by Geri Roberts
“If she knew me as I really am she would despise me, and certainly not aid or abet my evil designs. To veil their vices from the sight of the good is the only resource of those who are not blind and know themselves to be vicious.'
William Beckford
It is much too easy for us humans to end up like a group of dogs chasing their tails. (Or tales.) We are discovering that there is no such thing as history the way we have been taught in school or that is described in books. I was a history nerd and spent years and years of my life studying history, making maps and timelines and writing articles. I knew far more about the Emperors of Ancient Rome and the Plantagenet dynasty of England than I do about my own parents' families. I had to swallow a bitter pill with the realization that there was no ancient history, or even Medieval history, the way I had believed. That just about every fact I had crammed into my head was false. And that it was no accident; it had been done on purpose. .How depressing.
And it gets more depressing. The lies continue and are everywhere. How many prominent and beloved books in our culture were not written by the person we are told wrote them? Does it matter who wrote a brilliant play or a popular bestseller? Yes, it does. And not just for monetary reasons. I am not talking about simple plagiarism, or theft, here.
This is all about a subversive agenda; having an underlying social or political agenda that must be hidden from the reader and might be revealed if your identity was known to them. It is about deceit and betrayal of trust. Making up a false identity or stealing somebody else's.
We love the idea that the Shakespearean plays were written by a poor, unknown common person named William Shakespeare who just happened to be a superbly educated and well traveled poet, trained scholar and historian, and experienced playwright. Just like an unemployed, almost homeless secretary writing a bestselling book about a little boy named Harry Potter on her skirt and pantyhose. Yup, happens all the time!
We do understand that any plays authored by political creatures such as Christopher Marlowe or Francis Bacon, for example, would have been given a much different reception by the powder keg world of late Elizabethan London. The Shakespeare vortex continues to suck in historians, linguists, paleographers and everybody else and will rage until the end of time without being settled.
Now, here is an important question to think about. Did the iconic Helen Keller write everything she is supposed to have written? Books written by the normal daughter of a well-to-do Southern farming family would not have been regarded as nearly so interesting as those written by a blind and deaf girl.
In 1892 when Helen was eleven years of age, her teacher Annie Sullivan (AKA "handler") was accused of allowing/encouraging her pupil to plagiarize a story titled "The Frost King." There was a strong inference from Helen's other teachers that her remarkable abilities were fraudulent. Keller was acquitted by one vote at an informal trial at her school but questions about her true capabilities regularly surface.
An entire industry and structure for the life and education of the handicapped grew out of the Helen Keller phenomenon. Both she and her teacher Annie Sullivan, who came from an extremely deprived background, became rich and famous. Aside from that one incident in 1892, I haven't found one other definite suspicion that Helen Keller's literary abilities were any kind of hoax. That incident could have arisen out of the jealousy of Sullivan's colleagues over her pupil's success. Or maybe Sullivan just became much more careful and cautious.
The problem is that we readers want to read about miracles and we might be stuck with fake ones if we are not willing to dig into them. Or at least give them a bit of critical thought.
Was "The Diary of a Young Girl" actually written by a young girl named Anne Frank?. No.. No way. There is solid forensic evidence that it is a fraud. And the fact that any meaningful investigation is prevented by cries of "antisemitism", "Neo-Nazi Hate Speech" or threats of criminal prosecution should tell us something.
Anne Frank's Diary is the mere tip of a very ugly iceberg. The Holocaust Lie is a vast political and money making machine of such immensity that it has overtaken Western culture like an evil parasite creeping inside every human brain. I won't begin to discuss it here as there are excellent articles elsewhere. And more and more are appearing as the cracks in the worm eaten facade of the "Holohoax" continue to widen. The Anne Frank invention is a prime example of how the name of an author can be appropriated to serve a very dishonest agenda.
