November 28, 2017
Do you mind me writing so often? Steve says that some people who used to follow his own "blog" probably got discouraged because he began writing so frequently that they couldn't keep up with it.
Now, you may know that Steve has concluded, from his research and also from his own dim memory, that he and I collaborated to write the original version of "A Christmas Carol," which was adapted and claimed by Charles Dickens. Do you find this an outlandish claim? Steve had the whim to have me chime in with my own insights and memories, as much as he can channel me giving these. Shall we try?
Steve just got interrupted by a call about his mother's care, and he is both tired and distracted...but we will take a big breath...
Now the cat is crying, and will wake his Mom up a half hour early--she (the cat) is dying slowly of kidney disease, even though Steve is giving her daily injections of water under the skin. So this is a very stressful time for Steve.
We had made up stories, and written stories, together. Matt was gradually learning from me to believe in the spirit world, but he was a skeptic, and tended to make fun of things he didn't understand. He had written ghost stories of the type where someone scares someone else into good behavior by setting up a false ghost (Steve has found two or three of them). I had written stories and also poems, including matters spiritual. But we had not tried to write anything which combined these two viewpoints. How could it be done?
We did it by taking different characters. Mathew took "Scrooge," while I took the ghosts. It's very simple. And if you read that story, you see elements in the narration which sound like both of us--Mathew's wry humor, my Victorian sensibilities, and other things--but where the issue of believe vs. disbelief comes up, Mathew wrote Scrooge, and I wrote all the ghosts, who, to me, were either earthbound spirits, or spirit guides. Do you see?
So when Marley's ghost speaks of remorse, and warns Scrooge, that is me giving the audience real occult information, just as you see in the movie, "Ghost." But where Scrooge says that Marley may be just a "bit of undigested beef," that is Mathew, and in fact, he used much the same language years before when poking fun at my belief in prescient dreams. (Steve found that, also.)
It worked. It worked so well, the two of us, together, gave it a depth that neither of us would have brought to it, alone. It has an edgy humor; it has Victorian ideals. It has skepticism; and it has real occultism. Dickens had no idea what he had, when Mathew gave it to him in Boston. He made a mockery of it, in many respects, seeing it only as a ghost story--so much so, that he subtitled it, "A Ghost Story of Christmas." But you see that it is not. It is half like the movie "Ghost," where everything is depicted accurately--and that is my half.
That was easy, wasn't it? I will write more another day, as Steve has a long day of caretaking which must start as soon as possible, and he must post this online first.
Love to each and all,
P.S. When it gets a little closer to Christmas, Steve will re-post my other Christmas story.