• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

The Da Vinci Code

Pietro_Mercurios said:
Considering how aciduous their youth wing is in inducting and propagandising young Catholics into their organisation, you can be sure they know a thing, or two, about corrupting the innocent.
Perhaps this coloured Ruth Kelly's decision to let sex offenders work in schools? Musn't be seen to hold double standards, now should she?
Pietro_Mercurios said:
Last year, I watched a very enlightening Belgian documentary about their recruitment through youth groups and summer camps. i.e. It's a brainwashing cult.
Yeah, a mate of mine, ley but quite high in his diocesan Catholic set says many of them regard OD with suspicion and don't hold at all with their particular brand of "recruitment".
 
Here we go again:
Novel claims painter portrayed founder of Church as a traitor
By Roya Nikkhah
(Filed: 05/02/2006)

A new novel, based "90 per cent on historical facts", depicts Leonardo Da Vinci as a heretic who painted his own face into The Last Supper, and claims that the painting portrays Saint Peter as a traitor and carries a blasphemous message.

The Secret Supper, which has sold more than 500,000 copies in Europe, is set to rival The Da Vinci Code for conspiracy theories about one of the most famous figures in art history.

The novel portrays Da Vinci as a Cathar, a member of a gnostic sect outlawed by the Roman Catholic Church.

The story, which is being fought over by Hollywood studios hoping to emulate The Da Vinci Code phenomenon, is set in 1497 and told by Fr Augustin Leyre, a Vatican monk and expert code-breaker.

He is sent to infiltrate the Santa Maria delle Grazie monastery in Milan, the home of The Last Supper, after anonymous letters to the Pope accuse Da Vinci of concealing subversive ideas in his work. The monk deciphers the painting into a series of Cathar messages, revealing Da Vinci's denunciation of the Church.

Javier Sierra, the novel's Spanish author, claims that most his characters and events are based on historical records. "The book is fiction but 90 per cent of the facts are real," he said.

Sierra suggests that Saint Peter, not Judas Iscariot, is depicted as the villain.

"Saint Peter, the founder of the Church, from whom the Pope directly descended, is holding a dagger in one hand and menacing John with the other," he said. "Leonardo points to the Pope as the traitor of the Church - absolute blasphemy."

Although the Cathars were dismantled by the Inquisition in France, some historians have suggested those who survived took refuge in Spain and Italy and that their last known settlement in the 16th century was at Concorezzo, a town outside Milan.

"During Leonardo's years in Milan, the Cathars lived close to him - a coincidence that has never been underlined," said Sierra.

He refers to the Cathars' doctrine, Interrogatio Johannis - commonly known as The Secret Supper - to confirm Da Vinci's Cathar convictions by drawing comparisons with his masterpiece.

"This is the first time an artist depicts Jesus and his disciples without their halos," he said. "The Cathars did not worship the saints and considered Jesus a human, not the son of God."

Sierra also claims that Da Vinci painted himself as the disciple Judas Thaddeus - St Jude. The author used facial recognition software to compare Thaddeus's image with one of Da Vinci's self-portraits.

"The police use the same software and consider 60 per cent similarities as a good match," he said. "These images showed an 81 per cent match."

The Secret Supper has sparked controversy among academics. David d'Avray, a professor of medieval history at University College London, said that Sierra's claims were "as likely to appeal to professional historians as much as flat-earthers' arguments appeal to professional geographers".

Gillian Evans, a professor of medieval theology and intellectual history at Cambridge university, said most historians believed that the Cathars had died two centuries before Leonardo. "The Secret Supper is no doubt a good read. Just don't confuse it with history," she said.
Telegraph
 
Group urges Da Vinci film changes

Catholic group Opus Dei wants "references that hurt Catholics" to be removed from the film version of Dan Brown's hit novel The Da Vinci Code.
"The Da Vinci Code offers a deformed image of the Catholic Church," Opus Dei said in a statement released in Rome.

But the group added it would not call for a boycott of the highly anticipated film, due out in May.

The book portrays Opus Dei as a power-hungry movement bent on covering up the truth about Christ's bloodline.

The group did not say in its statement which references it wanted removed, but studio Sony insisted the movie was a work of fiction.

The film was "not a religious tract, and it is certainly not meant to criticise any group, religious or otherwise," said Jim Kennedy of Sony Pictures Entertainment.

