Updates

Transferring "In Another Life" from my Windows 98 computer to my newer machines, I had the whim to tweak a couple long-standing technical issues. That turned into a weeks-long struggle to resolve "just one more little problem". Finally, I've adjusted everything I can reasonably adjust, and the result is now posted on Vimeo.com. Jeff Keene brought to my attention that it finally did get posted by "Paranormal TV", on their YouTube channel. I've written my contact with them to see if I can get the newer version posted there, as well. I haven't had any word from them in several months. Last I heard they were trying to get it broadcast overseas. I do see that the program has had almost 6,000 views on Paranormal TV. That's about half the number of people who supposedly saw it in Denver when it was broadcast there on a PBS startion in 2003.

I've been doing research on my possible past life as Matthew Franklin Whittier. I've had help but can't reveal the source because I agreed to maintain their anonymity. I'm not going to look up all the precise details as I write this, but I am willing to provide them to anyone who wants to research it seriously. I'm just going to touch on a few areas, comparing intuitions I had (including, but not limited to, glimpses I had in three past-life regression sessions), with what I uncovered in the history. Addendum--see also the third-to-last answer in this print interview for Spiritual Atlanta, given before my friend Jeff Keene, who has a knack for synchronicity, directed me to MFW's photo on the Sarah Orne Jewett website. I had gotten there only because I felt I strongly recognized her name, had written my friend that I felt "close," and he found the bio. In this interview, I wrote: "I've been a writer, connected, I think, with the Romantic poets, for example. Not any of the famous ones as near as I can tell, but I think I knew some of them personally and ascribed to their overall philosophy (for better or worse)." I did not know at that time that Sarah Orne Jewett was closely connected with the Romantic poets, no less that she was close friends with John Greenleaf Whittier.

Keep in mind that history, as it comes down to us, turns out to be notoriously unreliable. Time and again, historical records appear to invalidate past-life memories, only to prove incorrect, or partial, or biased. On the other hand, I want to make clear that I am not certain this is a genuine past-life match. I'm not entirely convinced, myself, and I'm not trying to prove that it's genuine so much as I'm trying to prove whether or not it's genuine. I know that sounds redundant but there's a subtle difference.

Before I ever started researching this--in fact, since childhood--I had a feeling that I actually created "A Christmas Carol." Here comes the grandiosity that one wearily finds in so many past-life memory cases. But, what to do? If one is to be objective, one has to report the absurd as well as the believable. I actually found quite a bit of historical information on this--and, you may be interested or disappointed to know, I couldn't disprove it. Everything was plausible--maddeningly incomplete, but it remains plausible, or even a little stronger than plausible.

The history goes like this--and, again, I'm not going to look up all the dates but they can be looked up. In 1842, Charles Dickens made a speaking tour of the United States. Matthew's brother, John Greenleaf Whittier, was invited to see him, but had to decline. Dickens was speaking on abolition, a topic that both of the Whittier brothers championed. One of the first places Dickens visited was Boston, Mass. Among other places, Matthew lived in Portland, Maine and Boston, Mass. I don't know if he lived in Boston in 1842; I could check it quickly; but either way, he could easily have arranged to see him in Boston.

People visited Dickens on this tour in droves, for all kinds of reasons. Many of them brought their manuscripts for Dickens to read or promote. Dickens' secretary was traveling with him and, presumably, handled his correspondence. About a month after he was in Boston, on February 21st, Dickens (probably through his secretary) sent Matthew a form letter, or perhaps a standard response written by his secretary, with only Dickens' signature under "Faithfully Yours" in his own handwriting, while he was still on tour in the U.S. Clearly, Matthew had given him (or, as I feel, delivered to the house) a letter; possibly, a manuscript, along with scores or hundreds of other people who were doing the same thing. (The image to the right was a similar note, showing the signature and a second person's handwriting, dated March 1st.)

