The Da Vinci Code by Dan Brown was on the New York Times bestselling list for more then two years, recently returning to the top of the list due to the release of the paperback version in March of 2006. Released by Doubleday in March of 2003, it was an instant hit. The book is a very well written piece of fictional literature that combines the use of historical facts and artifacts with a completely fictional adventure. Brown's use of history has created a certain amount of believability to his story. When it comes to writing authors enjoy the use of creative freedom. So if they choose to use historical fact in a fictional book does that make it a non-fiction book? The use of historical facts, events, artifacts, and so on, in a fictional writing does cannot change that fiction into non-fiction. A fictional book is a fictional book regardless of the amount of fact used to enhance a storyline.
The Da Vinci Code is the story of the thrilling adventure of Robert Langdon. He becomes involved in the hunt for the truth behind the beginnings of Christianity and the Holy Grail. The main plot line of the book is based off the idea that the Holy Grail is Mary Magdalena herself, the supposed wife of Christ, and that she had a female child, thus the bloodline of Christ continues after his death. This truth of Christ's bloodline is of course the largest secret of the church and could destroy the church if it was ever found out by the public. Therefore this truth has been kept secret and protected by a number of secret religious societies. (Brown)
Dan Brown has claimed that all of the historical information in his book is accurate. On the Today Show he stated, "Obviously, there are--Robert Langdon is fictional, but all of the art, architecture, secret rituals, secret societies, all of that is historical fact."(Today). This is restated this on the bottom of one of the first pages of his book, along with a brief description of The Priory of Sion and Opus Dei, the two main secret societies in the book. However along with this mention of historical accuracy come the statement in on the copyright page of the book "In this work of fiction, the characters, places and events are either the product of the author's imagination or they are used entirely fictitiously." (Brown). Given this statement of fictitiousness how can the book or any of the uses of historical fact be construed as the truth?
Clearly the plot line of the story is not original. It has been used in many other books. Holy Blood Holy Grail by Richard Leigh and Michael Baigent for one example is a book about the actual theory of Christ and Mary Magdalene. The difference between this book and The Da Vinci Code is simply that The Da Vinci Code claims itself to be fictional and simply uses historical information to enhance the storyline.
Here are some of examples of the facts used fictitiously throughout the book. Constantine is said to have invented the deity of Christ to consolidate his empire under his power. That while doing this he eliminated gospels from the bible that did not fit his political aspects. While Constantine did convert to Christianity it was because his empire was being torn apart by religious differences. He converted to unify his empire as one not for his own gain. As for the gospels the Council of Nicaea, a gathering of bishops to "settle disputes about Christology" (Lutzer 6).
Jesus is not divinized until the Council of Nicaea and is portrayed as a mortal man before then. The truth is that Jesus is referred to as God and Lord (in the divine sense) a number of times throughout the New Testament. The texts from the New Testament post-date the Council of Nicaea which took place in the fourth century. The Council simply clarified the fact that Jesus was a deity (Wasthington 59).
The largest mistake in the book of course is the theory that Jesus was married to Marry Magdalene. This theory is supported mainly through the use of the Gnostic Gospels. These gospels are thirteen papyrus books found in 1945 in Egypt (Lutzer 25-32). They are not considered to be historically accurate and therefore are not supported by the religious community to be part of true bible.
One of the most interesting uses of history I find in the book is the use of the painting The Last Supper by Leonardo Da Vinci. Brown uses the painting to expand on the unity of Jesus and Mary Magdalene. Brown proposes that the person sitting to the left of Jesus as you look at the picture is none other then Mary Magdalene herself. He supports this by explaining that the "V" shape between Jesus and Mary signifies the unity of male and female. Of course the use of this artifact is purely up to the way that a person may perceive the painting itself. After reading the book I could not help myself and I took a look at the painting. While I could see the resemblance of a female in the person on the left of Jesus, this is apparently supposed to be the apostle John, I am have no official knowledge of how a person may look during that point in time. It is plausible that the person could just be a very feminine looking male. It could also be Mary.
The problem with the historical facts in The Da Vinci Code is that they are not entirely accurate as claimed to be by Brown himself. Though some of them are in fact actual events or true artifacts, a number of them are explained incorrectly and therefore give the wrong information to the reader. Also the book is so well written that it is hard to determine where the fact ends and the fiction begins, providing you have any religious background before reading the book. The use of actual street names and real buildings such as the Louvre, the Vatican, even Harvard University as the location of Langdon's employment make the book a bit more believable.
The rest of the historical facts are not the most common knowledge information to the average person. I personally did not know much about any of the religious aspects of the book until further researching the prospect of their truth, being fact or not in relation to the book. However this is the part where it becomes the choice of the reader to believe a declared fictional book or not to believe it. The fact still remains that it is a fictional book.
One of the reasons that the book is so believed is because of the religious factor of the book. Christianity has long been a religion that has needed to prove its history. Though it is the most commonly practiced religion in a number of areas it has a number of believers that are not sure of their complete faith in the beliefs of Christianity. Rev John W. Swell says "I could see some people could be threatened by the book, that it may shatter their Christian beliefs. I think a lot of people want certainty. The opposite of faith is certainty." (FAQ).
When it comes to religion itself, who is right and who is wrong. What becomes fact is based on the interpretation of the evidence left behind. The bible itself is simply the story of the life of Christ. All of the books in the bible are simply the interpretation of the people that were believed to have been involved in the life of Christ. The flaw I find in this is that how many times can the same story be told differently by different people. They way I perceived something may not be the way that you perceived it at the time it occurred. The Gnostic Gospels mentioned before are simply the story of Christ told from a person other then an apostle. Who is to say these are not the correct gospels.
Then of course there is the mater of fact itself. The best way to view the idea that fact is in the eye of the beholder is stated best by E. L. Doctorow in his essay "False Document" "There is no fiction or nonfiction as we commonly understand the distinction: there is only narration." (King 174).
"Fact is not true of false, but real or imaginary"(King 178).
Fact is simply the conclusion drawn from some evidence by the person examining that evidence. A writer simply looks at this evidence and sees it a different way. "Imaginative writing represents what might be and thus can call into question the unsatisfactory reality of facts" (King 174). Given creative freedom of an author that writes fiction, that author has the right to conclude his/her own interpretation of given facts, then to use those facts in a way suitable to the story being written. So in the battle of fact or fiction is it not all fiction to begin with and at some point in time that fiction comes to be known as fact. The only true fact that is known is the physical kind. The Louvre is located in France. The Vatican is located in Vatican City. All other facts are open to interpretation.
