Brothers!?
1. Nackles A short, short story by Curt Clark (Donald E Westlake) early influence back in the day of reading constantly, mostly pulp science fiction books, bought at the College Hill book store and a (de-remembered) book store also on Thayer St. This was back in the day… we were in high school, pre-Woodstock fer cryin outloud! It would be a major Saturday trip to Providence, go to the East Side, then (walk!!) down to Weybosset St to another bookstore. To give you a sense of the times, an expensive paperback (only your parents would have bought a Hardcover) was .95 (that’s 95 cents!). We would spend at least 45 minutes in each store, going through everything. And this was when they ‘invented’ posters. Of course, I had the inevitable Mushroom Cloud poster (pre-Woodstock, don’t forget) and a first edition of the eponymous ‘Hang in there, Baby’ cat poster. To the credit of my people, the first edition photo had a much more desperately, panic’d kitten than was found in subsequent iterations, you know before the college coeds discovered it.