“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

(During the holiday break two spontaneous sessions were held. The first was on Friday evening, December 23,1966, at the home of the Gallaghers, with the four of us present. Seth presented some very interesting material on flying saucers, time, other systems, etc. Peggy took notes that were somewhat incomplete because of Seth’s rapid pace. A copy of them will be attached to a later session.

(The second session was held at our apartment Friday evening, December 30, with Jane and me, Wesley Swan, Bill Macdonnel, Pat Norelli and Claire Crittenden present. Seth discussed computers and their future use; Wesley Swan agreed with the data. Seth also gave a good deal of personal data concerning a Brian Houlihan, a friend of Pat’s and some data concerning Claire and Pat, and answered questions from all of us. Evidently a good amount of the data was correct, being called so by Pat and Claire, although without notes we cannot check. One interesting bit: Seth named Claire’s birthday correctly—as falling on February 13, but missed the year by one. He said 1948 when the correct year is 1947.

(The envelope object for tonight was a card sent to Jane by Caroline Keck, conservator of paintings for the Brooklyn Museum, in 1964. See page 230.

(Jane began speaking in trance while sitting down. Her eyes opened often; her voice was on the quiet side, with brief pauses as a rule.

What they are now, so to speak, also exists, and as something distinct and different from what they were. The personality has experienced new realities since death, and is no longer precisely the person that was. The person that was exists as a sort of psychological unit, however. The person, the survival person that is, contains all that he was, and more.

(See page 230. The object is a card, blank on the reverse side, written to Jane by Caroline Keck, conservator of the Brooklyn Museum; it was mailed to Jane in early August, along with a copy of the book, Is Your Contemporary Painting More Temporary Than You Think? and a mimeographed list of various addresses furnishing technical help and supplies regarding the conservation of paintings. The list was also compiled by Caroline Keck; the book by Louis Pomerantz.

(Caroline Keck sent Jane the items to give to her in appreciation for a pen and ink drawing of a pigeon I gave to Caroline Keck. In July 1964 Jane worked at the Arnot Art Gallery, and Caroline Keck and her husband Sheldon spent some time there then, putting the gallery’s collection in shape. Jane liked Caroline Keck, and the two got along well. The drawing of the pigeon was among a group I had exhibited at the gallery at the time the Kecks were present; they saw it and admired it. I never met the Kecks, but told Jane to give the drawing to them.

(The equalization, Jane believes, refers to the book by Louis Pomerantz, that along with the object and the mimeographed list were mailed to her by Caroline Keck from Brooklyn, NY, in August 1964. All three of these items refer to the conservation of paintings. The title page of Louis Pomerantz’s book shows that it was published by A Chicago Chapter Artists Equity Publication, 332 South Michigan Avenue, Chicago 4, Illinois. Artists Equity Association is dealt with in the book’s forward also.

(“and a stone framework. Rocky.” Probably another general reference to the object, in that the object’s author, Caroline Keck, was associated with both the Brooklyn Museum and the Arnot Art Gallery. Both edifices being made of stone, as well as with additions of brick, etc.

(“A connection with light.” A reference to Caroline Keck, author of the object, and her husband, Jane said. The Kecks brought special equipment to the Arnot with them to examine the gallery’s paintings; among this equipment was a certain kind of light. Probably ultraviolet or infrared, though at this date Jane is not sure.

(“Several small letters or numbers, and a stamped card, from a distant place.” See page 230. The object contains small printed letters in the address in the upper left corner. It also contains numbers in the date. It is a card, but is not stamped; instead of being mailed alone it was enclosed in a small package or envelope with Louis Pomerantz’s book and the mimeographed list described earlier; and all addressed to Jane.

(“A very small image, such as the square or rectangle on the item.” This could be distortion arising from the object being similar to a postcard. But as stated the object was not mailed alone, and bears no stamp, etc, nor any marking like a square or rectangle.

(“An invitation to attend.” At this date Jane cannot recall. The Kecks are well known in their field, and it is possible some social affair was held for them while they were in Elmira and at the gallery doing their work. Jane could have been invited to attend. She knows she attended no such affair in their honor, but doesn’t know, now, whether she was asked to.

(1st Question: What’s that connection about a book? “It seems as to be an old book. A bound one, with a dark color such as brown on the cover. The side of pages when the book is closed seem dusky in color, like old gold color. The book having a connection with a desk, and another location.” Again, distortion. Jane said that here she confused old paintings and old gilded frames, such as the Kecks worked with at the Arnot, with old books. Quite possibly the book is Louis Pomerantz’s modern one, as described. The cover of this book is a rusty red. Also it may have laid on a desk, and it was sent to Jane from another location—Brooklyn, NY.

(4th Question: Who is the other man referred to besides myself? “Something to do with an animal in a tree, that I do not understand.” I had been hoping Seth, or Jane, might come up with Caroline Keck’s husband, Sheldon, or her son Larry, who is named on the object itself. See page 230. Of course I was involved with another man, and this involvement Seth picked up—since my drawing was appropriated by Larry Keck, as noted on the object.

(This in turn leads Seth to some excellent data which is also amusing. The drawing I gave the Kecks was of a pigeon—the “animal in a tree.” The drawing merely showed a pigeon, no tree, and a pigeon is not an animal. Yet the data is very good.

(“The other man, a friend rather than a relative.” Here Seth, or Jane, veers toward Bill Gallagher again, it seems. I had not met either Caroline or Sheldon Keck, nor Larry who was in Brooklyn.

(5th Question: Initials? “This may be your friend Gallagher, or your friend Mark, for the first name would seem to be William.” A miss here. As far as we know, neither Bill Gallagher or Bill Macdonnel (Mark) are involved with the object. Bill Macdonnel may have seen the pigeon drawing when it was on exhibit at the gallery; I do not know for sure. Could William have come from Larry, on the object?