“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

(The 67th envelope object was a penciled note written on one side of a piece of white paper by our neighbor, Leonard Yaudes. See page 319. The folded note shown below the object is my own, made at the time I discovered Leonard’s note stuck in our door on Sunday morning. Thus Leonard wrote his note in answer to a phone call by my mother at 10:05 Sunday morning, August 14. We do not have a phone.

(The greeting card represented on pages 320-21 figures in the envelope data, and so is shown also. It was not used in the envelope. The card was mailed to Jane and me by my mother from Tunkhannock, PA, on August 11,1966. It is on file along with the envelope, bearing date, ZIP code, etc.

(My own note, bearing the time and date, shown at the bottom of page 319, was clipped to the envelope object. I removed it before enclosing the object between two pieces of Bristol, then sealing the sandwich in the usual double envelopes.

Now. Do you have an envelope?

(Jane now took the sealed double envelope from me without opening her eyes. This is our 67th such experiment. She pressed the envelope to her forehead horizontally.)

The number 4. Several events happening together, or a series of objects strung together on the object. (Pause.) This leading Ruburt to think of Christmas. (Gesture with envelope.)

I N C again, and perhaps 1418. Something sent through the mail in an envelope. Long and narrow in shape.

(Jane sat with the envelope resting in her lap, eyes still closed.)

(Jane paused again. Briefly her eyes opened—something that seldom happens during envelope experiments.)

(See the tracing of the actual object on page 319, and the copies of the greeting card on page 320-21. Notes pertaining to both are found on page 322, and will be developed as we run through the connections we make with the envelope object. Seth adds a few comments after break.

(Jane of course had seen the card upon arrival, on August 12 or 13,1966. It had become mislaid after arrival and we hadn’t seen it since. We saw the envelope object on August 14. As soon as Jane began giving the envelope data I realized she referred to Mother’s card as well as the object. At break we launched a search for the card. It was fruitless; we had given up on finding it until I looked through a stack of old magazines as a last resort.

(Of course the emotional involvement and reaction between us and my parents is strong, and would tend to override more specific details of the envelope object itself, once Jane had picked up the idea of my mother. Jane had the idea of Mother’s greeting card in mind from the start of the envelope data, she said. She tried not to let this color the data. She mentally dropped it, deciding to let Seth speak in his own way. But the card plays a large part in the data nevertheless.

(Thus much of the data can be connected to my mother in a direct way, bespeaking strong emotional connections. These connections seem to spring out of the original perception of the envelope object, more or less leaving the object behind.

(“A very distant connection with a foreign land and a person. A woman. A Butts, I believe.” This is another example growing out of my mother’s connection with the object. The key is a mention of a Butts. Jane said that when giving the data she knew she meant the A as an initial A, standing for Alice Butts. I of course did not know this. Alice Butts is a retired cousin of my mother’s whom my mother admires very much. Alice served in Korea as a missionary for many years. In addition, Leonard Yaudes, author of the envelope object, knows Alice Butts.

(“A folded card. Writing on the inside. Printed matter and handwriting.” All of this refers to the greeting card shown on pages 320-21, and sent to Jane and me by Mother on August 14,1966. The envelope object itself is not folded.

(“Several events happening together, or a series of objects strung together on the object.” Probably a reference to the contents of my mother’s writing on the greeting card, since this deals with several events. The objects strung together being words. This could apply to the envelope object, but this data is sandwiched in with others applying to the greeting card.

(“Several colors. White, orange, red perhaps, this being circular, and a yellow. Plus dark printing.” All of this applies to the greeting card, which we received in the mail either on August 12 or 13, and was of course seen by Jane. The envelope object came into being August 14. All of the above is accurate with the exception that there is no yellow on the card. The orange, red applies to the red halftone used on the cartoon figure, as indicated on page 319.

(“I N C again, and perhaps 1418.” This is interesting data. No I N C appears on the greeting card, although a company logo and address does on the back. However I N C did appear on the envelope used in the last experiment, the 66th. That was a postcard, and this evening’s object is a greeting card. In addition, both are related to Leonard Yaudes; who sent us the postcard, and who authored tonight’s object. The connection being Leonard, and the fact that Jane picked up Leonard’s involvement in both experiments.

(The exact sequence, 1418, does not appear either on the envelope object or the greeting card. When we located the greeting card we also found its envelope. Tunkhannock’s zip code is 18657. On the back of the envelope my mother wrote my brother-in-law’s return address, which she should have. However she absent-mindedly wrote her own ZIP code, for Sayre, PA, after the address—18840. This is closer to 1418.

(See the tracing of the penciled slip I had attached to the envelope object when I first obtained it, reminding me of the date. The sequence, 8/14/66, is also close to 1418. Jane had never seen this slip, but it had been attached to the object for some time and perhaps was clairvoyantly divined. She had seen the envelope containing the greeting card in a casual way, of course, as had I. I did not discover the discrepancy in ZIP codes on the envelope until examining it after the session—several days after.

(“Something sent through the mail in an envelope. Long and narrow in shape.” An obvious reference to the greeting card.

(In reference to the Apples data above, I should add that an apple tree in the backyard of our place here in Elmira can also furnish connections. Leonard Yaudes, the author of the envelope object, irritated Jane somewhat in July by cutting some of the limbs from this tree. He also talked of cutting the tree itself down, and Jane asked him not to.

(4th Question: “What’s the shape of the object?” “Roughly rectangular, in itself.” Correct. The envelope object is rectangular. So is the greeting card.

(7th Question: “Can you tell me anything about what the handwriting says on the object?” “Not an invitation precisely at all, but reference to an occasion or visit.” I thought it okay to ask this question since Seth had already mentioned handwriting in connection with the data. Seth’s answer here is a good reference to the note Mother wrote inside the greeting card. It can actually apply just as well to the envelope object itself. The phone call on August 14 from my mother concerned a visit by us to Sayre, and one by her to us in Elmira. During this call arrangements were made for her to visit us here next weekend, on Saturday, August 20.

(Once again the greeting card shoulders its way into the data ahead of the actual envelope object. As explained both are related closely, but the greeting card with note, referred to above, and with an out-of-town connection, is of course not the object itself.

(Comment, meant to encourage Jane: “Well, that’s correct. The object does involve a note.” “A very definite connection with illness however.” As explained, both the envelope object and the greeting card have connections with the illness of my father and Mr. Meeker.

(“Was that word you gave in the envelope data, Ensenada?”)

(Note that I asked Seth 9 questions concerning the envelope data—the most so far.)