Dan Brown and the Yellowing of Historical Fiction


I sometimes wonder if a large proportion of my life is spent in a parallel universe - some hazy state that guards me from the world. It is true to say that I really do occupy some form of oblivious state as often, too often, I find myself completely ignorant of social controversies or debates.

My kinder other half suggests this might be proof that "I have a life!" If he means the life of a run-ragged mother then I suppose that's true! But how could I have missed all the heat about the Da Vinci Code. It has been vacating bookstores since 2003 I believe, and yet miss it I did!

My awakening to the furore coincided with the announcement of the Movie premiere, when dormant debates re-ignited. I read that the Philippines planned on banning the movie and that Indian leaders had insisted on previewing it before release. Church leaders decried it as heretical and Art historians refuted its claims.

I had to read it!

At first I was, like so many before me, captured by the thrilling pace and allure of a well written mystery. I couldn't put it down. Gradually, however, I began to feel irritated by the extraneous 'facts' that were casually scattered amidst the prose.

Surely the Olympics were not held as a tribute to the 'magic of Venus (who was actually a Roman goddess), they were held to honour Zeus, the King of the Greek gods and occurred in 4 year cycles, not 8!

And, The Dead Sea Scrolls (which incidentally are Jewish not Christian), did not contain any gospels, they pre-dated the New Testament (and were discovered in 1947 not 1950)!

My enjoyment of the story was unfortunately offset by such careless attention to detail.

My quest therefore began. A voyage of discovery to unearth, not the Holy Grail, as a Dan Brown heroine would; but rather to explore some of the incendiary devices employed by the author that have managed to unhinge so many.

You don't need to venture too far into the pages of the book before you stumble upon some of the errors that have given fuel to criticisms. Indeed, perhaps critics would have been more forgiving if Dan Brown had not decided to begin his novel with the words, "all descriptions of artwork, architecture, documents and secret rituals in this book are accurate!"

Connie Kubicek, guide for Classic Walks of Paris, has led approximately 8,000 people on their Da Vinci Code walk since early 2005. Beginning outside the Hotel Ritz, where hero Robert Langdon stayed, and ending at the Church of Saint-Sulpice.

Eager tourists are treated to a sight seeing tour of scenes mentioned in the book as well as a jovial account of things Brown got wrong.

"A person can't see the Pompidou Center and the Musee du Jeu de Paume from the esplanade in the Tuileries garden as Brown suggests; and not even the police could navigate a car through the Tuileries garden and up the stairs to the entrance of the Louvre."

The 17th Century, Church of Saint-Sulpice, has deemed it necessary to erect a plaque informing eager tourists:

"CONTRARY TO FANCIFUL ALLEGATIONS IN A RECENT BEST-SELLING NOVEL, THIS IS NOT A VESTIGE OF A PAGAN TEMPLE."

They also draw attention to the fact that the "P" and "S" in the windows refers to Saints Peter and Sulpice, not the Priory of Sion.

Another sign adorns their Obelisk, which serves as a Sundial:

"NO MYSTICAL NOTION CAN BE DERIVED FROM THIS INSTRUMENT OF ASTRONOMY EXCEPT TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT GOD THE CREATOR IS MASTER OF TIME."

I imagine explanations become rather tiresome when 8,000 curious visitors want answers, even half that amount would become irksome!

It was a 20 year old Parisian urban myth that inspired Brown's decision to embroil Francois Mitterrand in a conspiracy to make the new entrance to the Louvre in the form of a glass panelled pyramid with 666 panes.

Just try googling "666 panels" and you will find that this 'fact' has struck a nerve.

In truth, according to the Louvre, there are 673' panes of glass and architect, Pei, counted 698. As one observer commented, "It's not far off the Number of the Beast, but then a near miss is as good as mile with numerology."

Brown's bank account certainly attests to the profitability of his writing style, proving that sensationalism pays better than truth, but his credibility as a researcher or student of history is certainly questionable as a result.

Many Art experts and historians share this opinion. Especially the ones who gathered in Vinci, Italy last year, to stage a mock trial of Dan Brown's claims:

"Mr Vezzosi, director of the Museo Ideale Leonardo Da Vinci in the town, said he would produce documents and photographs to prove many of the claims about the legendary artist were false. His importance is misunderstood, he was a man full of fantasy, inventions and genius," he said." Methinks Mr. Brown should have been less eager to say:

"One of the aspects that I try very hard to incorporate in my books is that of learning," …

"When you finish the book-like it or not-you've learned a ton."

I don't think people mind much if historical fiction writers create new characters, imagine dialogue or even make minor changes to the order of events. They usually explain these alterations in their notes. However, I believe there is an underwritten trust that readers give to the author, an expectation that they write with a measure of respect for the time they are writing about.

Historical romance author, Megan Chance says, "I don't believe history should be window-dressing … I strive to be as accurate as possible in depicting the people and the events I'm writing about."

Tayari Jones, who is an English Professor at the University of Illinois and famous for her writing on African American women, has set herself the standard that if "real historical names are used, then the event had to have happened."

I think most of us would consider this a fair standard to adopt.

If you are searching the DVC for explosive contrivance, then you will find the first seams of the mother lode in chapter 55. It is here that Brown really begins his dance with the tenets of Christianity.

Logically, If you really wanted to create a furore amongst the Christians of the world then you could find no quicker way than to target the divinity of Jesus.

