Men have in them and women have in them, some of them, independent dependent nature in them. Many millions of men and many millions of women are always being made of this kind, always about half of everybody living is of this kind of men and women. This is now a description of one part of them which makes one kind of this kind of men and women. This is a description of that part of them, that kind of them as women; later there will be a description of them as men. Always it is easier to know it in them, the details of a kind of them, in women, later this will be clearer in them. Now this is a history of the kind of them who have of them Mabel Linker and Mary Maxworthing.
As I was saying the two of them had difficulties, later in their living, had difficulty in remaining friends, in beginning again with dress-making. As I was saying they had both in them the same kind of being, that is to say one was one extreme kind of such being, the other was almost the other extreme kind of such being and now there is a description of them in the kind of being there is in them, later there is a history of their living as it came out of them, always there is a description of their character as in repeating it comes out of each one of them. So then.
There are as I was saying the two kinds of being in women and in men, independent dependent, dependent independent. The first of these have attacking as their natural way of fighting, resisting in such of them is sometimes impatient or dull or scared or stubborn or pig-headed stupid or vacant being, is sometimes a continuing of attacking; resisting to the dependent independent is the natural way of fighting. Those then who have in them independent dependent being as the bottom of them have attacking in them as their natural way of fighting. Many of them have very little fighting in their living. This was true of both of these two who had independent dependent nature in them, Mabel Linker and Mary Maxworthing.
Those who have independent dependent nature in them may have practical and sordid nature in them but mostly they have not much earthy simple natural sense in them. This will be clearer as more of them come to be seen in the history there will be of such of them. As I was saying Mabel Linker and Mary Maxworthing had both of them independent dependent nature in them.
Mabel Linker had not an instrument nature in her, the sensitiveness in her made a kind of real creation in her, made her live her own living, do her own loving. To many there may be a confusion between the sensitive instrument nature that lives so strongly the lives of others that they seem to be their own creation and one like Mabel Linker. To any one that knows them well, sooner or later this comes to be clearer.
As I was saying then the instrument nature is one having sensitive being or power of idealising or power for seizing without knowing it other people's suggestion. If the seizing is their own volition that makes another being, that is not living other people's lives in living. So then there is a kind of men and women who have in them independent dependent nature in them and this is now to be a description of many variations in them and Mary Maxworthing and Mabel Linker, both of them, are of this part of the general independent dependent kind of men and women.
Sooner or later there will be histories of many men and women with independent dependent nature in them. As I was saying there is to be Martha Hersland and Julia Dehning, there is to be a sister of one governess, and one governess with such a nature. Now there are Mary Maxworthing and Mabel Linker.
Perhaps, always it will become clearer, the independent dependent nature and later every one will see it in each one who have in them some form of such nature. Later dependent independent nature will be clearer and every one who sees any one will know it sooner or later in that one their kind of nature and the kind of the kind of nature they have in them and that in repeating comes out of them. Now then to begin again with independent dependent being, now to begin with Mabel Linker and Mary Maxworthing.
To begin again then with the instrument nature, with attacking being, with sensitive being, with weakness or vacant being, with little, with much bottom being, with little or much attacking in living, with unified or with separated natures inside each one, as in living it comes out of each one.
There are then many men and many women, more or less half of all that ever were or are or will be living, who have independent dependent nature in them. I will tell about it now in women because it comes easier to tell about it in them; more and more, then, I will tell about it in men. It is the same in men as in women but it separates a little clearer in women and so it will make a kind of diagram for a beginning. As I was saying I like to tell in the beginning, I like better to tell it about women the nature in them because it is clearer and I know it better, a little not very much better. One can see it in her sooner, a little, not very much sooner, but on the whole it is clearer, things are more separate generally in her, perhaps it is a little clearer in her, perhaps I know it a little better in her.