Now. When Dickens got back to England, he got in financial trouble. He was in debt; his father had been in debtor's prison when he was young. He had to act fast. Christmas was approaching. By his own admission, he had gotten the idea for "A Christmas Carol" from "an earlier manuscript"; historians suspect a story about a "goblin king" from the Pickwick Papers. He began feverishly working on "A Christmas Carol" to publish before Christmas, completing it in just a month and a half, and then self-publishing. It was an instant success, a feat which he was unable to duplicate in subsequent Christmas seasons.

That book was published 22 months after Dickens sent the standard letter to Matthew. (It is unknown why, of the hundreds of such canned letters "acknowledging a letter" which must have been sent, only this one to Matthew survived to be listed with a footnote in Dickens' published letters.)

Dickens claims to have been feverishly inspired while writing "A Christmas Carol"--though whether by his muse, or by fear of debtor's prison, is unclear.

What I do know, from a life-long serious study of metaphysics, is that the metaphysics in the "goblin king" story is nonsense; whereas the metaphysics in "A Christmas Carol," although a bit distorted, is genuine. "A Christmas Carol" is rather like the movie "Ghost," written by Bruce Joel Rubin, who is a student of kundalini yoga. It contains real metaphysics.

Dickens, meanwhile, had no respect for metaphysics. His attitude towards it, according to the history I've read, was precisely like Scrooge's: "a bit of undigested beef." That's why the original subtitle of "A Christmas Carol" called it a "ghost story". To him, it was a ghost story, nothing more.

But this is impossible. A man who has no respect for, or knowledge of, genuine metaphysics, cannot write something as metaphysically powerful as "A Christmas Carol" or "Ghost". Not unless he is borrowing the key concepts from someone like Bruce Joel Rubin. Or Matthew.

So the thing is plausible according to the historical facts. There is one other clue, which I mentioned in my previous Update, and that is the name "Bob Cratchit". Perhaps it was the generally-accepted style to use names that had hidden meanings back then. Briefly, the literal definition of a "crat" is a ruler (one who rules), a policy maker, an authority. A "chit" is a note for money owed; "bob" is a very small amount of money. I feel that Matthew would have seen himself as a poor clerk influencing things from behind the scenes--in short, a "Bob Cratchit". Under hypnosis, I saw Matthew at work in a small office, with the door open and his boss watching him. That same scene is used to describe Bob Cratchit under the watchful eye of Scrooge, in "A Christmas Carol". It could have been "cryptomnesia," where I subconsciously drew it from having read the story; or it could have been past-life memory. In the regression, I was copying figures in a big, black ledger; in the story, Cratchit is copying letters. Perhaps even my subconscious memory isn't so good?

There is a book which shows Dickens' handwriting as he was revising a draft of "A Christmas Carol". I obtained a copy; you can't see what was underneath his scribble. It's all in his own hand. The introduction to the book mentions, by way of example, that Dickens agonized over the name, "Bob Cratchit".

All this is far from conclusive, until someone finds the proposed original manuscript or the letter. But I will say that the history contains quite a number of details that make it plausible, considering that all I had to start with was the ridiculous feeling that I had written the story.

I will also say, by way of throwing a challenge to any scholars out there who might stumble upon this, that the person who breaks this story, with proof, to the academic world is going to be both rich and famous.

Note that, following my logic carefully, there is an important gap. I could have deduced that someone else had to have written a "seed" manuscript, without it necessarily having been Matthew. It could have been any one of the people who deluged Dickens with manuscripts on that tour. If it turns out to have been Matthew, however, I would say this is very strong proof that I am Matthew's reincarnation, because no-one else, including scholars, to my knowledge, has ever suggested that Dickens didn't originate "A Christmas Carol"--and certainly, no-one would suspect John Greenleaf Whittier's ne'er-do-well younger brother who wrote scathing social commentary sprinkled mischievously with spicey references. (I think the fundamentalists would not be pleased.) Note that I didn't study the history about Dickens' tour, or realize that the letter from Dickens to Matthew was written while he was still on that tour, or even know that there was a letter from Dickens to Matthew, until after I'd reported my theory in public on this website--and now you see why I risk public ridicule to such a degree and jeopardize my credibility on this site. I may look ridiculous now, but if my gamble pays off, that my hunch is published on this website by date makes it a matter of indisputable public record, should it ever be proven by historians. Remember, there is a "wayback" machine on the internet, an internet archive, where you can see what a website--including this one--looked like at various sampled times in the past. No-one has access to or control over that archive.

