NEW RELEASE DECEMBER 5TH, 2024
THE LOVER
BOOK TWO OF ANONYMOUS AGNOSTIC ANTICHRISTS
KINDLE VERSION
CLICK HERE
PAPERBACK
CLICK HERE
HARDCOVER
CLICK HERE
In January of this year, an anonymous person reached out to me in distress, perplexity, anguish, hysteria, and, apologizing when they did so, ridicule.
They sent me a message on Instagram (from an account I had no way of identifying who the person was), claiming that what I wrote in my novel from 2023, Anonymous Agnostic Antichrists, was all wrong, all completely wrong.
They said the manuscript I received from the anonymous person which claimed to have been written by Elizabethan poet, playwright, and statesman Thomas Sackville was a hoax.
This new anonymous individual from January of this year had to refrain from calling me an idiot, since I knew that the supposed historical documents I received in the mail was on April 1st, April Fool’s.
They said there was indeed a manuscript found in 1993, 400 years after the first time the name William Shakespeare appeared in print, with the publication of the narrative poem, Venus and Adonis.
But this manuscript was not written by Sackville, it was written by Thomas Watson, Elizabethan poet, playwright and translator from the 1580’s, most famous for being a close friend to Christopher Marlowe.
I explained to them that the historical documents I received in the mail appeared to be legitimate, and I was concerned to show the papers to anyone else, as I was told there would be consequences if I did.
The person laughed at me once again and I was close to ending the correspondence out of irritation and blocking their anonymous account.
They apologized once again, saying they and a noted historian would like to meet me to verify their claim.
This person and the historian would prove the manuscript which they had by Thomas Watson was the legitimate document.
They explained there were ways to show the legitimacy of historical records and they would provide the skills and technological tools required to do so. Curious as a cat, I agreed to meet them.
Just as I was asked for my previous novel not to reveal information, I was asked not to reveal the identity of both the person I was communicating with and the historian.
The following week I met the two of them at the historians home here in Los Angeles and they showed me Thomas Watson’s text. Like before with Sackville’s manuscript, it was a deep delight for me to read.
As with Sackville’s tale, it was written with such passion, intelligence, and vitality, I wanted to spend the whole night reading it. But the two of them said as exciting as it was, they needed to prove it was legitimate first and foremost.
They proceeded to show the validity of the text using the technology as promised, verifying not only Thomas Watson’s manuscript, but also other historical documents they had in their possession which confirmed Watson’s story.
I was convinced, and I joked with them that perhaps next year I would be approached by a third anonymous person and told yet a different story!
They laughed and said that would not happen, or if it did, the following person would be another hoax. The historian also wanted to point out that there were similarities between Watson’s manuscript and the one by Sackville.
They believed that someone had somehow gotten hold of this true tale by Watson and chose to completely alter the story and make it about Sackville instead of Watson.
They said the reason why the individuals altered the text was that Watson’s true life story was not something these people wanted the world to know about, and therefore the incorrect manuscript told a vastly different tale.
I said that while it was very unfortunate that Watson had such antagonistic enemies even centuries after his death - and this made me wonder why and who these people were - this was great, I was profoundly excited to finally know the truth, the real truth of what happened back then, who was the actual Bard, the true Bard, the true author of the plays and poetry with Shakespeare’s name on them, and Watson’s written testimony declaring this to be so, was now in my hands.
But I also felt depleted in spirits, considering how much time and energy I spent on writing my original novel, Anonymous Agnostic Antichrists, now knowing it to not be true.
They responded that if I would like - and they personally were hoping I would do so - I could rewrite the novel, based on this accurate manuscript, but keep the incorrect one out in the public, as it was exceptional in and of itself.
Even if untrue, they said, it was a remarkable book, Anonymous Agnostic Antichrists, which I of course appreciated hearing.
They told me that I needed to remind myself about the nature of agnosticism, the kind of agnosticism I already embraced: that I lived and breathed in the realm of Possibilities.
As an agnostic I embraced uncertainty, doubt, different paths. I believed that it was possible that life had no spiritual existence to it, that everything was material, and I was fine with that.
I was also fine with there being a spiritual reality to reality, another dimension not of matter or what appeared to us here, was also possible.
So too could I feel about these two books of mine: either could be possible.
