“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

(The object for the 72nd envelope experiment was an empty envelope, as shown. I kept the letter that had been enclosed in the envelope for reference, and as expected needed it to decipher some of Seth’s data. The object was a standard white business envelope, printed and typed in black. The back was blank. I sealed it in the usual double envelopes after placing it between two pieces of Bristol board. Jane had seen the envelope in a casual way upon its arrival here last May, but not since then.

The letters M and J, though these are not necessarily connected with the man.

(See the tracing of tonight’s envelope object on page 71 and the notes on the next page. The empty envelope used as object was mailed to me last May 26,1966, by an old friend, Wendell Crowley, and contained a letter detailing a reunion of a group of friends, all artists, that Wendell and I worked with in 1941-43. The letter was not in the envelope but was kept separate by me for reference after the session. As I suspected, some of Seth’s data referred to the contents of the letter rather than the envelope object itself.

(Wendell’s letter of May 26 is two typewritten pages long, and at the moment we do not plan to include a copy of it with these notes. If necessary we will do so; in the meantime the letter remains on file with other envelope-related material. Other background material may be necessary to fill in the relationship between Wendell, myself and our friends discussed in the letter, and this will be included in our interpretations of the envelope experiment data. Some geography is involved also.

(“A double, or something twice, or a negative.” Relatively little of the data refers to the envelope object itself. Instead the empty envelope from Wendell serves as a springboard. This data is a case in point. After break Seth agrees with Jane and me when we assign the double or twice mentioned here to the frequent use of the numeral 2 on the second page of Wendell’s letter.

(Wendell uses the numeral 2 to indicate the second page of his typed letter. He mentions the 20th anniversary of a friend’s wedding. He discusses the fact that although he is recovered from a heart attack of last year, he cannot lift over 20 pounds, and must take a 2-mile walk each day. The numeral 2 appears once on the first page of the letter.

(The negative mention in the data is interesting, and has several connections, both here and in the rest of Seth’s data. Jane and I did not think of negative in connection with the word no, for instance, but in relation to pictures or visual images. On page two of his letter Wendell tells about a friend who works for the Neilson TV survey people—having to do with pictures. But also, negative, meaning pictures, is called to mind because Wendell’s letter deals with a group of artists who worked together in a studio, drawing comic strips, in 1941-3. In addition I personally have a studio here in the apartment, and the envelope used as object was kept in this studio. These references about studios, pictures, and the object crop up again later in the data also.

(“It seems some connection with cars or transportation.” As stated, the object contained a letter describing the reunion of perhaps half a dozen artists who worked together in the early 1940’s. The reunion was attended by the writer of the letter. All of the reunion participants live in the New York City and New Jersey area just across the Hudson River. In his letter Wendell does not name the town or city in which the reunion, at a restaurant, took place, but from following data Jane and I surmise it took place in New York City.

(There is another possible travel connection here, depending upon interpretation. The envelope object is postmarked Ridgewood, NJ, which lies on the outer rim of the commuter towns attendant to New York City. The letter the object contained, however, was written by Wendell at his home in Edgewater, NJ, which is just across the Hudson from New York City. The two towns are at least 25 miles apart—a trip Wendell makes daily.

(“My fair lady—I do not know to what this refers.” In his letter Wendell makes no reference to this in any way. Seth begins to clear this up after break but an interruption interferes.

(“A string, as of lights, or pearls, in a string of succession, of items in succession.” We interpreted this as a possible reference to street lights at first, or a theater marquee, since the reunion was held at night, and nighttime travel would involve lights, etc. But “items in succession” could just as well refer to words in succession—i.e., the letter that had been enclosed in the envelope object or the printing and typing on the object itself.

(“Some connection with a February event.” Wendell’s letter of May 26 was in answer to a letter I wrote him last February. I do not have a copy of my letter, but am sure it was written in February because Wendell discusses my references to snow and poor weather. Our weather last winter was quite peculiar—we had no snow at all until the massive three-day storm of February 1, one of the worst in local history. Seth has more to say about February in answer to my first question.

(“Black and white colors.” The envelope object is white, with both the printing and typing on it in black ink. Wendell’s letter is also black and white, though his signature is in blue ink.

(“A photograph. Ruburt here thinks of the photographs taken in your studio, of him.” The picture data begins to emerge again. Seth here mentions some test photos I took of Jane in my studio here last week. Studio is the link here with Wendell’s letter, and hence the envelope object. In his letter Wendell specifically mentions the studio we artists shared back in 1941-3.

(“The photograph connection is strong [pause] but I do not believe the item is this precisely.” [Pause.] Seth tried to help Jane discriminate here, as he often does. Tonight’s object of course is not a picture or photo, but an envelope that contained a letter about people who make pictures. Also, I was taking pictures of Jane last week, as explained. Thus it can be seen how all such related data, even though separated by much time, comes together in these session experiments. This particular chain of association was not anticipated by me when I picked the Crowley envelope as object for tonight. The two studio settings—the studio I worked in with Wendell Crowley in 1941-3, and my present studio, are separated by as much as 23 years.

(“There seems to be a dual impression of printed matter with a photograph.” Seth comes even closer with this data. He deals with the photo-picture-artist impressions on the one hand, and the actual envelope object, containing both printing and typing, on the other. We regard this as good data. Tonight’s empty object also contained Wendell’s typed letter. In the past Seth, or Jane, has used lettering, typing, writing and printing interchangeably. Thus it is possible that tonight “printing” could refer to both the printing and typing on Wendell’s envelope, and to the letter it had contained.

(“One thirty-five.” My hunch was that this referred either to the end of the reunion discussed in Wendell’s letter—at 1:35 AM, or the time Wendell himself left the party. Inspection of his letter showed that Wendell states “I left at about 12:30 AM,” but that other member of the party remained after he left. Seth is more specific after break.

(“Two again, like a double exposure.” See the “twice” and “negative” data on page 77, and the listing of Wendell’s use of the numeral 2 on the second page of his letter. Double exposure, above, also has picture and artist connotations.

(“And a small round object.” On top of the stack of papers that had accumulated on the desk shelf, and which contained Wendell Crowley’s envelope and letter, I had placed a plastic tape dispenser as a makeshift paperweight. This dispenser is composed of round and curving lines, has a circular hole through it perhaps an inch and a half in diameter, a larger round design in red printed about this hole, and of course contains a round roll of Scotch tape perhaps two inches in diameter.

(First Question: What’s that connection with a February event? “I am not sure, though the number 17 seems connected to it, or 14, between the 14th and the 17th of February.” As explained, the object for tonight contained a letter written by Wendell Crowley in answer to my letter of last February. My letter could well have been written between February 14 and 17.

(Jack did not attend the reunion, though of course he is mentioned in Wendell’s letter of May 26. A strong connection is that Jack’s younger brother, Otto, did attend the reunion, and is also mentioned in the letter to some extent.

(2nd Question: Got any initials on the older man? “The letters M and J, though these are not necessarily connected with the man.” The J here could apply to Jack. Seth began to comment on the M after break, but unfortunately was interrupted, as will be shown.

(Seth called for break after the second question, taking me by surprise. Usually I can ask more questions, and attempt them without being leading about it. I owe Wendell a letter, and may ask him to clear up some of the points mentioned in the data, and by Seth after break. It is however difficult to explain briefly in a letter just why such questions are necessary, and so Jane and I usually forego trying. But any additional information obtained will be attached to this session at a later date.

(See page 78.) Too disconnected, I am afraid. Your friend wrote a letter to a man in Michigan, immediately before or after writing this letter. This was the M also—a name something like Murray. No, more like Musach—