Comparing Rob's notes to the published books

[Deb]

I started this post mainly to draw attention to some work Mary Dillman has done that most may not know about. She has compared some of the NoPR and SS books with Rob's actual notes and produced two PDFs containing some of the comparisons. Mary thinks while most changes were made by Rob or Jane, the publishers also had a hand in some of them. You can get the PDFs at her website or the attachments below.

Key:
{ } = as in the published book, but not in Rob's notes
[ ] = omitted from book, but appearing in Rob's notes

Seth would dictate his books with essentially little to no need for editing. The words would flow from him and Rob would write them down using his own brand of shorthand. He said he could type a session from his notes a lot faster than he could from a tape (NoPR Ch.1), which is why he preferred taking notes rather than recording the sessions. Seth would tell Rob where to put punctuation, when to underline a word, or spell a word to avoid any type of confusion with a homonym.

Occasionally Seth would correct himself, but more often the need for editing came more from note-takers than from Seth. There's a post here where Seth corrects Rob's mistakes, and adds: "The error could have been on Ruburt's part, although I believe I would have known it in that case and corrected it at once."

An example of Seth correcting himself:

"... you may wonder: "How can my psyche exist in more than one time at once?" It can do this just as an apple can be found on a table or on the ground or on the tree.
   (Then:) Change that last sentence to read: 'just as apples ...'
(Occasionally Seth will make this kind of correction in his material.)"
—UR2 Section 6: Session 735 February 3, 1975

From the Intro to The Seth Materials:

Jane: "Then a give-and-take period began in which Seth corrected Carol's notes as she read them, added several remarks to clear certain sentences, and bantered back and forth with her."

Here's an example of a comparison from the Seth Speaks Comp, Session 528:

You are [(underlined)] a soul; you are a particular manifestation of a soul, and it is sheer nonsense to think that you must remain ignorant of the nature of your own being. You may not be able to put your knowledge clearly into words [when you receive it. You may find it difficult to explain to another what you have learned], but this will in no way negate the value or the validity of the experience(s) that will be yours once you begin to look inward.