“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

First of all, this evening’s small chat: it was a beginning. You should freely encourage each other however to express feelings. Those mentioned tonight on Ruburt’s part were “negative” ones precisely because they were so strongly inhibited. He tossed them out cautiously, watching for their effect upon you.

You reacted cautiously. It was like the beginning of a dance. When Ruburt got a real touch of inhibited feeling he automatically translated it to the leg, and only by a strong exertion of will managed to get the feeling behind the words out at all. Nor did you freely encourage him to do so.

He worried about the effect of such expressed feeling on you, and both of you intellectualized, as is often your wont. This does not mean that a series of crying jags, explosive ones, need be in order, as Ruburt fears, and fears that you fear.

The expressed (underlined) emotional anger, accusation or hurt on Ruburt’s part would automatically, or should, bring out in you an answering emotional statement. Answering in that any hurts or reasons on your part would be expressed with feeling, and the way cleared for an emotional statement of love, regret, or on both of your parts an emotional expression of sorrow for having hurt the other.

This operates as strongly for you as Ruburt. You have seen him in a very few honest expressions of anger, once when he tried to throw a chair, and felt the suddenly released energy that he usually does not channel physically. That same unexpressed energy is present within you, but it must be felt first, and acknowledged. If you have questions ask them. Now. I mentioned, and you realize the significance of Ruburt turning down the radio when you enter the room. He tried to turn his emotions down in the same way. He felt you equated noise, period, with emotional behavior.

Make it a point then to encourage your own expression of emotion, and Ruburt’s. Do you want a break?

This is but one method. (Pause.) In following this particular line of development, Ruburt for example will be taught to free inner cognition from the recognized verbal patterns enough so that any future work with speakers manuscripts will not be stereotyped out of all proportion. A recognizable verbal pattern must of course result, but use of the language itself will break up these personal associative processes that cling to recognized language symbols.

Other physical manipulations may also be involved, as Ruburt suspected this afternoon. The word cordella, now for example, was used instead of alphabet to break your ordinary conceptions of alphabet while conveying an idea of symbols closely allied, and upon which alphabets are based.