I was asked about Matthew's first wife, how she died, etc. As I was writing back that I didn't know, feelings and memories started to come to me. I felt, for one thing, that Matthew might not have actually been there when she died, because it was a blank. That turned out to be plausible, because she had gone back to her mother for nursing. Then I saw a funeral scene. It was a small, flat area, with a manicured lawn, a few stones, an area of trees or foliage ahead making an enclosure or windbreak. The mourners were dressed in dark suits, standing in a wide semi-circle facing the stone, which was semi-flat somehow, not entirely vertical. A small tree some 15 feet away, to the left, suddenly blew tiny star-shaped flowers which dusted the stone. Matthew felt this was a sign--then, later on, agonized over whether it was or not.

Looking at images, apple tree blossoms exactly match what I was seeing. Apple trees bloom something like a month or more after his wife died, depending on the year. But if the service was delayed, and this was a memorial service--I didn't see any bare earth in this memory--then an apple tree could have been blooming.* The cemetary is the same one mentioned in a famous poem by John Greenleaf Whittier, in which he describes the terrain as hilly. But in actuality, a modern photograph of the cemetary shows that it is flat.

What I remembered was looking at this little enclosure, this enclave with the grass (which I saw as being a dark color, though in the modern photograph the grass is light-colored), with the foliage making a natural windbreaker, that Matthew had the automatic thought, "I'll have to take Abby here for a picnic, she'd love this spot"--and then, like a thunderbolt, came the realization that she was dead, and he couldn't take her. (If you've experienced the loss of a loved one, you know this kind of thing happens, since you can't believe that the person is gone and you have all these automatic associations as though they are still living.)

I also "saw" that it was a couple hundred feet or so from a dirt road that curved behind and above them; and that afterwards, they went to a nearby large, two-story house for a reception, and he had to sit in a parlor with dark wallpaper and act "nice", all the while dying inside and feeling like a caged lion. He went through it with outward niceness only because her mother was there, for her sake. In the parlor, he spent his time mostly focusing and gazing on some kind of little statue in a bell jar, to control his emotions and get through it, while everyone else exchanged pleasantries. I learned that bell jars are common in that part of the country. I didn't know that beforehand. (On re-read I can still remember this--it was a bronze statue of a young girl, like a ballerina on tip-toe, something like that.)

I found a historical photograph from Portland, Maine where they lived, that I react to intuitively and emotionally as being his first wife, Abby. The date is wrong--ca 1850. According to history, Abby died March 27, 1841 at age 24 (the announcement in the Portland Transcript was dated April 17th, so likely the memorial service was on or after that date). This girl in the photo looks to be about 18 or 20, which would place it around 1835-37. But if someone didn't know what date it was and casually labeled it "ca 1850" as the middle of the century, then it could be plausible. All I know is the reaction I get from seeing it. I tried a self-hypnosis CD and the feeling was strongly subjectively confirmed. In addition, I felt that it was Abby who taught Matthew metaphysics, while he, at that time in his life, was more interested in politics. So if it turns out that Dickens did use some of Matthew's plot ideas for "A Christmas Carol," the real content author will be Abby. Update 7/12/10--it seems unlikely that the girl in this photo could have been Abby, as the daguerreotype process was not introduced into the United States until the early 1940's. It's just barely possible if she was 24 in this photo, and it was taken when the process first came out. I have flipped the photograph, because all daguerreotypes were mirror images, and my emotional and intuitive reaction to the photograph is even stronger. All I can do is report what I experience subjectively and let it fall out where it will.

