Across the Spectrum:The Interdisciplinary Life and Letters of John G. Neihardt (‘Flaming Rainbow’)

That was a good letter — yours of the 9th received only yesterday. (It's a long way out there!)

You certainly hit the bull's eye when you pointed out that my world-view is both Aristotelian and Platonic. That is why I wrote Poetic Values — to show that there is no gap between the two, that our scale of values is continuous. All our values, from "lowest" to "highest" — from common sense through science and on through the esthetic, the ethical, the religious values are obviously creations in consciousness from selected data of our experience. It is commonly assumed, without examination of that assumption, that our sense values are "objective" and therefore "real". But they are created in consciousness too. Surely, nothing in the "sense world" is essentially as we conceive it. The physicists back us 100% in this view, as I showed 36 years ago in Poetic Values; and since then they have become more and more obviously supporters of that view. In brief, this is what happens, as I've set forth in Poetic Values;

The horizontal line represents the state of consciousness in which the values at any point are conceived. It is commonly, and wrongly, supposed that there is only one valid state of awareness — the sense state of common sense and science. If this were true, there would be no art, no religion, no sense of beauty, no love. Proceeding left to right, the consciousness arrives at a point where the preconception of "the world" as solid, "objective" fades out. The consciousness expands, is aware of larger relations, and out of this other " state (and higher ones) creates the values pertinent to such a state or states and the process is the same essentially as that by which the "lower" more restricted values are conceived.

Perhaps you will read Poetic Values with this sketch in view. This is not Idealism in Bishop Berkeley's sense at all! It is obvious when one comes to think it. I know from my own experience that it is so. The expanded view of "the world" illuminates and gives meaning to the narrower, "lower" view. I allowed myself to tell you about my athletic leanings in youth, because they were concerned with a vital part of the scale. And the same excess vitality that operated on the lower levels, has continued to operate on the higher levels — even now. It is all one pattern. Even what I called the happy "hell-raising" in the good April days with John Chaffee has its place in the scheme of becoming. In considering my world-view as expressed in various ways throughout my life and my work, I think you are sure to note that there is, in the last analysis, no discrepancy. The parts fit into one pattern. And I suspect that your biography will trace that becoming and the shaping of the pattern. I am still working on the pattern, slowly fitting it to some larger pattern of which I am becoming more more aware.

I will read the Poetics and comment modestly, I hope, in keeping with my own experience in that realm. His "melos, lexis, opsis" click with me already! And Plato's cave! Indeed, I know the inside of it very well. Also, I have often found the way out through the poetic miracle and also prayer. Poetic Values explains this also.

As I remember now, the Albers Bureau was not concerned with a lecture trip for me, but with the possible management of a scheme concocted by a brilliant and capable friend. He proposed to run a sort of school on wheels — a special train touring the country, with specialists to lecture to the travelling students and on numerous matters, geographic, social, artistic, pertaining to the regions visited. This almost succeeded. I was willing to give myself to the scheme, did what I could, and enlisted a number of prominent people willing to help. My friend ended by committing suicide. I never knew why, but the trouble seemed to be with his wife. He never let me know. I wish he had.

Feakins lost me on a Pacific tour, and I quit him to go to Long. I enclose a clipping on Stephens. You will know I am quoted with less than accuracy! But the intention is much. Also I enclose a note on the Law Wives' talk.

I'm glad you will see John Chaffee. He may be of help. He should.

Have you rec'd the recording from Sandy? His address is: 555 Gayley, Apt. H Los Angeles 24.

The Feakins connection was quite unsatisfactory to both of us. It was not important, except at the moment. He did not work for me, and I he lost him me on the tour.