“Seth material” search engine (Jane Roberts)

(Jane’s sessions have been very irregular also, and she hasn’t worked on Seth’s latest book for some months now. Therein lay one of those clues that was right in front of us, yet invisible at the same time. In each Seth book there have been layoffs, so to speak—long or longish periods in between certain sessions, while, usually, we held personal sessions in the interim; these were usually devoted to trying to get at the root causes of Jane’s symptoms. This pattern was most pronounced while Seth was producing Mass Events, but without checking at the moment we remember similar if shorter layoffs while the previous books were being produced. This has always bothered me to some extent, but I usually told myself that was Jane’s way of working, and to forget it. It did make for some tricky work writing notes for Mass Events, say, to explain these long periods in between certain sessions in the book.

(As soon as I reread her paper the evening before last, I was reminded of the two excerpts I’d copied from recent deleted sessions—those for January 26 and 28, 1981. In them Seth briefly explained how Jane had created her symptoms as protection against the spontaneous self going too far: this fear was the real reason for the symptoms—not, as we usually thought, her fear that she would do other things besides work if she had normal mobility. The latter idea is a cover-up for the previous one. To Jane, going too far means that she would find herself in an unsafe position in the world. And to me, as I began to put all of this together, it meant that although she did the Seth books, which we think so highly of, she also drags her feet in resistance with each one—hence the long intervals of non-work that crop up during the production of each one. Again, without checking, I think that an examination of our records would show that her symptoms flared up, indeed worsened, as she worked on each Seth book, and that behind her labors on each book there lay this fear that she was going too far with each one she produced. This fear may be based on outmoded ideas—as Seth has mentioned at various times—it may make no sense, or whatever, yet as long as it exists it must be dealt with. This present session represents, then, our latest attempt to come to terms with all of our personal, public, and creative aspects involved with the Seth material—not just those we’d chosen to deal with in past years.

(Yesterday morning, then, while painting, the thought came to me clearly: Jane does the Seth books just to please me. I knew at the time that this was likely to be an oversimplification, yet I also knew at once that it contained the key to the puzzle; this rather simple idea helped me assemble all of the information already described in these notes, half of it in ways I cannot consciously describe. But it did lead to the discussion I had with Jane this noon [on the 4th], and this session. All at once I had several ideas I wanted to talk over with her.

(Coupled with all of this is the statement Seth made recently to the effect that we “have made no major errors.” This is one of those bits of data that I return to much later and begin to question, after having let it pass at the time. “Well, if we’ve made no major errors,” I said to Jane recently, “what do you call the hassles we do have?”’ I was—am—quite aware of the humor implicit in the whole situation. At times I for one can agree with Seth, but at other times I have strong doubts.

(This noon after lunch, then—on the 4th—Jane and I had a discussion about the ideas mentioned above. My latest efforts to cope with our challenges involve her letting go of Seth’s latest books. Dreams, for some time. That is, we can work on it if we want to, but with no thought of deadlines or signing a contract, which would commit Jane to additional public exposure. The idea is that she’ll be free to do what she wants with the Seth material, for as long as she wants to, without our adding fuel to her fears until we’ve had a chance to work things through. I told her I was sure I was on the right track here, without knowing positively that I was, and without having pat answers that would solve all of our hassles.

(Putting off Dreams, it seemed to me, was a necessity at the moment because I now believed that the long interlude in her dictation was, again, a clear sign of resistance to the project on Jane’s part. The idea is an attempt to at least call a halt to something that she has resisted from the start, or so it seems in retrospect—and I mean the start of the sessions, not just Dreams. I reminded her that I was the one who first suggested we start publishing the Seth material, and that she’d had reservations about doing that. It seemed to me now that a clear course of hanging back had been displayed by Jane all though our psychic endeavors, and that it could be easily charted if we took the time to do so. I said that she would have probably used her psychic gifts in some fashion in her writing, but that the Seth books might very well have not come into existence except for my own interest—hence my mental insight this morning that Jane did the Seth books to please me. I know things aren’t that simple, but I do feel that the fact of public exposure represented by the Seth books has always bothered Jane. And currently she has been bothered more than ever, as she has described in her December 27, 1980 paper. This upset includes her work on her own latest, The God of Jane.

(I explained that in their different ways both Jane’s ESP classes, and the mail, reflect other aspects of public exposure, and that these too must have engendered resistance over the years. [Jane remarked last week to the effect that she wondered how she could get out of answering the mail, for example.] Class had always seemed to offer much, and has helped many people, yet implicit in its very existence was the fact of public exposure concerning unacceptable psychic abilities, in Jane’s eyes, I told her. My idea is that both class and mail have had an unfortunate reinforcing effect over the years as far as the symptoms and their attendant fears go.

(Putting off the publication of Dreams, then, is only a ploy to gain some time to defuse the present situation, while Jane’s body struggles to right itself as much as possible. We do believe Seth’s assessment, to the effect that her body is righting itself in numerous areas after years of disuse, of being held down, but at the same time it’s very difficult not to have qualms and doubts about what’s happening at the same time. At Christmastime I discussed with Jane the idea of seeking medical help, and asked her to tell me what she thought of this idea later, but she has yet to bring up the subject. I knew she’s not in favor of it, but as I said at the time, this seemed to mean that she was indulging the idea of spending the balance of her life sitting down —quite immobile for all practical purposes. I’d told her at the time that I had no great hope that medicine could help much, but still I wondered often enough if the medical profession might be able to offer some sort of help. I didn’t want Jane to get so bad that she was forced to turn to doctors, before at least considering outside help. At times I feared something like this would happen if she wasn’t able to “pull out” of her symptoms on her own—that is, with her own, Seth’s, and my help.

