12/24/25
Christmas Eve and I am about to be 72 years old. Can I last long enough, in good health and clear mind, until people start taking my work seriously?

Some of the more knowledgable naysayers will cross swords with me on Facebook. One just gave me bits and pieces of the official history of Charles Dickens' authorship of "A Christmas Carol." They seem to think I'm not familiar with it. And their last line of defense, where they think they are quite safe, is the belief that Dickens' chapter 29 of "The Pickwick Papers," entitled "The Story of the Goblins Who Stole A Sexton," was Dickens' precursor to "A Christams Carol."

It looks superficially similar, in structure; but spiritually it is about as similar to the "Carol" as an alligator is to a swan. I did some fancy detective work a while back, and discovered that when Dickens wrote that story in 1836, he must have had, in front of him, one published story by Mathew Whittier, and one unpublished story by Mathew and his wife, Abby. It sounds far-fetched, until you look at the matching details. Dickens took a little bit from this one, and a little bit from that one. Between the two plagiarized stories, there's hardly anything original in Dickens' amalgam.

But my point in writing this entry is, it doesn't matter, because I have the DNA evidence. When you have the DNA evidence, it simply doesn't matter if some of the circumstantial evidence seems to go against your theory. If you want to be logical, you have to start with the DNA evidence as a given.

Does that make sense? It's kind of like arguing a point in a tennis match, after you've lost the match.

These people don't understand the sheer power of the evidence I found underneath Dickens' redaction marks, in his handwritten draft. They haven't read the book, and they simply aren't in a position to criticize anything until they have done so.

We are having a white Christmas in Portland. You do know, that all of this aggressive sleuthing is for one purpose--to clear these worldly, dishonest plagiarists away from Mathew and Abby's stolen works, so people can get an idea of how magnificent they were, or must have been, in their pristine form. I have a vast treasure-trove to share; but the uncouth dragons guarding it must be slain, first. Dickens chief among them.

Until people truly understand that Dickens was an imposter, and no literary genius at all, I won't be successful because they will always make excuses for him. This crass, insensitive person could no more have written "A Christmas Carol" than I could write a Bach fugue. It's that bad, and until people see just how extreme this really is, I could talk to them all day, and they won't get it.

Sincerely,

Stephen Sakellarios, M.S.