1 result for (book:ur2 AND session:724 AND stemmed:background)
[... 2 paragraphs ...]
(With some elaborations, the following account of my “fourth Roman” is directly from the description I wrote upon awakening. The notes, added later, are intended to give a minimum of “ordinary” background material, and to explore a few of the questions referred to above.)
[... 7 paragraphs ...]
“Somehow, without being able to see them, I knew that stone or clay steps rose up the back of the tower, clear to the top where the soldier posed. He didn’t move. Try as I would, I couldn’t make his image any clearer or closer, or induce it to change in any other manner. What I did perceive was remarkably steady and lasted for several minutes, at least. I can still summon it to my mind’s eye when I want to. It came to me that the soldier was 43 years old and had two male children — where they were, I didn’t know. Like an echo in the background lingered a woman, but I couldn’t get anything about her.
[... 37 paragraphs ...]
13. Early in this appendix I wrote that I added these notes later, to give “ordinary background material” for my fourth Roman. So now, what do I make of the considerable similarities between my Jerusalem episode and Peter’s? Although his internal data reinforce mine to some extent, he can be no more specific about a physical location in the city for his visions than I can be for mine. (See Note 6.) I’ve also written about the conflicts involving authority that I believe my two Roman soldiers are expressing. Here I feel on more “solid ground” symbolically than physically. Just as I do, Peter rebels in his own peaceful ways against conventional authority, preferring to go his individual route in the arts, no matter how dubious his rewards may be.
To me, this fact alone lends a credence to his visions that bolsters my own in the most meaningful way: I think our tower experiences of so long ago (in terms of linear time), plus our mutual artistic backgrounds now, with their corresponding social implications, are too closely allied to be explained as “coincidence” in the objective fact world. Peter’s surprising material, then, helps me tentatively recognize the physical connections those motionless visions of mine may have in our space and time.
[... 1 paragraph ...]