“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

SESSION 912, APRIL 30, 1980
9:04 P.M. WEDNESDAY

Again, such times are closely bound with reincarnational intents that direct the genetic triggering, and that meet in the culture the further stimulus that may be required. The time of the great masters in the fields of painting and sculpture is a case in point (humorously and louder)—so you see, I am getting to one of your favorite questions,² and we will continue the discussion at our next session.

(10:09. I did have a question for Seth now—one made up of a number of questions, actually, and another one of my favorites. It’s easily the longest I’ve asked in a session. It grows out of Seth’s philosophy, obviously, yet it also reflects my own, and concerns man’s attempts to both fight and grasp his heritage. Here’s a condensation of what I said:

(Heartily:) End of session.

10:20 P.M. I told Jane that the session is excellent. Her delivery had often been rather fast and intent—even impassioned. She laughed. “See, I wanted him to come through and say something about me, without my asking, but he didn’t.” She hadn’t mentioned such a desire to me. “I got something about genetic dreams while I was doing the dishes tonight—just the phrase,” she said. “Anyhow, I feel better after the session than I did before it.

“But tonight I had the feeling after the session that it’s a real full one—that I really got to the heart of something,” Jane added. “I like that. The last session didn’t give me that feeling, but when I read it, it was fine….”)

NOTES: SESSION 912

2. Seth referred to a question I periodically ask Jane, but seldom discuss with others simply because they don’t seem to be interested: What’s happened to all of the Rembrandts? Why isn’t there at least one artist in all of the world painting today whose ability equals Rembrandt’s, and who uses that great gift to evoke the depths of compassion for the human condition as Rembrandt did? For in my opinion there isn’t such a one around. By extension, why isn’t there a Rubens or a Velázquez or a Vermeer operating now? My choices are personally arbitrary, of course—yet why don’t we have a Rembrandt contributing to our current reality? Just those four artists, whose lives spanned a period of only 98 years (from 1577 to 1675), explored human insight in powerful ways. To link the “great masters” with our species’ reincarnational intents and drives, as Seth mentions in this session, opens up a new field for understanding my question, and a very large and intriguing one indeed.

3. I’ve been saving the following untitled poem of Jane’s for a spot like this. She wrote it on November 7, 1979, almost a month before delivering Session 886 for Chapter 2 of Dreams (in Volume 1) on December 3. I suggest that in connection with the poem the reader review the opening paragraphs of that session.