“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

In other words, the books are considered to have some social life. (Pause.) You are, or we are, certainly criticizing many of the aspects of your society. In that particular book (Mass Events)—rather powerful honored aspects, and criticism will (underlined) meet criticism. At the same time, as the book’s criticism has a good import, so is the disclaimer in its fashion a creative example, again, of the book’s premise, and also would serve for that matter in a way that may not have been anticipated: with the disclaimer the book may well sell more copies by far than it would otherwise (humorously), for people will be curious about what such a volume might contain that will be dangerous to the public good.

To the extent that he questions his own natural protection. Give us a moment.... You are dealing with two issues also. The natural person—the creator, the artist—in Ruburt, wants the book out without any interruptions, and cares little about other issues. The socially knowledgeable person does not want to be taken for a fool, be insulted, and wants to be treated with respect. To some extent that is a simplification, of course. Nothing is that simple, but the explanation does serve to clarify contradictory issues. Certainly the entire affair is to be used creatively. Art, including writing, of course—creativity itself—is bound to be, as per the Cézanne passage (I’d called to Jane’s attention a couple of weeks ago) sometimes disruptive. It brings into being that which was not there before. It rearranges some aspects of the world, and it is in its fashion as brilliant as a child’s clear eye. It sees truth clearly. Because it does, art can often make disclosures that offend the pious, the well-mannered.