Opus Dei said changes to the film would be appreciated by Catholics "particularly in these days in which everyone has noted the painful consequences of intolerance" - a reference to the violent protests sparked by the publication of cartoons satirising the Prophet Muhammad.

However, it said it would not urge boycotts, and would follow a "more constructive" path.

The novel, full of conspiracy theories in a thriller style, is about two code-breakers who try to track down the truth behind the Holy Grail. It has caught the imaginations of millions.

The Roman Catholic Church has said the book is pure fiction.

The film, starring Tom Hanks and Audrey Tautou, will premiere at the Cannes Film Festival in May.

Opus Dei was formed in 1928 in Madrid by the priest Josemaria Escriva de Balaguer. Its name means "the work of God".

The fundamental idea was to encourage Catholic lay people to see religion as something that should direct every minute of their lives, rather than being a matter of just turning up for Mass and confession.

Members are expected to live holy lives, evangelise people they know, and observe daily religious devotions.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/4715860.stm
 
Ah, good, a legal punch-up pending!
Da Vinci Code author in copyright dispute
(Filed: 26/02/2006)

Conspiracy theories involving the Catholic Church and the Holy Grail are about to be investigated at the High Court.

One of the world's highest-paid authors, Dan Brown, is being challenged by two men who claim he stole their ideas for his blockbuster, The Da Vinci Code.

Michael Baigent and Richard Leigh are suing their own publishers, Random House, claiming the international successful novel lifts from their 1982 book, The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail, itself a best seller.

This non-fiction work deals with theories that Jesus and Mary Magdalene married, had a child, and the blood line continues to this day - with the Catholic Church trying suppress the discovery.

It is similar to the theme explored in the Dan Brown novel which won best book at last year's British Book Awards and has sold over 30 million copies worldwide, earning the author £45 million in one year.

If the two writers are successful and opt to take injunctions stopping use of their material, it could threaten the British release of the film adaptation of the novel, starring Tom Hanks and Sir Ian McKellen, which is scheduled to open on May 19.

The case, expected to last up to two weeks if there is no settlement in the meantime, is also likely to clarify existing copyright laws over the extent to which an author can use other people's research.

Dan Brown acknowledges the theories of The Holy Blood in his novel and names the villain in his story Sir Leigh Teabing, which, it has been suggested, was a deliberate part anagram of the surnames of the authors of the earlier work.

The two books - which deal with parallel versions of the fate of Jesus Christ - have now ended up in the Chancery Division of the High Court for a battle over the huge financial returns both have generated by their success.

http://tinyurl.com/ehnph
 
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/4754308.stm

Da Vinci Code 'copy' case begins
27 February 2006

A claim that Dan Brown's bestselling novel The Da Vinci Code copied the ideas of two other authors is going before London's High Court.

Michael Baigent and Richard Leigh claim Mr Brown stole the idea that Jesus had a child from their 1982 book The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail.

They are suing publisher Random House, which also published their book. Random House denies the allegation.

A judge is due to hear initial submissions in the trial on Monday.

'Intellectual theft'

The Da Vinci Code won best book at this year's British Book Awards and more than 30 million copies have been sold in about 40 languages.

It has been adapted into a $100m (£57m) movie starring Tom Hanks, Audrey Tautou and Sir Ian McKellen, which is due to open this year's Cannes film festival.

Mr Baigent and Mr Leigh's non-fiction work The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail was also a best-seller.

It dealt with theories that Jesus and Mary Magdalene married and that their blood line continued to the present day.

They said Mr Brown's book, which explores similar ideas, constituted "theft of intellectual property".

Mr Baigent and Mr Leigh wrote their book with a third author, Henry Lincoln, who is not taking part in the claim due to ill-health.
I thought Baiget & Leigh were passing off all their guff as hidden historical, fact? Now it's just copyrighted fiction.

I bet all the true believers feel a bit foolish, now. :lol:
 
Could the basis for the copyright action be because of Brown's assertion at the very beginning of da Vinci Code that everything historical, relgious, geographical and otherwise is all fact?

And is propagandising really a word? :shock: I also have my doubts about inducting
 
Ravenstone said:
And is propagandising really a word? I also have my doubts about inducting
I think it's inducing. But I do like the word "aciduous" - sums up Opus Dei's corrosive influence nicely. Sorry, Pietro! You're spot on with what you say, though I'm sure Dan Brown is currently finding the truth of the old adage "there's no such thing as bad publicity". Every controversy gets more people reading his book and planning to see the film.
 