As I was saying then, every one has in them their own way of being and this comes out of them in the repeating that is always in every one, in some it does not come to be very clear in them until their middle living, in some not until their later living, but sometime in every one the nature in them comes to be clear to any one who looks well at them, sometimes in their younger living, sometimes in their middle living, sometimes in their later living. As I was saying every one has in them their own way of eating, their own way of drinking, their own way of sleeping, their own way of resting, of loving, of talking, or keeping still, of waking, their own way of working, of having stupid being in them and coming out of them, their own way of having nasty feeling in them and coming out of them, in short then, every one has in them their own being and in repeating it is all through their living always coming out of them.
As I was saying more or less half of all who ever were or are or will be living have independent dependent nature in them, that is to say attacking is their natural way of fighting, resisting is stubbornness and in many of them the stupid being in them, many of them have as a bottom to them sensitive or weak or stupid being, some have attacking that is fighting as almost the whole of them. As I was saying this is all clearer in the women, as they have less in them a unification of these things in them, they have simpler reaction in them. Everybody knows this now in women and now this is a history of all of them.
As I was saying then there are a kind of men and women who have in them independent dependent being and some of these have instrument nature, others are of the kind of Mary Maxworthing, others of the kind of Mabel Linker. There are many kinds of them who have independent dependent nature in them and there are many kinds connected with these kinds of them and their history will come later; Martha Hersland and Julia Dehning and Mr. Hersland and many others who came to know the Hersland children in some part of their living were connected then were of such a kind of nature. It is clear then, independent dependent being is being when the natural way of fighting is attacking, dependent independent being is when the natural way of fighting is resisting. There are some who have independent dependent nature in them and have no attacking, no fighting being in them, Mabel Linker was such a one; there are some who have in them very little fighting in their living but all fighting in them is attacking and this is true of Mary Maxworthing.
There are then some who have in them sensitive being to the point of creating even to the point of fighting, there are some who have this in them; there are some who have in them sensitive being and this makes them live other people's lives in living, these may have fighting from attacking being in them, these may have fighting in them from the sensitive being in them that makes them live other people's lives all through their living. Later there will be written the history of such a one. These have instrument nature in them, they need other people's lives for life enhancing. Later there will be more history of such of them. There are some who have instrument nature in them without the sensitive bottom to them, with stupid or vacant or weak or vague bottom to them and an idealising sense in them and a stupid stubborn way of resisting to everything except the one thing they have made their living and this is always in such of them some one else's thinking, feeling or being. There are many millions always of such of them, sometime perhaps in Julia this will be interesting. So then there are many ways of having instrument nature in one. The dependent independents have it also in them, some of them, but with them, such of them as have it in them, it shows in different fashion from the independent dependent kind of them, such ones have earthy being, they have fear in them, that makes their way of being in them; later in the living of Mrs. Hersland and Madeleine Wyman and Alfred Hersland and young David Hersland dependent independent being will come to be clearer.
Now then there is only independent dependent being we are considering. Later there will be more written of instrument being of this kind of them. Neither Mary Maxworthing nor Mabel Linker had this nature in them. So then to go on with them.
As I was saying Mary Maxworthing had gayety in living. She had very little fighting in her living but fighting in her was as attacking. She had very little fear in her. She had very little bottom to her, she had a little sensitive bottom to her enough to give a pleasant sweetness to her. She had a little weakness in her enough to make her a little yielding to attacking. She had very little stupid bottom in her, most of the stupid being in her was of the impatient being always in her. This was the disagreeable part in her, the little attacking in her was not enough in her to be an unpleasant being in her, injured and angry feeling in her was part of such attacking living as she had in her but these were not much in her. They were sometimes in her; they were in her when she had the baby, that such bad luck should come to her. They were in her about Mabel Linker, when to her thinking Mabel was ungrateful toward her. This is now a history of Mabel Linker, and of her and Mary Maxworthing living together and their having trouble with one another and of Mabel's loving and then their beginning again dress-making together.
