Yo! “Vivienne Westwood”! Thank you for your edge…

Vivienne Westwood?  Yes.  Step aside Diane (Keaton), Vivienne’s in town today.  No, there is no footnote.  You’ll just have have to look her up yourself.  “Why Vivienne this morning?”  Honestly, she and the title simply popped into my head.  I was caught between brief moments lamenting the loss of  “opportune” times to write.  You know, those tenuous moments (usually inconvenient and/or away from a computer) when fabulous words start streaming through your brain only it’s nearly impossible to hold on to them long enough to get them on paper or throw ’em up on a screen.

It’s funny that Vivienne should scream at me today. I have been wanting, for weeks now, to write about certain signals that have been appearing lately indicating we are on the cusp of a seasonal change.  Geez, what part of my unconscious did she pop out of?…. have I been putting in some astral travel miles to Paris and simply forgot I had a front row seat at all the best fall shows?!  

You should know that, in spite of the reputation we have with some people (clarkscottroger),  most clarklike females do keep current with fashion and couture.  And no, I don’t believe that we like people make a mockery of “fashion”.   Au contraire mes amis.  You see, Vivienne, the clark that she is,  is an excellent example of a fashion designer/icon who, in her unique style, has influenced decades of fashion conscious men and women all over the world. 

Listen to those testimonials for goodness sake.  Daisy loves Vivienne’s “crazy cuts”, Paloma thinks her clothing expresses British “rebelliousness and eccentricity” (can you say clark?) and someone used the euphemistic adjective “distinctive”.  Boy George?  He’s loved her clothes since he was, well, a boy.

The second video is a tad long however you don’t need to watch the entire clip in order to catch on to why I can say Vivienne Westwood is a clark, although if you do watch it in it’s entirety, you will be convinced yourself that Vivienne is without doubt a clarklike female She places proper emphasis on footwear, she includes androgeny and she manipulates, rather artfully, design in a way that evokes certain and subtle sexiness.  If you are still not convinced she is a clark then by all means peruse some photos of Ms. Westwood.  Trust me there is not doubt on how she “views the world”.

Google Vivienne, watch these videos and then tell me that she is not a designer extraordinaire!  Thank you Vivienne for your contribution to the world of fashion! 



  1. clark · September 1, 2011

    very enlightenating…the clarklike female is probably the most easily recognisable of the 3 types, right behind (both) the scottian male and scottian female.
    While the fashion cues are quite distinctive, they are, of course, merely the manifestations of how the (clark) relates to the world. While this is true of rogers and scotts, the clarklike female offers a clear view of this in the form of the contradictions, both explicit and implicit. There is the quality of gender that makes the clark (“I don’t want to be the subject of your attention, you will not over-look me.) I offer as illustration the vid clip of Kristen Stewart being interview on Regis. (For new Readers Regis is so a roger and Kelly is totally a scottian female):


    • Girlieontheedge · September 1, 2011

      I would agree with you that the clarklike female is the most easily recognized. But then I am one. Is it really as easy for the scotts and rogers out there to spot them(clarklike females)? Heck, even new readers of the Wakefield Doctrine aka the theory of clarks, scotts and rogers who have identified themselves as clarks may have a tad difficulty in this identification. I take it for granted that I can spot Vivienne, Diane, Kristen, Uma, “Flo” etc. as my “kind” but for those who are just discovering this thing, it may take a little more time/practice. For example, would any one of the 3 “types”, who has the basics down as to what characteristics define a clark, a scott and a roger be able to distinguish between Madonna and Lady Gaga? (easy one that).
      I like where this is headed so if they don’t mind (you don’t guys do you?) I would like to ask new FOTD Molly M. and Clairpeek, heck, and any readers out there to identify Madonna and Lady Gaga as: clark, scott or roger.

      More often than not, the manifestation you speak of, at least for the female sex, will take some form of personal adornment. Long time back Downspring glenn aka Lunchbox Lenny inquired of yours truly about my Doc Marten boots (“combat”). We were playing the Gestaldt game. But he was on the right track. The “why” of this fashion thing runs deep. It is, on the surface, like asking why the sun rises each day….


  2. clark · September 1, 2011

    Your questions mock ‘seriously difficult’ questions asked by so many people…Lady GaGa is so clearly a…. now wait just a darn minute!! I recuse my own damnself from the questionation as proposed by your question.


    • Girlieontheedge · September 1, 2011

      My questions were not meant to mock. Recently, I have been attempting to step back and look at the basis of The Wakefield Doctrine with “new” eyes.


  3. Mens Clothing · September 2, 2011

    I really love those outfits, defently a way to make you stand out from the herd.


  4. Jennifer · September 2, 2011

    “the clarklike female is probably the most easily recognisable of the 3 types, right behind (both) the scottian male and scottian female”
    Interesting that the WD is starting to refer to male/female types. This opens a whole new door as we begin to learn new aspects of the Doctrine. Maybe not gender free as far as the three types are concerned.


    • Girlieontheedge · September 2, 2011

      The Wakefield Doctrine is gender neutral. As the conversation (about clarks, scotts, rogers) evolves, it is inevitable that certain, shall we say nuances, begin to be discussed as it pertains to gender. On a basic level a clark, for example, views the world the same whether they be a he or a she. Same with the other 2 (scotts and rogers).
      There are core characteristics to each that define the individual irregardless of gender.
      Having said that, I agree with you that there is a door to be opened in the conversation at the Wakefield Doctrine. It sounds as if you have already opened that door. Tell us a little more about where that door has led you.


  5. Jennifer · September 5, 2011

    Perhaps not put correctly on my part. Of course the Doctrine is gender free. I was referring to the characteristics between the males and females of each of the three types….


    • Girlieontheedge · September 5, 2011

      I know what you are referring to. I would love to get your input on those characteristics. I personally have not spent a whole lot of time discussing those intricacies. Care to start us off?


  6. Pingback: Nowhere near the edge…of completion « GirlieOnTheEdge's Blog

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s