In the history, it is known that Matthew, when he lived in Portland, Maine, "bought a camp" on the shore looking out at Peaks Island, and that he liked to visit and stay overnight on the island, partly to combat insomnia. In the record it is said that he built a house there. What I feel is that he rowed over there, stayed overnight, and slept in a shelter connected with a small dock, probably on the back of the island, and it was on or near a small crescent beach with a rocky shore. I feel that he got permission to use the dock and the attached shelter from an old man who lived in a run-down or unkept house, a couple hundred feet (I'm bad at estimating distances) up a path from the beach. The old man's family lived on the mainland. Matthew used to bring him groceries--including booze that the family refused to provide--and they became friends.

I learned, after writing about these hunches or glimpses, that there was, in fact, a hermit living on Peaks Island, a squatter. Most of the people living on the island were wealthy--a handful of wealthy families who owned the land. But this fellow lived there, and his name was Bartlett. According to the history, some young men picked up his house bodily and moved it some distance, which finally convinced him to leave. It's not a plausible story, to me, because even a storage shed would be hard to pick up bodily, no less a house that had enough room to live in.

Matthew wrote a humorous story about a character called "Botheration Bartlett." I believe that much of Matthew's writings were drawn from himself and from his own life, and I can cite numerous small indications of this.

An aerial drawing of Peaks Island shows structures of some kind attached to the docks (in the front). They are large docks and, apparently, large structures, not like the small version I envisioned which was little more than a shed or a single small room, which I feel he customized to his liking. There are none on the back side of the island that I can see. detail Peaks Island 1886

However, I was not consciously aware of having noticed those houses in the image until after I wrote about Matthew's (all of this is recorded in a series of dated e-mail correspondence). My feeling about this dockhouse, or whatever one would call it, came from memories or hunches I've had for years about them, without ever having seen one (in person) to my knowledge.

I had the feeling or idea that Matthew's older sister, Mary, was a runaway, and married young to get away from the family, which I feel was a dysfunctional one. There was an interesting clue in the history, and that was that Mary left her husband, and that he subsequently hung himself in the barn. So clearly all was not entirely well in Niceville. But apparently she was living at home at age 20, and married at age 22. So my idea seems to have been mistaken, unless there is more to the history than I currently know. This is the one glaring contra-indication.

I had felt that Matthew was not buried in the family plot. Then I was provided a photograph of his tombstone next to the others in the family plot. This appeared to be another mistake; then I found an obscure reference which says that Matthew's grave was moved. The reference listed all the family members in the family plot; then it added Matthew separately, at the end, saying he was moved to the family plot. The jury is still out on this one.

page 53. excerpt in John Greenleaf Whittier biography by Underwood

Update 11/29/09, looking again at the source, a biography of John Greenleaf Whittier by Francis Henry Underwood (p. 53), I see that it was published in the year following Matthew's death, and says, "Matthew Franklin Whittier has since been buried in the same lot." In my first reading, I had missed the publication date and misremembered the text, then jumped to the conclusion that it supported my hunches. Apparently this line was tacked on separately as "late-breaking news." Still, my gut feeling that Matthew either wished to be buried somewhere else, or actually left instructions to that effect which were ignored or countermanded, could be correct. The text is discussing all the characters in John Greenleaf Whittier's idealized poem about his family, "Snowbound." The irony is that despite the preceding statement, "In such a home only the purest and noblest natures are bred," Matthew was considered the "black sheep"--and yet, he was the last surviving member. Actually, he was the last surviving member at the time that his brother wrote the poem, and John Greenleaf offered to dedicate it to him, but Matthew declined the honor (probably, because he knew it wasn't really like that).** The deepest irony is that Matthew did have a noble nature--he simply was more concerned with honesty than with appearances. He would mischieviously burst appearances to achieve honesty, in much the same way as you will see in some of the better political satire in "Theonion.com."

In one of the regression sessions, I saw Matthew in a crowded, open square, where there was a public proclamation of some kind being given. Everyone was dressed up. The speaker, at the far end of the square from Matthew, was standing up in a farm wagon, using a megaphone. Matthew was feeling somewhat cynical about the announcement, like, "Okay, well, we'll see."

