“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

His mother’s scorn told him this was a part of a bad blood heritage, an inevitable part of his condition. Ruburt felt that his mother only liked him because of his writing. In the early novels his repressed feelings could be expressed. They were creative, but also safety valves. I made art out of them.

You must understand that for nearly 20 years he lived in an environment in which expression of dissent brought instant retaliation of the most frightening kind. Outright punishment—hair-pulling or cursing. Verbal humiliation was easiest to bear, but his mother would immediately show all kinds of extremely serious symptoms, for which Ruburt would be adamantly blamed.

I am an ally because I can help express those repressions. I have the energy to do it creatively if I am not hampered. Read this together with the other statement. You are on the right track. Once repression is really faced as a problem it can be overcome, because all portions of Ruburt’s personality now realize the danger involved, and know that the pattern must be broken.

There may well be emotional charges expressed. Do not be afraid of them. They will clear the air.

(The tyranny results from “it” not being allowed to express itself in usual ways, I thought. Jane is perfectly able to work a daily quota of time without overseeing, just like anybody else, and to do all the other normal things people do, like take vacations, etc. If all parts of her being are allowed expression, I said, there would be no extreme reactions, as in the symptoms. Therefore we must learn what is being held back, what is seemingly so terrifying, that it dare not be faced.

(The two instances cited here actually represent good improvements on Jane’s part, in that she allowed me to learn what was involved. I think the continual repressions over the years have let the conscientious self grow out of proportion. I think also that the conscientious-self or “it” made a creative advance on February 19 when it stated its tactics were bringing about the very thing it did not want—Jane’s inability to work in freedom. My thought at the moment is that more expression on Jane’s part will free the conscientious-self to perform its own balanced role, and to actually retreat in doing so.

(I told Jane today that when a fear is expressed, it takes its natural place in the scheme of things and no longer grows unseen. Jane at first said during our talk that she must hate many things—but it seems that hate would only be a mask for fear— hence the suggestion that instead of asking herself what she hates, a more basic question is “What do I fear?”

(This morning when she expressed resentment at her conscientious or creative self, Jane said it took her a long time to get mad—several days in this case—after the session of February 19, when the creative self spoke. This delayed reaction may be, partly, her very cautious way of allowing an adverse reaction to surface, and it may also simply reflect her nature.

(My thinking at this time is that when we allow ourselves expression freely—painful as it may be at times—and live in ways that are in keeping with our natures and abilities, we will achieve that necessary and vital balance that automatically results in creative work, health, whatever material success we require, etc.