The "World View" Series (c. 1977 - 2006)

[Dandelion]

Jane Roberts "tunes in" to the nonphysical minds of 3 different historical figures.

The World View of Paul Cezanne: A Psychic Interpretation (c. 1977)

The Afterdeath Journal of an American Philosopher: The World View of William James (c. 1978)

The World View of Rembrandt (c. 2006)


* * * * *

Reviews and other comments and opinions posted under this topic can either be about this series in general or about a specific one.

[Deb]

New Awareness Network,
©1977 Jane Roberts and Robert Butts,
©2003 Robert Butts

While I haven't had much time to read lately, I wanted to at least get this started rather than wait until I've finished the book. I'm a hobby painter, have taken just a few superficial classes in fine art, and a lot of the things Cezanne sets forth in this book are things I'd never considered when painting. I am learning not just techniques, but more deeply (and more importantly, in my opinion), the heart and soul that goes into creation.

So far this book, compared to the other Jane Roberts/Seth books I've read, is unique in that I'm getting a feel for Jane's personality. She's the one who does commentaries (it's usually Rob in other books) in between the entries from Cezanne. Her writing style is very relaxed and conversational. It makes me wish I could have met her, but also makes me feel like I'm getting a chance to know her now.

While Jane was writing this book, Seth was also dictating The Nature of the Psyche. In one of those sessions, Rob asked Seth about the Cezanne book. There are excerpts from that session in this book, explaining the mechanics behind how and why Jane was getting the Cezanne book. Seth points out that Jane was not in direct contact with Cezanne personally, but was tapped into his world view, his "comprehension of painting as an art" and pointed out that Jane herself was not fluent enough in artistic techniques to be able to follow Cezanne's instructions. I'm curious to find out later in the book whether Rob benefitted artistically from Cezanne's observations.

Here's Cezanne on the role artist's models play (something new to me, but it explained an experience I had in a life-drawing class years ago) (Entry 3):

"Yet a portrait can capture that portion of a person that is unknown to the subject himself, and even speak to him about himself; for a model always models for himself and not for the artist. The model wants to be known in a way that he does not know himself...yet. So a model sits in a state of anticipation. Anticipation of what? The model hopes that the artist's painting will create a new person; that looking at it later, the model will see the self he was meant by God to be."

Many of Cezanne's comments were beautifully poetic to me. He was definitely tuned into the deeper aspects of creatiing. An example (Entry 6):

"The artist, by cherishing the reality of objects such as fruit, still can imply their inner vitality by not defining their edges too definitely; and by the clever use of color he can imply even in a ripe fruit, its pre-ripe and post-ripe stages so that it is given motion in time. And by not settling it too securely, he can also give it mobility in space.

"On a tree, apples move. On a table, that ability or characteristic is still a part of apples, even though the opportunity or conditions of motion are diminished. A rock, though secured, will still move if given the chance and so also possesses the possibility of motion. Even the heaviest of mountains is composed of living objects, each in its own way capable of motion: Tree branches wave in the wind, small stones fall in miniature rock slides, and little brooks carry leaves downhill.

"So mountains should also be built up of various layers of alive paint, successfully applied with the quick strokes that in themselves imply motion. Mud in nature is not muddy either, but composed of its own brilliant transparencies..."

I'm getting a feel for Cezanne's personality as well, his priorities (Entry 7):

"When people ask about an artist's personal life, they do not understand that his deepest personal life is his work... His family life is not his deepest concern... I dare say that if the artist had another family than the one he has, he would still be an artist..." He makes comments like this more than once.

My (premature) conclusion is that this book is worth reading if you are an artist, or like art, or simply want to start looking at the material world with new depth and appreciation. I want to get my hands on a book of Cezanne's paintings so I can study them while reading his descriptions about motion, force of brush strokes, earth pigments from natural elements producing a more lively nature to objects painted on canvas. "For were such drawings not dipped in nature's own life and then shaped into earth's replica?" (This in reference to drawings made by cavemen artists.)

I'll update this post as needed once I get back into my reading habit.

[GayatoYana]

Should there be another sector? I like it a lot and pay close attention.

[Deb]

Hi Gayato, welcome to the forum. I don't quite understand your post, could you explain what you mean by "another sector" ? Thanks, I look forward to hearing more from you.