Ravenstone said:
Could the basis for the copyright action be because of Brown's assertion at the very beginning of da Vinci Code that everything historical, relgious, geographical and otherwise is all fact?
Ah, that bit is actually quite carefully worded. He actually only says that descriptions of all artwork, places etc are accurate.

*taps finger on side of nose*
 
The Daily Grail is following this and make an interesting point:

Whatever the outcome, it's likely that the publicity may be more than enough to compensate for the costs of B&L's court case, and will also contribute further to DVC sales and income. As of today, HBHG is at its highest ever Amazon ranking (#9), and is not far from pushing into the top 5 and challenging DVC itself (#4). Perhaps the biggest winner out of all this will be Random House - who publish both books...

http://dailygrail.com/node/2632

See:
www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/new-for-y ... enantmc-20

One could opine that the whole thing is a set up.

Checking Amazon.co.uk the illustrated HB (handily released in Sept 2005) is #8:
www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/18441 ... ntmagaz-21

DVC is #6:
www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/05521 ... ntmagaz-21

The again Jeffrey Archole is #1 so....

www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/tg/stores/ ... ntmagaz-21

Not sure what kinds of sales that would represent but I'd suspect quite a few.
 
Da Vinci Code faces gay porn remake as DaVinci Load

27-Feb-2006
Benjamin Cohen

Whilst Da Vinci Code author, Dan Brown, faces a High Court accusation of plagiarism, it has been announced that the film version of his best-seller is to be remade as a gay porn film to be released on the same day as the Hollywood version starring Tom Hanks.

Mr Brown's publishers, Random House, are facing a copyright challenge by Michael Baigent and Richard Leigh, authors of the 1982 book, The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail (also published by Random House).

Meanwhile, gay porn producers, PZP Productions, have announced that the DaVinci Load will be released on the same day as the Hollywood version of the international best seller. "This will be the first time that a porn parody will be released simultaneously with the Hollywood blockbuster it is parodying," said Peter Zaragoza of PZP.

"It's big gamble," he added, “If the real movie tanks at the box office then we're screwed! But I'm betting that director Ron Howard and star Tom Hanks will deliver the big hit that everyone is anticipating. I loved the book."

Mr Zaragoza claims that his pornographic remake is only “loosely” based on the book but “tries to retain the same suspense."

“It was very hard for me to do this film without making it tongue-in-cheek. There is some serious stuff in this film, including political commentary and even a couple of non-violent, cloak-and-dagger style murders."

He added that the film will be their “most ambitious and expensive to date.”

Despite the drama and tension, the parody of Robert Langdon (the hero of the Dan Brown book) will have time to pack his condoms, the film will contain only contain safe sex scenes.

www.pinknews.co.uk/news/articles/2005-617.html
 
Is this the rumoured sequel to The Brown Mile? :shock:
 
min_bannister said:
Ah, that bit is actually quite carefully worded. He actually only says that descriptions of all artwork, places etc are accurate.

*taps finger on side of nose*

Ah. Say no more, luv. Say no more ;)

Baigent et al are suing Random House, aren't they? Rather than Dan Brown himself? And HBHG is published by Random House as well? So - Random House is suing Random House?

Publicity whores? Never!!!! :twisted:
 
Also note the absent author in the lawsuit. Henry Lincoln certainly believes the whole thing is true (as can be seen in Rat Scabies and the Holy Grail) so is he not suing on the grounds it's not strictly copyright? Or because he has higher moral standards than the others? Or just because they're not talking anymore?
 
Anome_ said:
Also note the absent author in the lawsuit. Henry Lincoln certainly believes the whole thing is true (as can be seen in Rat Scabies and the Holy Grail) so is he not suing on the grounds it's not strictly copyright? Or because he has higher moral standards than the others? Or just because they're not talking anymore?
According to an earlier link, it's because of ill health.

I imagine he's pretty old by now.
 
Ill health might prevent him from attending court, but it shouldn't stop him from participating in the lawsuit. After all, he has relatives that might want to protect his intellectual property, and/or get a piece of the Dan Brown action.
 