They are the same book and yet they are not the same book.
They are similar yet vastly different.
While these anonymous people were certain that the version they shared with me about Thomas Watson was the valid one, others could decide for themselves whose story was fact and the other fiction, which is what people do anyway.
But if I was interested in telling Watson’s story, the true story, what really happened back then, the true Bard’s tale, then I could, they said.
They would give me an electronic version of the manuscript and I could rewrite it as I did the previous year for the one told by Sackville.
They only asked I never identify who they were nor share any of the documents to anyone.
For a number of reasons, they needed to be anonymous. As I did the previous year, I agreed.
I would tell Thomas Watson’s story. The tale of the real Shakespeare, or another possibility?
Before I left, they mentioned that what the other anonymous person told me about being a descendant of Sackville was actually true in relation to Watson, that I was a descendant of not only Watson (later Thomas Shelton) but Emilia Lanier as well, that the two had a child, a daughter, and that this daughter was my ancestor.
Odd it may seem, since I gave myself the name Hunter and was not born with it, yet it was true they said I was descended from Will Hunter, Will Hunter being Watson’s birth name, and they proved it to me with ancestry family tree software.
Like in my novel from last year, Watson’s story has been rewritten by me for 21st century readers, who otherwise would be, for the most part, unfamiliar with the English of Watson’s times.
The bizarre, surreal aspect of the tale, occult experiences, romances and friendships, joy and pain, secret societies, tragedies and triumphs, artistic and intellectual revolutions, adventures of all kinds has been retained, to the best of my abilities.
It is apparent that Watson was experienced with alchemical practices, and wrote this work - in addition to it being a profound confession and entertaining autobiography - in much the same way one finds with alchemical writings and art of the time, utilizing enigmatic language to express ideas and experiences, perhaps in code to others in the know, or perhaps in a surrealist sense, of tapping into the chaotic and supernatural that lies beyond the rational mind.
My rewriting of the text is meant to both retain this essence and provide a 400 year bridge between Watson’s lifetime and now.
I am forever grateful to have been included in the telling of Watson’s story. I hope you enjoy it as much as I have.
Derek Hunter,
December 5th 2024
THE LOVER
BOOK TWO OF ANONYMOUS AGNOSTIC ANTICHRISTS
KINDLE VERSION
CLICK HERE
PAPERBACK
CLICK HERE
HARDCOVER
CLICK HERE
In January of this year, an anonymous person reached out to me in distress, perplexity, anguish, hysteria, and, apologizing when they did so, ridicule.
They sent me a message on Instagram (from an account I had no way of identifying who the person was), claiming that what I wrote in my novel from 2023, Anonymous Agnostic Antichrists, was all wrong, all completely wrong.
They said the manuscript I received from the anonymous person which claimed to have been written by Elizabethan poet, playwright, and statesman Thomas Sackville was a hoax.
This new anonymous individual from January of this year had to refrain from calling me an idiot, since I knew that the supposed historical documents I received in the mail was on April 1st, April Fool’s.
They said there was indeed a manuscript found in 1993, 400 years after the first time the name William Shakespeare appeared in print, with the publication of the narrative poem, Venus and Adonis.
But this manuscript was not written by Sackville, it was written by Thomas Watson, Elizabethan poet, playwright and translator from the 1580’s, most famous for being a close friend to Christopher Marlowe.
I explained to them that the historical documents I received in the mail appeared to be legitimate, and I was concerned to show the papers to anyone else, as I was told there would be consequences if I did.
The person laughed at me once again and I was close to ending the correspondence out of irritation and blocking their anonymous account.
They apologized once again, saying they and a noted historian would like to meet me to verify their claim.
This person and the historian would prove the manuscript which they had by Thomas Watson was the legitimate document.
They explained there were ways to show the legitimacy of historical records and they would provide the skills and technological tools required to do so. Curious as a cat, I agreed to meet them.
Just as I was asked for my previous novel not to reveal information, I was asked not to reveal the identity of both the person I was communicating with and the historian.
The following week I met the two of them at the historians home here in Los Angeles and they showed me Thomas Watson’s text. Like before with Sackville’s manuscript, it was a deep delight for me to read.