It seemed unlikely that there could be an open area like this flanked by low buildings, without anything obstructing the view, like a fountain or a statue. But I found one--and I felt, immediately, upon looking at it, that this was the same one I had seen under hypnosis. So this was perhaps the strongest possible "hit". It was also one of the clearest images I had had in the regression sessions. The image is of Congress Square (this photo is from about 1885, or a couple of years after Matthew died). It is on Congress Street, which I didn't realize until I just now downloaded it.

I also looked at other historical photographs of Portland, and kept feeling that I was "close" when I looked at photographs of Congress Street and Middle Street. In fact, Matthew lived in that area. I had previously seen a listing of several of his addresses, and even used Google Maps "street view" to see what they look like today. I didn't consciously remember the addresses when I was looking at these historical images. I can't prove I didn't subconsciously remember them; but I don't think so. I don't think Congress Street was mentioned in the list of addresses. There was a fire that swept Portland after Matthew had lived there; so very little looks the same today. 29 Waterville St. wall

The only thing I felt I possibly recognized from Google street view was a small section of stonework by the sidewalk of a house at one of the locations where Matthew lived, at 29 Waterville Way, Portland, Maine ("street view" addresses on Google are "approximate"). I felt that Matthew might have actually built that while he lived there; and there was a vertically-placed stone that I felt was a clue somehow. I feel that Matthew was good at stonework--I have always been fascinated by it in this life, and admired it when done well (and, how would I know?). But "remembering" anything specific like this little section of stone wall on Google, while one is not regressed, is notoriously unreliable. One might be imagining--it's hard to tell. On the face of it, it seems highly unlike that this loose stonework would have survived from the mid-1800's; but it's possible it could have been done and re-done by subsequent tenants, having originated in the mid-1800's. I just feel the strong intuition to post the darned picture, what can I say?***

In the regression (where memories are somewhat clearer), I saw something that will, once again, stretch one's credulity.**** I saw myself on the porch of a rather unfinished cabin, which had blond or light-colored wood. The porch extended across the entire face of the cabin. But I don't think it was uncut logs; I think they were roughly cut. I was sitting with Edgar Allen Poe, and we were talking enthusiastically about a wide range of subjects. I think we had smoked pot in a pipe, and we got very engrossed in the conversation. Poe had seen Matthew's (I wanted to write, "my") writing and had invited me to meet with him. In the regression I realized, in hindsight, in the hypnotic state, that Matthew had thought Poe admired his writing and wanted to be friends and equals. Finally, Matthew thought, he would have at least one famous friend (a rebel, to match Matthew's personality), while his famous brother had scores of them. But Poe actually had contacted Matthew to recruit him for political writing. Poe, according to what I felt I knew in the regression, was very heavily involved in radical politics--so much so that his writing was almost more of a cover for his political work. They were impressed with Matthew and wanted his skills as a ghost writer. He would not be allowed to know who he was working for (ostensibly to protect him; but now I feel, it was to protect them from Matthew accidentally revealing them). And, I felt, Matthew did that work for them for a long time, receiving a small sum for each piece. His writing was used in parts of speeches, tracts, etc.

None of this is part of the known history, to my knowledge, except that Poe did use drugs. At least, to date, I have not seen anything that suggested that Poe was involved in politics. I did read recently, however, that he worked as an editor of several publications, was liberal, and once ran for office. I didn't know this when I had the regression--not even in passing. So it is plausible that a liberal editor might also be involved in the radical politics of the day.

There is quite a bit more but most of it has little or no historical validation so far. Most of it is emotional--I got more and more about Matthew's emotional state, and especially about his emotional relationships, as I delved further into it. His relationship with his famous brother, especially, took on life and form for me. In the history, that relationship is painted as being something like the relationship between President Jimmy Carter and his brother, Billy Carter. Matthew was painted as the ne'er-do-well who embarrassed his brother and had to be bailed out of trouble periodically.