Someone has written a book which reflects my own impression of Jesus' mission:
God, this conspiracy is getting bigger

As Dan Brown is accused of stealing the plot for the Da Vinci Code, new books are queuing to reveal the truth about the Jesus dynasty and other odd goings on, finds Stuart Wavell


Another day, another conspiracy theory. Dan Brown’s bestseller The Da Vinci Code outraged traditionalists with the idea that Jesus married and had children. The theological applecart is about to be upset again by a new scholarly book that kicks down another central prop of Christianity. It claims Jesus was intent on founding a royal dynasty, not a new religion.
With The Jesus Dynasty, published next month, the biblical archeologist James Tabor is tapping into a market that has made a multi-millionaire out of Brown, who was being sued in the High Court last week by Michael Baigent and Richard Leigh. They claim that much of Brown’s novel derives from their 1982 bestseller The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail.

Brown’s book revolves around the theory that Jesus and Mary Magdalene married and founded the Merovingian dynasty of French kings, a secret protected by the Knights Templar and a mysterious group called the Priory of Sion, which included in its membership Leonardo da Vinci. Da Vinci supposedly left a “clue” in his painting The Last Supper by depicting the apostle John as Magdalene.

Tabor, chairman of the department of religious studies at the University of North Carolina, says such speculation is “highly suspect at best”, although he does not rule out the possibility that Jesus married and had children.

From archeological and textual evidence, Tabor has concluded that far from setting himself up as the Messiah, Jesus was intent on establishing himself and his family as the rightful rulers of Israel.

Jesus and his extended family were “royals” descended from King David, who ruled in the 10th century BC, Tabor says. He was proclaimed “king of the Jews” and executed for this claim.

Yet his paternity remains open to debate. His adoptive father Joseph apparently died childless and his mother Mary remarried Joseph’s brother Clopas, but there is “good reason to doubt” whether either of Mary’s two husbands fathered Jesus, Tabor maintains.

So who was his father? According to an anti-Christian work by the philosopher Celsus in AD178, Mary “was pregnant by a Roman soldier named Panthera and was driven away by her husband as an adulterer”. Such was the gossip in Jewish circles. In Germany Tabor tracked down the grave of a Roman soldier of the same name, possibly Jewish, who was a contemporary of Mary.

“So we have the right name, the right occupation, the right place and the right time,” Tabor concludes. “(But) there is no way to prove a connection with this type of evidence, short of DNA tests of identifiable remains.”

Contrary to assumptions that he came to found a new religion that would supersede Judaism, Jesus preached “a very Jewish apocalyptic message”. He wanted a social revolution, informed by spiritual values, in anticipation of the imminent collapse of the Roman empire, Tabor writes.

In the event, after Jesus’s crucifixion in AD30 his half-brother James became head of the family until he was executed in AD62 and was followed by Jesus’s second brother Simon, who ruled for 45 years before his brutal death. Leadership then passed to a man named Judas, perhaps one of Jesus’s nephews.

“What we clearly have is nothing less than a Jesus dynasty, taking us well into the 2nd century AD,” Tabor claims.

However diligent his research, Tabor’s theory is largely speculative, adding to the canon of colourful books that occupy a lucrative publishing niche. In this netherworld where mysteries intersect, nothing is off limits. Certainly not Diana, Princess of Wales.

When Diana died in a car crash in the Pont d’Alma tunnel in central Paris nine years ago, conspiracy theories abounded. But something much more sinister was evidently afoot.

In pre-Christian times, the Pont d’Alma area had been the site of a pagan temple of the goddess Diana and a direct gateway to heaven. Mindful of this safety net, the place was chosen by the Merovingian kings (AD500-751) to fight their duels, with the loser going directly to paradise.

At least, we have to take this on trust from Rayelan Allan’s book Diana, Queen of Heaven, which relates that as a Spencer, Diana was descended via the Stuarts from the Merovingian dynasty, which in turn was descended from the union of Jesus and Mary.
With such deft logic, the Diana myth hooks up with books such as The Da Vinci Code. But Allan goes one stage further. A secret cabal of powerful men, intent on establishing a new world order, had manipulated Diana to marry Bill Clinton (Hillary would be removed through divorce or even murder), Allan claimed. Diana’s refusal led MI6 to eliminate her. They picked Pont d’Alma to “send a signal” that would lead to Saint Diana and a new world religion.

