“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

With Ruburt of course it leads to work blockages, particularly along poetry lines where the emotions appear very clearly. Ruburt saw today that the intellectual portions of the self, and even the literal-mindedness, served an excellent purpose in allowing him to objectify highly intuitive material, and to give it actuality in the world that you know. He did not understand this earlier.

You were apt to put the personal relationship last, or rather to let it go, so that often it seemed to come after everything else. Now it is true that withheld sexual energy can be diverted to creative aims, but in your cases it was the feeling of daily emotional nourishment that was sometimes lacking.

Now give us a moment. When the point is reached of which I had just spoken, your objectivity comes foremost in your work at the expense of spontaneity. Remember some time ago I mentioned your feeling about oils and the emotions. This is in keeping you see with the fact that you felt more threatened than Ruburt at those boundary-near-contact points. At such times you became more alarmed working with your oils and colors, and wanted a retreat, and sought for greater distance in your paintings.

When you closed off and retreated to compensate, you came closer to the people with whom you work, enjoying their safer emotional contact. It was not threatening, you see. At the same time you adopted a more hard line in your relationship with those in the family, trying to avoid all emotional situations which might trigger a release of the repressed feelings.

At the risk of repeating myself, your in quotes “role” to one extent was restrictive in the sexual and emotional area; you were the one who drew the line. It was partially a distorted, unconscious understanding of this that led Ruburt to the exaggerated projection of that restrictive role to those other areas of your life.

Instead you see, you felt with some considerable exceptions that in this particular area spontaneity could be safely followed. When you encouraged the sessions in the beginning so strongly, he was taken back for to him you were not fulfilling the implied role. When you urged him onward then he felt that he might be on dangerous ground, for you had been counted upon in the personal area to stop spontaneity, emotionally and sexually.

This in itself has led you away from stereotyped portraits, and you could have fallen into that trap with your background in comics. There you see you avoided facing the ordinary human portrait through figures that were actually not as such individual, but types or even caricature. At that time in your development you were afraid of emotions in art to such a degree that you chose in comics to deal with stereotypes rather than individual characters, to follow rigid patterns.

In later years you loosened up considerably. You still would not want to deal with the intrusive, and to you, immediately disruptive emotions that would be obvious in a sitter. With them you would want to handle the emotion with kid gloves, precisely because of course you are so sensitive to emotion.

Yet human forms and faces intrigue you, hence the development of these creative visions, which are actually often highly intensified emotionally. In that area you were presented with a challenge, and discovered a highly unique way of meeting it.

For this reason you also feel that they are not challenging to produce, as compared with your other paintings. Ordinarily you seldom paint women, feeling that in such paintings emotions would be too blatantly displayed. You may have to watch a tendency to masculinize your women if you seriously begin to do such work, for you may feel, again, that harsher lines are necessary to hold the emotional element in check.