But the reality, if my emotions and vision of this are correct, was quite different. I won't go too deeply into it, because it has little bearing on objective proof; and also because I do not have a desire to upset the apple cart unnecessarily. The gist of it is that Matthew, as I see him, was like a hippie ahead of his time. He was too honest, too aggressive in exposing hypocrisy, and to top it all off, he was too naive. A very bad combination for success in society. His brother was concerned about success, about being accepted, and later, about being famous and having famous friends. Matthew was, indeed, an embarrassment to him and also a subtle threat to his position with his peers. He probably didn't dare associate too closely with him. (As a humorous aside, when I visited the Carter Center in Atlanta, Georgia a few years ago, I saw only one photograph of Billy Carter--in the cafeteria.)

Matthew's approach to life was that of a rebel exposing hypocrisy and ignorance. His brother's approach was to see the best in everyone--especially, publicly--to paint lovely pictures of reality that covered over the ugliness (as in his famous poem, "Snowbound," which Matthew declined to have dedicated to him as the last surviving family member in the poem); and he had a tendency to avoid rejection by his selected society. In short, he could criticize that portion of society he wasn't concerned about being rejected by (like slave-owners and political conservatives); but not those he wanted to be accepted by (including his public). He was, in short, primarily a statesman with tremendous writing talent. Matthew had more of the soul of a poet than his brother did, in my opinion. In any case, the two approaches to life (and, if I'm correct, their reactions to early family dysfunction and the hypocrisy that had crept into the Quakerism of that time) were inherently opposed; and this was the source of the life-long tension between the brothers. There's more, but that's the gist of it, how that dynamic played out.*****

So it's quite a picture that emerged for me, but none of it is conclusive. For the most part, it's remarkable that the hunches and memories I came up with weren't immediately disproven, considering that I stuck my neck out pretty far with some of them. So that in itself is, shall we say, curious...