This fantasy has echoes of an equally implausible explanation for the death of Princess Grace of Monaco in a car crash in 1982. Of course that was no accident either, but linked to her involvement with the Order of the Solar Temple.

Members of this sinister Francophone cult, which claimed to have descended from the Knights Templar, later committed mass suicide at locations in Quebec and Switzerland. Grace, initiated by having sex during a magical ceremony and induced to give the order millions of dollars, became disillusioned and threatened to reclaim her funds, whereupon she was murdered.

But the Solar Temple baddies are minnows compared with the Illuminati, or “enlightened ones”, who feature in many conspiracy theories. They were founded in Bavaria in 1776 by a former Jesuit law professor who dreamt of fomenting revolution and installing a single world government. Although they ceased to exist after 1785, they have been blamed for the French and Russian revolutions, not to mention the creation of the United Nations, the European Union, the World Bank and much else.

The truth is definitely out there, and so is David Icke, the former professional goalkeeper turned sports presenter who, while Green party spokesman, announced he was the son of God 15 years ago on Terry Wogan’s chat show.

Icke is now the author of 15 books with such compelling titles as Children of the Matrix: How an Interdimensional Race Has Controlled the World for Thousands of Years — and Still Does, and I Am Me, I Am Free. His message is that life is an illusion generated by reptilian Illuminati who manipulate humans with the aim of enslaving us. And yes, he blames them for Diana’s death.

Icke realised that the late Sir Edward Heath was a lizard as long ago as 1989, when he shared a makeup room with the former prime minister at Sky News, he confided to the Daily Express in January. “As his eyes scanned me . . . they went jet black,” he said. “It was like looking into two black holes.”

In the scale of daft conspiracies, it ranks up there with the great Titanic insurance scam, listed in Joel Levy’s The Little Book of Conspiracies. The theory goes that it was not the Titanic that sank, but its sister ship the Olympic.

While the Titanic was being prepared for its launch, the Olympic collided with a British warship off the coast of Southampton and the insurers refused to pay up. The solution was to do a switch, so the battered Olympic was dressed up as her sister and launched with the aim of scuttling the ship, offloading passengers and claiming the insurance money. But the Olympic hit an iceberg and went down with massive loss of life.

Entertaining stuff, but it doesn’t quite measure up to theories challenging articles of faith. A classic of this genre is a disturbing reinterpretation of the Book of Genesis by Christian O’Brien, a geologist involved in the discovery of the Tchoga Zambil ziggurat in Iran.

First published in 1985, The Genius of the Few introduced a group of alien sages known as the “Shining Ones” who, O’Brien claimed, established an agricultural centre remembered as the garden of Eden and founded the Hebrew race.

According to O’Brien, Yahweh was a leader of the Shining Ones who led the Israelites out of Egypt, guiding them from an aerial craft that rode on “a pillar of cloud” by day and a “pillar of fire” by night.

He was a bellicose and intimidating figure who kept his face covered when talking to Moses, even in the privacy of his specially constructed tent. Neither he nor the Ark of the Covenant, which he kept close, could be touched without danger to life. From the tent’s vast dimensions, O’Brien calculated that Yahweh must have measured between 8ft and 13ft.

Tales don’t come any taller than that.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0, ... 39,00.html

Loadsa conspiracies there! :D
 
Hey they forgot the Kennedy family...

This looks like the kind of dreams you get after reading a Dan Brown novel and watching a couple of X-Files episodes...and loads of mind-altering substances...
 
something (perhaps) interesting I noticed - in the short stories of Saki (H.H. Munro) who was also a keen amateur historian, the most frequently recurring character is called Clovis (!) Sangrail (!!). These are all 1910s or so.
 
I never done it gov, it was my own tale it was...

Da Vinci author scorns copy claim

Author Dan Brown has dismissed accusations that he stole the ideas for his best-selling novel The Da Vinci Code as "completely fanciful".
The novelist is appearing at London's High Court after historians Richard Leigh and Michael Baigent sued publisher Random House.

They say Mr Brown copied ideas in their book The Holy Blood and The Holy Grail.

"I have been shocked at their reaction. Furthermore I do not really understand it," Mr Brown said in a statement.

Both books explore a theory that Jesus did not die on the cross but survived and had children with Mary Magdalene, and that their descendents survive.