Next we examine the Frankenstein Hoax. At first it doesn't seem THAT awful. The book was published in 1818 so we can't imagine anybody caring who wrote the thing, especially since it seems that nobody has ever even read it. But it matters a great deal now that we see all around us the first horrible blossoms of the seeds that this book planted. Seeds of what? you ask.
Here are some clues:
What is the birthplace of Adam Weishaupt's Illuminati? Inglostadt Castle.
Where did Victor Frankenstein build his monster? Inglostadt Castle.
Here's another clue:
What is the whole title of the book "Frankenstein"? Frankenstein; or, the Modern Prometheus.
Okay, you've got it now: The seeds are those of transhumanism.
Hollywood has, as usual, muddied the waters for us. With a few notable exceptions the film versions of Frankenstein portray the monster as a green, lumbering monstrosity with bolts in its neck and the story diverging further and further from the original. When I was an innocent, I thought that Hollywood did things like this to make the story BETTER (What can I say? I was a stupid child). I now understand that they didn't want their movie associated with the book. Because back in the early days of the movies people were still reading books and might have drawn some conclusions about what was going on.
I think I always smelled something of the rat about Mary Shelley but I was a Lord Byron fan and never cared enough about her, her husband Percy Bysshe Shelley or Frankenstein to investigate. But I recently stumbled across the book "Shelley Unbound: Discovering Frankenstein's True Creator" by Scott Douglas DeHart. I had bought it several months back and it sat neglected in the towering book heap next to my bed until I was getting ready to write about my favorite topic, the Nefarious Elite and Hollywood, when I spied the title and decided to take a look. And the light dawned.
Percy Bysshe Shelley was not a sweet faced gentleman poet who sat around sniffing flowers all day. He was a hard eyed, determined revolutionary and elitist who wished to transform humanity into free and noble men. Not ALL humanity, of course. There would be the superior and the inferior humanity. There always has to be some inferior humanity around. Who else would take out the trash and scrub the floors? And guess who would be the superior humanity? As George Carlin said "It's a big club and you ain't in it."
The book "Frankenstein" was first published anonymously. There was a lot of smirking going on because everybody in the know knew who had written it. Percy was in the habit of writing anonymously or under an alias, which was understandable because he liked to write about atheism and how people must be freed from the lies of the clergy and organized religion. I can sympathize with these topics but the problem was that Percy continued to lie to everybody about what he wrote and liked to trick people into writing to him when they thought they were writing to somebody else. Then he would get them into trouble. And here you thought all Regency gentlemen were like Mr. Knightley in Jane Austen's "Emma".
Even when "Frankenstein" was published under Mary's name, people knew who really wrote it. The manuscript was in Mary's handwriting because she regularly transcribed Percy's writings but corrections were in his hand. Just coincidence. And people of that day were well aware that no woman was capable of writing about topics such as electrifying dead frogs for a simple reason: No woman, even a common streetwalker, would be admitted to classrooms or lecture halls to see such things. In later days it would be said that Mary overheard her husband talking about science and electricity and dead frogs to other men, but COME ON!
Mary did write a novel once but it was so dreadful it was downright embarrassing. She would say "Frankenstein" was just from a dream or the ghost story contest but COME ON!
The problem now is that Mary Shelley has been taken under the wing of "Women Studies" which means that all those bitchy women with tenure and royalty checks from their books about women writers will never even admit there might be a question of Mary's authorship.
So today we find ourselves in a world run by people like Ray Kurzweil who wants to hook everybody up to machines to download their consciousness into machines so they can live forever. If we had paid more attention to Percy Shelley and his alter ego Victor Frankenstein we might not be as taken unawares. But I won't worry. I know I won't be among the lucky elite chosen to accompany Mr. Kurzweil into this Cyber Heaven. Somebody will have to stay behind to take out the trash and scrub the floors and it might as well be me. It is what I do all day anyway.. And if I accidently trip over a wire and pull the plug on that big computer in the corner and the lights go out--oh well!