Constantine is portrayed as the collator of the bible and also the one who gathered the Council of Nicaea in order to debate and vote upon the divinity of Jesus, amongst other things. Brown wrote:

"Until that moment in history Jesus was viewed by His followers as a mortal prophet … a great and powerful man, but a man nonetheless. A mortal."

"… Jesus' establishment as 'the Son of God' was officially proposed and voted on by the Council of Nicaea."

Brown describes this vote.

"A relatively close vote at that'… 'By officially endorsing Jesus as the Son of God. Constantine turned Jesus into a deity who existed beyond the scope of the human world, an entity whose power was unchallengeable."

I don't claim to be a great student of history, neither do I claim to have a great knowledge of church history, but I thought it was obvious to all that the enduring reality of Christianity is sustained by the fact that followers of Jesus actually believe He is God.

Christian author and Pastor, Rick Joyner, considers the assertion that neither Jesus, nor the first Christians considered Jesus to be divine, to be the biggest distortion of the book.

"The Gospel of John begins by asserting His divinity, as does the first two chapters of Hebrews, the first chapter of the Gospel of John, and an abundance of other statements such as Romans 1:1-4:

Paul, a bondservant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, separated to the gospel of God which He promised before through His prophets in the Holy Scriptures, concerning His Son Jesus Christ our Lord, who was born of the seed of David according to the flesh, and declared to be the Son of God with power according to the Spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead (NKJV).

Bill Muhlenberg is a lecturer in ethics and philosophy at several Melbourne theological colleges. He ardently refutes Dan Brown's version of history saying:

"When the Council of Nicaea was convened in 325AD, there was no debate about which books belonged in the Bible, or whether Jesus was God. They did discuss how the deity of Christ was to be understood, and they did condemn the heresy of Arianism. But there was no close vote on the deity issue.

Of the over 300 Bishops assembled to discuss Christ's deity, in the end only two did not vote for the new creed. Hardly a close vote"

It is commonly known that the disciples, the 12, were the closest group of people to Jesus. And that, contrary to Brown's version of events, they unremittingly embraced the belief that Jesus was God incarnate. That is, Jesus was God, living in the body of a man for a season, on earth.

Anyone who doubts their commitment to this belief, need only study the historical annals to find that James believed so much in the divinity of Jesus that King Agrippa relocated his head. Nero, rewarded Peter's fervour by crucifying him and Andrew suffered the same end at the hand of the Russians. The only one of the twelve, who died a natural death, was John. He died after living in exile on the Isle of Patmos.

Brown skillfully compels his readers to turn the pages as chapter after suspense-filled chapter closes with strategically placed cliffhangers. His writing is well paced and rich with insight. The disappointment comes however, when you realize that this insight is essentially a concoction of myths, heresies and conspiracy theories. I felt duped, feeling as if Brown had made a concerted effort to infuriate as many institutions and professions as possible in order to gain notoriety!

When asked how he expected people to respond to his decision to turn, "Christianity's most fiercely held beliefs into fictional fodder," he determined that it was "a risk worth taking."

"I worked very, very hard to make the book fair to all parties.

Yes, it's explosive

I think there will be people for whom this book will be-well, 'offensive,' may be too strong a word. But it will probably raise some eyebrows."

Well he was right! In this understatement of the century! A few eyebrows have been raised.

In my opinion, Dan Brown has turned YELLOW!

He is walking in the famed footsteps of media barons, William Randolph Hearst and Joseph Pullitzer, who came to notoriety and wealth through their, "shrieking, gaudy, sensation-loving, devil-may-care kinds of journalism."

The industrial revolution brought technology to the newspaper world that enabled them to 'print thousands of copies' at one time." Pulitzer and Hearst excited the public with their style of Yellow Journalism, which is, according to the Think Quest website, "biased opinion masquerading as objective fact."

Unfortunately, "greed came before ethics," and many consider this era to be a dark one in Journalism history. "It was nothing for papers to steal headlines and story's from other papers, or even fabricates stories that suited their agenda." The tragedy was that they "routinely outsold the more honest, truthful, unbiased newspapers"

Well my quest has ended.

My disappointment in the book is balanced by the search it inspired which has, in fact been fun. I am therefore content to say that I have completed the task I embarked on, to unearth controversies and explore the unhinging world of the Da Vinci Code.

I am ready to get back to my Life!

As he had hoped, Dan Brown's book has become a catalyst for debate, although as an aspiring writer I feel the most worthy debates will not just relate to religion, history and faith as he hoped, but will come from the world of literature and communication.

Will we allow sensational authors to create confusion and undermine the work of genuine authors who are dedicated to historical accuracy.

I sincerely hope not.

Bev Holmes-Brown lives in Brisbane, Australia.  In 2001 she began Link-Zone, a Christian Resource ministry with a mandate to “Bring the Body together in specific interest areas and to Believe and Pray for the Reformation of Values, Systems and Wisdom.“ In the last nine years Link-Zone has focussed on praying for governments, communities and ministries.  ‘We are currently transitioning,’ Bev says, ‘believing the Lord wants us to begin to tell people’s stories.  There are so many people living amazing and victorious lives for God against the odds, we want to hear from them, to understand their hearts and glean the treasures that God has laid up in their hearts for our own breakthroughs.    Of course we will continue to feature our favourite columnists and will not give up on praying but we believe this is a season where God wants us to identify and clarify the frontlines that need our support.   It’s exciting to venture into whatever He lays upon our heart. The website can be found at www.Link-Zone.net  Contact Email: bev@link-zone.net