Mr Brown said Mr Baigent and Mr Leigh were just two of a number of authors who had written about the theory.

"Yet I went out of my way to mention them for being the ones who brought the theory to mainstream attention," his statement said.

"I would like to restate that I remain astounded by the claimants' choice to file this plagiarism suit.

"For them to suggest, as I understand they do, that I have hijacked and exploited their work is simply untrue."

Mr Brown told the court his wife Blythe carried out much of the research and she "was deeply passionate about the sacred feminine".

'Wide research'

He said it was hard to pinpoint the sources he and his wife used while researching The Da Vinci Code.

"On the way, we met with historians and other academics and extended our travels from the Vatican and France to England and Scotland in order to investigate the historical underpinnings of the novel," he said.

He was originally unsure whether to include the theory that Jesus' bloodline had survived because he thought readers would find it "too incredible and inaccessible", he said.

But his wife persuaded him and he said he was "positive" he read about it in many sources before reading The Holy Blood and The Holy Grail.

The author grew up on the campus of Phillips Exeter Academy, New Hampshire, where his father was a teacher and where he studied.

Code of conduct

"It is also known for the strictness of its regulations and code of conduct, especially with respect to plagiarism," he told the court.

Mr Baigent previously told the High Court Mr Brown stole "the whole architecture" of research that went into their book.

He said there were "fairly specific" similarities between the books, but conceded there were many differences.

Random House has said Mr Brown used several sources for his research and wrote a synopsis of The Da Vinci Code before even looking at The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail.

The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail's third author, Henry Lincoln, is not taking part due to ill health.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/4801080.stm
 
A Telegraph travel writer visits Paris and discovers the shocking truth about the sinister figure who is behind Dan Brown

Link

[Emp edit: Fixing big link]
 
Longer than I thought!

Four pages, of which I've read one! :(

Still, if nothing else, it convinces me that Brown has a deep interest in many of things that most of us here find fascinating. Certainly his interests echo mine.

Not sure I can find time to read the whole statement, however.
 
Da Vinci QC tries to unlock secrets of the green ink
By Alan Hamilton

A WELL-THUMBED paperback copy of The Holy Blood and The Holy Grail, heavily marked and annotated in a variety of coloured inks, took centre stage at the High Court in London yesterday.
It was Dan Brown’s personal copy, and the author of The Da Vinci Code flicked back and forth through its copious pages in the witness box as he was pressed under cross-examination on when exactly he had first read it.

Two of HBHG’s co-authors are suing Mr Brown for breach of copyright, claiming that his successful thriller is at least partly based on their work. Mr Brown denies the charge, insisting that he read HBHG late in his writing process and that, anyway, all that book’s themes can be found in other sources.

Mr Brown at times appeared to be on the ropes under the cross-examination of Jonathan Rayner-James, QC, counsel for the claimants, who wanted to know why his copy of HBHG seemed to have many more page marks, underlinings and turned-up page corners than most of his 40-odd other source books.

Ah, Mr Brown said, most of these would have been done by his wife after DVC was published. During promotional tours he was being asked so many detailed questions that he asked her to give him a refresher course on the facts of DVC. And, he conceded, HBHG was an excellent source of basic facts on early Christian history. Mr Brown was exceedingly vague on the dates of his own writing history, but he strongly denied a suggestion that he had read HBHG before even writing the synopsis for DVC; he had, he said come to it late, after the storyline of DVC had already been assembled. The ideas for the plot had come from other books such as The Templar Revelation, which he freely admits drawing on.

From the bench, Mr Justice Peter Smith did not appear entirely to believe him. “It says in The Templar Revelation that HBHG is essential reading [for anyone interested in the the theory that Christ married, had children and that his bloodline still lives]. Are you asking me to believe that you did not read it? How could you have missed it?” the judge asked.

Mr Brown replied that The Templar Revelation had given him everything he needed to write his synopsis; at that stage he was interested in the broad picture, not the details.

Returning to the green ink markings in Mr Brown’s copy of HBHG, which he had voluntarily surrendered as evidence, Mr Rayner-James claimed that some of the annotations highlighted an aspect of the plot that was in the synopsis but not in the final novel, that the character murdered in the early pages was to have been the father of Sophie, the heroine, but in the final version was her grandfather.