(I repeated in our discussion that it was perfectly all right with me if Jane chose not to publish any more Seth books, but concentrated on her own works, and she said she understood this. It’s my personal opinion, at least of the moment, that it will be quite a while before Dreams is either finished or printed. At least Jane now has some breathing space, and the cycle of resistance may be interrupted, say, if not reversed yet. We now have time for Framework 2 to operate. In this interim I may do some work on Dreams myself, or start something of my own.

(I’ve taken the time to write the above notes as much as for a reminder to myself as for anything else, and to start off this session as something special. I did not know whether Jane would have a session or not—yet I was still somewhat surprised when she did offer to hold one tonight. Once again, she’d been “so far out of it,” sitting on the couch and watching TV, that I’d given up on hearing Seth comment upon our latest ideas. Jane had been “out of it” for most of the day, except during our talk, which lasted over an hour. I must admit that at this time I’m pretty well puzzled as how to best help her. She was still very uncomfortable each day as bodily changes swept through her. Her backside and legs in particular have bothered her recently. Yet last night it had been her arms and elbows—I’d say that during the night she’d wake me up over a dozen times crying in her sleep at the discomfort in her arms. This morning I discovered that the knots of muscle beneath her left elbow had almost disappeared—an effect I’d never seen before. Instead the elbow was full of fluid. Was this the latest attempt by the body to heal itself by flooding afflicted areas with soothing liquid, say as lubrication, or what?

(As I covered her up for a nap at 4:30 this afternoon, I asked her “how one person could raise so much hell?”—meaning that in line with our talk today I now believed that the whole Seth business, and especially the books, had been conducted in the face of a steady, fierce resistance. One foot dragging the other after it, was a way I’d put it recently. That resistance is the state that we absolutely must dissipate, I think.

(By 8:52, then, Jane said she felt Seth around. She’d perked up a little, although she was still quite bleary-eyed. At the same time she sat quite upright in her chair, not leaning back, and I read this posture as a sign that she was still very uncomfortable sitting there. She began the session at her usual pace of delivery, but after a few paragraphs slowed down considerably.)

There is some difference, of course, in Ruburt’s mind between his attitude toward his books and mine. To some extent this is more than understandable. He would (pause), had I not emerged, written books of his own in any case. He would have encountered no unusual obstacles as far as his public stance was concerned, in that he would have felt the rather characteristic dilemma of some creative writers, who must assimilate the private and public portions of their experiences. He would have had no unusual difficulty, however, in say, standing up for his own ideas—holding his own, so to speak, in any arguments or philosophies.

(After breakfast on the morning of the 5th I read this session to Jane before typing it in the afternoon. Seth’s statement stopped me in what seemed to be a new way personally—for I don’t think I’ve considered that Jane might even see Seth’s own material as in competition—or as even a threat, although I don’t care for that word —to her. This whether the material was published or not. Yet Jane said she’d had such thoughts occasionally. I don’t recall her telling me about them, though.)

(Long pause at 9:27.) Give us a moment.... There are few people in such a position. He is not cowardly in that regard (as Jane had speculated during our discussion). He was, in fact, quite daring in refusing to accept the conventional spirit-guide dogma—which would at least have given him a kind of psychological covering (all emphatically.

(9:40.) In that regard he felt that he was violating an important cultural taboo, and embarked upon a program that would necessitate caution, self-protection, and a certain detachment. He was determined to go ahead, because his own value fulfillment sought those directions—such was his nature. My published works, however, presented him with what he felt to be a public stance in a different fashion than his own would (louder). My books automatically seemed to suggest a framework of reference to which few others could have access.

(Jane was speaking very intently for Seth through this material. The night was very cold; a bitter wind struck at the house again and again, rattling the blinds in the heavy metal awnings on the western side of the living room where we sat.)

Again, definitions of personality are important here. Ruburt could read poetry without first having to define the nature of a poet. He could meet any criticisms with suitable explanations, since any audience was not about to question the poet’s psychological validity. Any arguments would take place within an implied framework of definitions.

(I told her the session was excellent, as I’d known it would be. “Yes.” she said. “I had the feeling that he was going to get into deeper stuff.” All through the session she’d sat stiffly upright in her chair; hardly relaxed. I urged her now to get back on the couch. “I wish I’d done the dishes,” she said. There was a day’s accumulation of them in the sink. The bitter wind banged the metal awnings outside; the local forecast was for a temperature of zero degrees to five/ten below. I told Jane I’d do the dishes—and read the session to her from my notes tomorrow morning after breakfast.

(Now it’s Friday night [the 6th] as I finish typing this session. Seth’s reference to “grievous errors” was obviously in answer to my own comment as recorded in the opening notes. At first when I asked her, Jane said the session hadn’t done anything to “relieve some of Ruburt’s stress.” But then we decided that it had helped her somewhat Thursday and Friday. On Wednesday night she’d had a dream involving our Instream-Oswego experience, and a copy of that is attached under February 5. And she had a pair of positive healing dreams that afternoon during her customary nap. These dreams were quite good.

(After this session was held we briefly talked about things we might do in order to ensure privacy, should we decide to be more active in the pursuit of that quality. There would be moving to a new location, perhaps, or doing something about the mail—answering labors each week. I suppose we might use the post office’s impending rate increases as an excuse to save on postage, and either cut way down on, or eliminate, answering the mail, if this will help. I’m willing to do most anything, but our ideas here as yet are very vague, and I haven’t discussed with Jane yet whether she thinks a move would do any good, really.

(We are making small decisions about protection along the way, however. Today I mailed Jane’s letter to Meredith Wheeler of ABC News, declining MW’s second recent invitation to be on that show; and when Tam called this afternoon to tell Jane that a British journalist was at CBS in NYC, and wanted to interview her for a newspaper article, we decided to not call back and okay the interview.