“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.

(Jane didn’t feel too well before the session, what with all her bodily changes still taking place, but she did well once she began the session.)

(In our defenses here, I’ll digress a bit to note that although we may do that on occasion, Jane and I certainly do not blame others anything like we used to, or the way we still see others do. Our incidence is cut way down, in other words. Even when we do catch ourselves indulging, one might say, always in the backs of our minds lies the knowledge that, really, each of us creates our own reality, and are therefore participators in whatever events we may find ourselves enmeshed in—even those we dislike. This background knowledge has had profound effects upon us, of course.)

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.

Ruburt’s own passages (in God of Jane) about the television preacher are a case in point. They upset him to some extent—not for himself, but because he did not want to hurt other people who so believed in the dogma that he was disclosing to the world. It is very important, then, that you learn to trust your own creativity and your own vision, and allow it its expression, for it will always lead to a more fulfilling vision. End of session. Unless you have another question.