The implication was that Mr Brown was mining HBHG at an early stage. “You can’t look at a pen mark and tell when it was made,” Mr Brown maintained.

Last week John Baldwin, QC, for Mr Brown’s publishers, Random House, cross-examining the claimants, argued that it did not matter when Mr Brown had consulted HBHG; the ideas he used were all in the public domain, and that there could be no copyright on ideas, only on the development of them.

Turning to another document, Mr Rayner-James directed Mr Brown to one of his own research papers, which quoted heavily from HBHG but with comments and annotations which, counsel suggested, appeared to be the work of Blythe Brown, his wife. “That has been downloaded from the internet,” Mr Brown insisted, although unable to be precise about its origins. “Look, it has British spelling and British punctuation. My wife would never spell ‘behaviour’ like that.”

The hearing continues.


http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0, ... 43,00.html
 
EXCLUSIVE: THE WEIRD WORLD OF MRS DA VINCI CODE

EXCLUSIVE DAN BROWN EXCLUSIVE
By Vanessa Allen

SHE is the shadowy figure behind Dan Brown's £200million fortune - but, unusually for the wealthy author, this time there's no big conspiracy involved.

The astonishing success of his bestseller, The Da Vinci Code, could never have happened without the passionate vision of attractive blonde Blythe Newlon Brown.

Yet when the reclusive author was forced to make a very public defence of his novel in the High Court this week, his wife was notably absent.

It was Blythe who researched much of the 40-million-selling title for him and critics claim she is the controlling Svengali-like figure behind his success.

Mrs Brown, 53, shuns the spotlight, and her husband's legal team claim they do not even know if she travelled to London for the three-week hearing, due to finish on Monday.

More likely, say friends, she is hard at work on the research for the sequel to what has proved to be the most successful thriller of all time.

Despite her absence, her name and the force of her personality have been ever present in Court 61 at the Royal Courts of Justice in London. It's here that Brown, 41, has defended himself against claims that he copied his ideas from an earlier book.

And he has painted a fascinating picture of the bizarre-sounding home life the childless couple lead. Blythe, we learnt, encourages Dan's habit of rising at 4am seven days a week to begin writing. When writer's block sets in he hangs upside-down, bat-like, until the ideas start flowing again. And when they do the couple converse using email, even when in the same house.

"It may sound very cold, but that's often how we communicate at home," Brown told the court. "For me, writing is a discipline, much like playing a musical instrument. It requires constant practice and honing of skills.

"If I'm not at my desk by sunrise, I feel like I'm missing my most productive hours. I keep an antique hour-glass on my desk and every hour break briefly to do push-ups, sit-ups and some quick stretches. I find this helps keep the blood - and ideas - flowing."

But if the writing ability is his, the eye for detail and the inspiration belongs to Blythe. Brown admits he is "not much of a detail person" and relies on her for research.

It was her deep interest in the mystery behind The Da Vinci Code that inspired him to write the book - his last throw at making a success of his writing career.

Her drive has moulded his life since they met in 1991, when he was in his 20s. Twelve years his senior, Blythe gave him his first big break as a musician before becoming his lover and, eventually, his wife.

She was working in the music business in Los Angeles after growing up in Palmdale, California.

Ambitious Blythe seemed to have little in common with the geeky former choirboy who approached the National Academy for Songwriters, where she was director of artistic development. He had grown up in cloistered Phillips Exeter Academy, the US equivalent of Eton, where his father Dick taught mathematics and his mother Constance played the organ.

He graduated from the school in New Hampshire and spent a year studying art history in Spain before double-majoring in English at Amherst College, back in the States. When he approached Blythe at the academy he had made two demotapes, Synth-Animals, a cassette of strange animal songs for children, and a similar album aimed at adults.

Blythe had been working in the management industry for some years and could easily have dismissed the oddball musician as a weirdo flop. Instead she became his manager, comparing his talent to that of Billy Joel, Paul Simon and Prince. Soon the pair were secret lovers.

Author Lisa Rogak, who wrote The Man Behind The Da Vinci Code, explains: "It made sense to keep their relationship from other people.

"Blythe was taking charge of his musical career and it could have easily been misinterpreted as a power-hungry female boss exerting control over her younger client."

