“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

(“But now where’s all that stuff I was picking up from Seth today?” she demanded. “Here it’s session time and I don’t have an idea in my head....” So after all this time she still preferred to know in advance what was coming up in a session.

(It’s difficult to describe, but Jane’s voice in trance was pitched a bit lower than it usually is. and it was very clear and precise and quiet in a strange way. Her diction was easier to understand, her pace quite deliberate.)

I told you that dreams played an important part in what you think of (underlined) as evolution. In a way, this is an extension of last evening’s session, but the art connection is important.

The peasant was poor because he was basically brutish as a result of his parentage. The gentleman was accomplished because a certain refinement came into his blood because of his royal—or nearly—parentage. The ownership of land of itself provided not only built-in social status, but an entire built-in world of privileged beliefs. A man of property, whether he be a scoundrel or a fool, was first and foremost a man of worth.

When all that was changed, as indeed it should have been (pause), the world underwent great changes. It may not have been much, but a yeoman’s son in the past would always be a yeoman’s son. He would follow in his father’s footsteps. He was not of equal value with a prince, either of church or state. His position was a poor one, yet its freedoms and limitations were known, and his value, whatever it was, was accepted as his station in life. He might be a good yeoman or a poor one, but a yeoman he was.

They also rise partially whenever you think of yourself as a male first or primarily, and then as an individual. You are an individual first of all and a male secondarily. You could be an individual male or female, but (louder) you could be neither if you were not an individual first of all—and that individual, again, happens to have an unconventionality of mind and ability most needed in your time and space.

The artist portion became outraged, so that the better husband you were, in that regard, the poorer it seemed the artist became—but (louder) at least you were seen to leave the house every day, as a good man should (with sly amusement).

My viewpoint is, I admit, more cosmopolitan than yours, but your own inner knowledge is also far-reaching in those terms, and that knowledge can indeed be shaken loose from social confinement. You can often follow social mores quite easily, when you realize they are mores (intently), and not moral pronouncements—and that is all. I think you are learning.

(“I don’t know why I get that directional thing.” she said. “but before the session I was getting that Negro material over there [to her left] and the cave drawing stuff over there [to her right], and I had to wait for them to come together....”)