Welcome to the Wakefield Doctrine ( the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers )
I went to the Crossroads but I did not ‘claim it’. We all know that the Rite of Hat, (with it’s documented record of the power established with the Treaty of Tordesillas), empowered me to claim the Crossroads of Rosedale, Mississippi as my personal property. I was there, I have a video record to prove it, (it can be viewed on the last Video Friday Post). I also have still photos and maps and notes and (I may not have thrown aways the bottle of water that I bought at the Double Quik Lunch right there on Mississippi Rt 1 less than 100 yards from the intersection of Rt 8 and Rt 1). …and, and I had the hat on my damn head and my video camera in my hand and
…I could not do it.
I could not claim the Crossroads as my own.
Don’t get me wrong, it was not that I looked around and saw the people standing on the corner or (that) I could see the movement of a teacher at the blackboard in the little elementary school on the north side of the intersection or (on the south side of Rt 8) the supermarket where shoppers were busy buying groceries and such…it is not because I was given a look of disapproval of anyone of these people, but I could not say the words: “I claim this Crossroads, by Rite of Hat for my own…so get your damn things and move it on out“!
Interesting. I was not afraid to claim it, I was not embarrassed to claim it, I was not too busy to claim it, I did not feel pity for the (former) owners of the place, I did not think that someone would disapprove of my actions, I was not in fear for my life, on the run from the law, or even going to see my baby… I simply had a feeling of respect for that place.
Interesting. And what does the Doctrine tell us about the significance of a reaction like this?
- clarks think …therefore it was not an emotional attachment to the place affecting my decision
- rogers feel …but it was not a roger who travelled to this area, dressed in a business suit with a Wakefield Doctrine hat on …so it cannot be a weakness of character
- scotts act …but there was plenty of activity and people were moving about in plain view and there was no instinct driving me to give chase, so it could not be that I viewed the people there as prey
So what the hell?
We all know that clarks are the outsider(s). Justified from your point of view or not, that is the basic worldview of a clark.
We are and everything else, the world and peoples and places are all ‘out there’. Even when a clark knows better, realizes that everyone else has the same fears and dreams,insecurities and confidence we cannot escape the feeling that we are different. Not (even) necessarily different/deficient or different/more than or different/you-will-disapprove…just different. Just as a scott knows without thinking about it, that the world is a hostile place and that only by staying on the alert can they survive and (as) the rogers feel the certainty that the herd is proof of a world where the rules are there to be understood and shared and maintained and preserved, clarks know they are different.
So maybe it was this, this sense of seeing Rosedale without pre-conception, as an un-abashed outsider, maybe that is what kept me from claiming the place.
Damn. Is this a Doctrine or what?
Hey, great Saturday Night Drive last night. Nearly full house as we had DS#1 and Ms AKH(in the dashboard) and DownSpring glenn (aka Lunchbox Lennie) riding shotgun. Even better, we were joined by Molly! Located in one of the big, regular-shaped States that use longitude and latitude for house numbers, Molly is providing us with a perspective on the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers , in addition her feedback on the writing of this blog, will surely result in an acceleration of the growth of the Wakefield Doctrine. So don’t get left behind, call or write us here at this here blog here and tell us which of three (nearly) identical Wakefield Doctrine hats (for your damn head) we should be sending y’all. Don’t delay, supplies are limited.