As with Sackville’s tale, it was written with such passion, intelligence, and vitality, I wanted to spend the whole night reading it. But the two of them said as exciting as it was, they needed to prove it was legitimate first and foremost.
They proceeded to show the validity of the text using the technology as promised, verifying not only Thomas Watson’s manuscript, but also other historical documents they had in their possession which confirmed Watson’s story.
I was convinced, and I joked with them that perhaps next year I would be approached by a third anonymous person and told yet a different story!
They laughed and said that would not happen, or if it did, the following person would be another hoax. The historian also wanted to point out that there were similarities between Watson’s manuscript and the one by Sackville.
They believed that someone had somehow gotten hold of this true tale by Watson and chose to completely alter the story and make it about Sackville instead of Watson.
They said the reason why the individuals altered the text was that Watson’s true life story was not something these people wanted the world to know about, and therefore the incorrect manuscript told a vastly different tale.
I said that while it was very unfortunate that Watson had such antagonistic enemies even centuries after his death - and this made me wonder why and who these people were - this was great, I was profoundly excited to finally know the truth, the real truth of what happened back then, who was the actual Bard, the true Bard, the true author of the plays and poetry with Shakespeare’s name on them, and Watson’s written testimony declaring this to be so, was now in my hands.
But I also felt depleted in spirits, considering how much time and energy I spent on writing my original novel, Anonymous Agnostic Antichrists, now knowing it to not be true.
They responded that if I would like - and they personally were hoping I would do so - I could rewrite the novel, based on this accurate manuscript, but keep the incorrect one out in the public, as it was exceptional in and of itself.
Even if untrue, they said, it was a remarkable book, Anonymous Agnostic Antichrists, which I of course appreciated hearing.
They told me that I needed to remind myself about the nature of agnosticism, the kind of agnosticism I already embraced: that I lived and breathed in the realm of Possibilities.
As an agnostic I embraced uncertainty, doubt, different paths. I believed that it was possible that life had no spiritual existence to it, that everything was material, and I was fine with that.
I was also fine with there being a spiritual reality to reality, another dimension not of matter or what appeared to us here, was also possible.
So too could I feel about these two books of mine: either could be possible.
They are the same book and yet they are not the same book.
They are similar yet vastly different.
While these anonymous people were certain that the version they shared with me about Thomas Watson was the valid one, others could decide for themselves whose story was fact and the other fiction, which is what people do anyway.
But if I was interested in telling Watson’s story, the true story, what really happened back then, the true Bard’s tale, then I could, they said.
They would give me an electronic version of the manuscript and I could rewrite it as I did the previous year for the one told by Sackville.
They only asked I never identify who they were nor share any of the documents to anyone.
For a number of reasons, they needed to be anonymous. As I did the previous year, I agreed.
I would tell Thomas Watson’s story. The tale of the real Shakespeare, or another possibility?
Before I left, they mentioned that what the other anonymous person told me about being a descendant of Sackville was actually true in relation to Watson, that I was a descendant of not only Watson (later Thomas Shelton) but Emilia Lanier as well, that the two had a child, a daughter, and that this daughter was my ancestor.
Odd it may seem, since I gave myself the name Hunter and was not born with it, yet it was true they said I was descended from Will Hunter, Will Hunter being Watson’s birth name, and they proved it to me with ancestry family tree software.
Like in my novel from last year, Watson’s story has been rewritten by me for 21st century readers, who otherwise would be, for the most part, unfamiliar with the English of Watson’s times.
The bizarre, surreal aspect of the tale, occult experiences, romances and friendships, joy and pain, secret societies, tragedies and triumphs, artistic and intellectual revolutions, adventures of all kinds has been retained, to the best of my abilities.
It is apparent that Watson was experienced with alchemical practices, and wrote this work - in addition to it being a profound confession and entertaining autobiography - in much the same way one finds with alchemical writings and art of the time, utilizing enigmatic language to express ideas and experiences, perhaps in code to others in the know, or perhaps in a surrealist sense, of tapping into the chaotic and supernatural that lies beyond the rational mind.
My rewriting of the text is meant to both retain this essence and provide a 400 year bridge between Watson’s lifetime and now.
I am forever grateful to have been included in the telling of Watson’s story. I hope you enjoy it as much as I have.
Derek Hunter,
December 5th 2024
