“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

(We’re still in the process of checking the copyedited manuscript for God of Jane, although we’re nearing the end of that job. Today Jane told me that she thought Seth would go into the famous—or infamous—disclaimer that Prentice-Hall wants to attach to Mass Events. We’d received a formal letter about that from the legal department of Prentice-Hall last Friday; today Jane had been “picking up” on it. I didn’t ask her what she’d learned; I thought it better to get the material in a session, if possible. Just before the session, Jane said that she thought Seth was “rather cavalier” in his attitude, and that my own wasn’t very good. She was only half joking.

(At 8:52: “I sort of feel him around, but I don’t think it will be very long.” Jane had been tempted to pass up the session and continue work on God of Jane, but I reminded her that I could use Seth’s information on the disclaimer in our reply to the legal department at Prentice-Hall. We knew by now that we were resigned to having the disclaimer inserted into Mass Events, but we wanted to have our say—partially out of anger and partially out of self-protection, since we didn’t believe all the legal department had told us; we wanted them to know we understood the subterfuges involved.

Ruburt wondered the other day what my own attitude might be toward the famous disclaimer, and I began to tell him.

Now: any disclaimer would not insult me. The entire idea of the disclaimer is a living example of the book’s thematic material. It shows the elements of the society that we have criticized in action. It becomes almost an exterior extension of the book itself. Certainly it shows why the ideas in the book are so important at this time. I consider such a disclaimer as a mildly amusing case in point: a living example—almost as if indeed you had requested one—a proof of the pudding.

(9:05.) There is more involved. Our work has achieved enough notice so that it is indeed considered to have some effects upon your society. (Pause.) Otherwise, no disclaimer would be considered. That means that we have made inroads, that we are reaching people, and that even the Prentice legal department is aware of our readership.

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.

(Long pause.) Because the book met criticism at Prentice does not mean that you or it were not protected. (Pause.) The word “protection” in this context is interesting, of course, since the disclaimer is supposed to protect Prentice from any court action. It is in its fashion an attempt at protection at that level. The level is one where every bit of preventative protection is needed in a world where people constantly need insurance, preventative medicine, and so forth – again, all issues dealt with in the book.

(Long pause.) The disclaimer is also Prentice’s way of allowing itself some freedom thematically, without getting its feet wet in any possible court actions. The company, as stated, is in its fashion a capsule of your society and its present climate. (Long pause.) The disclaimer in no way lessens the power of impact of the book. It only manages to stress many of the pertinent issues, and in its way it would point out the situation quite clearly. No one is seriously concerned about the possibility of a person dying of a disease because they followed any of the advice given in the book. They are afraid to some extent of being sued for such a purpose because they themselves dwell in a mental situation in which threats are everywhere, in which all precautions must be taken.

I am making no recommendations, but hopefully adding to the information that you have at hand, and offering another framework from which you can view the situation. Your feelings about it are as important as your actions. You have every right to call them on any points you desire, of course. (Long pause.) In the overall cultural picture (long pause), “psychic matters” are no longer as easy to dismiss as they used to be. People’s curiosity has been aroused, and the established methods of gaining knowledge have been found less than satisfactory—so in a fashion the idea of the disclaimer is a kind of backhanded recognition. You and your works are protected. Your lives are aware as they are meant to be. You have made no great errors in your lives. You are doing what is right for you. If you accept those statements as true, then you will begin to feel an emotional sense of rightness with yourselves. You will drop habits of self-disapproval. You can even take it for granted that intellectually you may not know all of the reasons (underlined) for your own actions.

(“Has he been reacting physically to this disclaimer business?”)