Mabel Linker had a very different nature from the other. She had no impatient being in her, she had sensitive being in her to the point of creation. She had in her independent dependent nature. She had no attacking in her. This is now a history of her.
Every one has in them always their own repeating, always more and more then repeating gives to every one who feels it in them a more certain feeling about them, a more secure feeling in living. Repeating is more and more in every one the whole of that one the whole of every one, the wonder of each one is always more and more complete in each one as the repeating in them makes them a sure thing a thing certainly having being, makes for every one old men's and old women's wisdom, old men's loving and old women's feeling. Always more and more then repeating is the certain thing in every one. Always more and more then there is contentment in the secure feeling repeating in every one gives to every one. Always then there is excitement for every one in the certainty of repeating in every one. Always the wonder of each one as repeating in them makes a certain whole of them, comes to be a contentment to any one who sees them. Always then repeating is in every one and every one is a whole then and there is a secure feeling in resting in this realisation sometime one can have of every one. Repeating then is always in every one, sometime then there will be a description of all repeating and then there will be contentment in contemplation. Anyhow repeating is always in every one. Anyhow repeating is always in the pairing of two of them. This is now a history of two of them.
As I was saying Mary Maxworthing and Mabel Linker both of them were of the kind of them having in them independent dependent being. Mostly for successful living two living together, man and woman or two women or two men, there should be in them the two kinds of them, one independent dependent the other dependent independent, one with attacking as the natural way of fighting, the other resisting as the way of being; but in loving and in friendly living this is mixed up in different ways to make a pair of friends for reasonably successful living. For loving to marrying to successful married living, there is always this combination, the independent dependent in one and in the other the dependent independent being. For loving then there is almost always this combination, in long successful friendly living there may be another mixing, a pairing of the same kinds of them. This will now be a description of some ways this is true in men and women, with every kind of nature in them.
Mary Maxworthing and Mabel Linker had then both of them independent dependent nature in them. Slowly it came out in them. Slowly they had trouble with each other. Later they began again together but that was then a business matter. Mabel had then her husband to urge her. Mabel's marrying made at first great trouble between her and Mary Maxworthing.
As I was saying, until Mabel Linker was full up with loving for the man who later married her no one ever had known what feeling she had in her about any one near her, about anything that happened to her. Perhaps nothing was important to her until loving filled her. Anyway no one ever knew what she had as feeling in her. She had as I was saying almost brilliant quality as a dress-maker. She had not much sense of fashion in her. She needed some one to urge her and start her. When a thing was suggested to her and she was pushed to begin she was almost a brilliant dress-maker. As I was saying no one knew very much what feeling she had in her. People who knew her had very different opinions of her. When Mary Maxworthing first knew her, first had her living with her, she almost idolised her. This feeling lasted in Mary through the beginning of their undertaking of dress-making. It died down in her when she had her trouble in her, her impatient feeling when they were not succeeding, her despairing feeling at the failure of her undertaking, her impatient troubled nervous feeling when she had her baby in her, her anxious feeling when she knew what had almost happened to her that her baby was dead and that she had almost died with her. And then Mabel Linker had her lover, Mary found ingratitude then in her, things got so that they could no longer live together. Then Mabel got married and much later when Mary had a little money left to her from some relative down in the country and Mabel had her husband to urge her, they began with their undertaking in that part of Gossols where richer people were living. Now they were more successful and things were different between them. Mary had now mostly the business managing and the excuses and the matching and the buying to do for the two of them and Mabel did the dress-making and she had in her with her husband's urging enough decision so Mary was stopped from doing too much interfering. They always did a fair amount of quarrelling but on the whole this time they succeeded fairly well with their undertaking. Then Mary married the man as I was saying, he had always wanted her to marry him and now his family would let him. His mother had not any longer any objection. Mary Maxworthing was succeeding well enough with dress-making, besides she saw that he would do it and it was not any longer any use objecting and resisting. This was about the time when Mrs. Hersland had them to make for her all her best dresses, all those she used for visiting.