*I had seen the date of death for Matthew's first wife before I began having what felt like memories of her memorial service; therefore, I could have known that it was Springtime and conjured up the idea of apple blossoms falling to match. But I'm the kind of person who has to think before I know what season a month is in; I didn't pay much attention when I saw it. Besides, these memories came welling up spontaneously from someplace deep inside. Subjectively, as honest as I can be about it, I think it's unlikely that my subconscious mind created a scene to match the month I had previously read in her death date. Skeptics tend to grab at these explanations with enthusiasm; but if one is being truly objective, one needs to suspend judgment and look at the matter carefully from all sides. In this case, it could be cryptomnesia but I seriously doubt it--I think I would know the difference. I felt what those blossoms signified to Matthew, the tremendous wave of relief he felt when he believed it was a sign she was alive in spirit; the crushing confusion of questioning it later on. All that didn't come from cryptomnesia, seeing the date beforehand.
**After writing this, it was pointed out to me by a friend who had done some stone masonry that the vertical stone probably indicates the end of an earlier, smaller wall, which had been added on to, and that the top of the older wall is just above the top of the vertical stone. My gut feeling (i.e., in the conscious, awake state) had been that it had some significance, perhaps even structural significance (as, say, a mid-point of the wall) or a kind of "signature" by the builder--the feeling was very vague. I entirely missed that it was the end of the wall. This is probably not unusual for trying to remember anything by recognition, as an adult, while not under hypnosis. It suggests that the vague recognition could be correct, while the details are being filled in by my imagination. Had there been more emotion attached to it than a little pride, I might have gotten something more detailed. (If someone who knows the history of that wall writes me, I'll post the information whether it shows that I was right or not.)
***There's a very interesting behind-the-scenes psychological history behind this poem, "Snowbound," which emerged during my research collaboration, as I brought the recorded history and my emotional reactions into juxtaposition. I'll put what my emotions told me in italics:
Matthew felt responsible for his first wife's death, and was vulnerable to feedback from friends and family that it was his fault for not being a responsible citizen. So a year after her death, he remarried a "hard-headed woman," the daughter of a sea captain, who Matthew must have met in his association with seafaring people because he still felt the pull of his immediate past-life as a sailor. This new marriage partner was supposed to keep him on-task. Unfortunately, his friends and family misunderstood him, the diagnosis was incorrect, and Matthew continued not to fit in with society, and hence, not be able to make a living or provide a stable home for his wife and children, primarily because society rejects those who expose its hypocrisy--not because he was lazy, a loser, etc. His second wife lost respect for him and influenced the children to do the same, except for his daughter Lizzie, who, in temperament, was a lot like Matthew. Finally, the marriage ended and the family split up (the history, written by Lizzie's future husband, says Matthew "abandoned his family"). Lizzie, age 13, went to live with John Greenleaf Whittier, and kept on asking questions about her father's family of origin. John Greenleaf would then tell her stories from his childhood, and these stories became the basis for the poem, "Snowbound," which launched John Greenleaf's public success and established his wealth. Probably Lizzie, being a lot like Matthew, was a handful at age 13, and John Greenleaf told the stories partly just to keep her out of mischief, and also to pacify her. She wanted the the truth about her father, and John Greenleaf told her a bunch of pretty stories about what was probably a very emotionally dysfunctional, puritanical family. In short, I think that "Snowbound" was a "snow job," which Matthew was helpless to stop but certainly didn't want dedicated to him as the last surviving member. (See also R.D. Laing's work on "mystification.") These stories effectively erased the reasons behind Matthew's lifelong rebellion against hypocrisy (in his family, within the Quakers, and in society), making him simply look rebellious. Matthew couldn't take Lizzie in himself, because he was now partnered with a woman who had bought the house they were living in (the history says they were married but no marriage record has been found). She probably she didn't want Lizzie living with them and Matthew was not in a position to force the issue. At least he knew that Lizzie was being taken care of.
****Samuel Clemens' published letters show that he sent a newspaper with one of Matthew's satirical "Ethan Spike" letters to a friend (i.e., for that reason), and the commentator quotes Matthew at length, suggesting that "Ethan Spike" was an influence for one of the characters that Clemens developed. But I have had no sense or memory of Matthew having any direct contact with Clemens. In fact, I have the feeling that reading of it in this life is the first I've heard of his interest. If Matthew's writing did inspire one of Clemens' characters, this would be a perfect example of his having influence from behind the scenes. Keep in mind that having contact with a person who later on becomes famous is not really that unusual. Ian Stevenson, his successor Jim Tucker, and Carol Bowman will all be famous one day, and I have had contact with all of them and more besides.
*****Apparently, John Greenleaf Whittier, though a Quaker, was what we might today call somewhat "Puritanical" in his judgments of people privately. He strrongly disapproved of the sexual references in Walt Whitman's poetry, for example (though he was hardly alone in that). Matthew, on the other hand, sprinkled his "Ethan Spike" letters with thinly-veiled, naughty misspellings, like a science lecture about the "heavingly bodies", and the topic of his own upcoming talk on "orfice seeking". John Greenleaf would almost certainly have disapproved. (The name "Ethan" means "firm" or "strong," so that Matthew's pen name, "Ethan Spike," can be interpreted as "firm spike.") However, once Matthew had ceased writing those letters, John Greenleaf apparently prepared a letter to a publisher friend of his, recommending that they be published all together in a book. In that recommendation letter to the publisher, John Greenleaf speaks of them in glowing terms--far more so than I saw in any of his previous correspondence. However, that letter, according to the history, was probably never sent. My feeling is that John Greenleaf must have insisted on removing some of those naughty references, Matthew refused to alter his work, and the matter was dropped. Had that book been published, it would have changed Matthew's life, I feel. One will find similar traits in my handling of this website. Incidentally, take a minute to read the "Lecture on Comics" I've linked to, above. Speaking of plausibility, this man definitely had the intelligence and the writing ability to have had the admiration of Samuel Clemens (as we know), to have come to the attention of political radicals wanting a ghost-writer for speeches, and even to have written a draft or treatment of "A Christmas Carol."

Music opening this page: "High Landrons," Eric Johnson (Ah Via Musicom album)
All I can say is, if you have a chance to see Eric in concert, don't pass it up...
sell the car and hitch to the concert if you have to.