With her help Brown eventually released a CD of love songs, but the couple had more in common than music. Brown's year studying art history in Spain had left him with a fascination for it and Blythe was a painter and sculptor whom Brown describes as "a Da Vinci fanatic".

By 1993 Brown had admitted the relationship in an interview and they left LA to go back to his home town, Exeter. They married two years later and worked ferociously hard on a string of books, including The Digital Fortress, Angels And Demons and 187 Men To Avoid: A Survival Guide For The Romantically Frustrated Woman, written under the pseudonym Danielle Brown.

None sold well and The Da Vinci Code was Brown's lastditch attempt at writing before going back to teaching English.

Blythe was desperate for it to work and lobbied him to write about the idea that Jesus married Mary Magdalene and that their descendants were alive today, spawning secret sects and Catholic conspiracies.

Brown has said: "I am not sure I had ever seen Blythe as passionate about anything as she became for the historical figure of Mary Magdalene."

Friends say that was typical of her. One pal describes her as "the classic pushy mother", saying: "He has the talent but she has the drive - that's what their relationship is all about."

The couple ploughed through hundreds of books and documents researching the thriller. Blythe pored over books in Paris, Rome and the Vatican.

Stan Planton, the head librarian at Ohio University who helped with research, says: "She is the major researcher and has done most of it from the very beginning."

Brown has been generous in his praise of her work and inspiration, dedicating the book to her. He has also tried to protect her privacy, hinting to the High Court that he had taken the stand to protect her from the ordeal of having to testify.

"I see no reason why she should be put through the stress that the glare of publicity would cause," he said.

The couple are building a large house in secluded woodland in New Hampshire, which will be kitted out with the latest security devices.

Both are very aware that The Da Vinci Code's explosive mix of sex and religion is considered by many Christian extremists to be blasphemous.

Friends say they are happy to retreat from the world together and work on the sequel to the hit novel. But Blythe Newlon Brown, who has never given an interview, may have to get used to the glare of publicity.

The High Court battle has led to such interest in The Da Vinci Code that UK sales are up by almost 800 per cent and a film starring Tom Hanks, Audrey Tautou and Sir Ian McKellen opens in May.

The sequel, The Solomon Key, is already generating fever-pitch excitement among Da Vinci Code fans and many cult websites have sprung up.

Leonardo Da Vinci himself had Mona Lisa as his inspiration. Dan Brown's muse and silent partner will find it hard to remain as mysterious as the Mona Lisa smile.

THE BROWN CODE Dan and Blythe communicate by email .. even when they are both in the same house

THE BROWN CODE When writer's block sets in he hangs upside down, bat-like, until the ideas flow again

THE BROWN CODE Blythe was desperate for Dan to write that Jesus married Mary Magdalene
http://tinyurl.com/o9m2v
 
Been reading the Holy Blood Holy Grail book and what I find is that it is far better written, more interesting and more logical than the Da Vinci Code. Could Dan Brown have got some of his ideas from the book - I think it's possible but so far the similarities don't strike me as plagiaristic (a word?). I'll have to re-read Da Vinci Code afterwards to compare properly, but I think Baigent should be glad that it's popularity brings books like his, which are far better, into the limelight once more.
 
Da Vinci case drawing to a close

Evidence from author Dan Brown denying he copied ideas for his book The Da Vinci Code should be viewed with "deep suspicion", the High Court was told.
Summing up his clients' case, Jonathan Rayner James QC said Mr Brown had been "unco-operative" in court.

"He had almost no recollection of matters that related to issues of timing", he told the judge.

Mr Brown denies copying The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail by Michael Baigent and Richard Leigh for his best-seller.

Mr James said the author claimed he had not read his clients' book until The Da Vinci Code was in the latter stages of production.

"He would struggle to recall a year, was rarely able to recall a month," he told the High Court in London.

"His general attitude in cross-examination was unco-operative."

Mr Baigent and Mr Leigh are suing Random House, which publishes both books, claiming Mr Brown plagiarised their book.

Both books explore the theory that Jesus married Mary Magdalene, that the couple had a child and that the bloodline survives.

Mr James said Mr Brown had admitted that much of the research for the novel was carried out by his wife, Blythe.

"It was crucial in revealing the dependency on The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail and the extent to which she relied upon it. Perhaps that explains why she was not produced," he said.

Mr James said Mr Brown claimed his wife did not like publicity and that is why he did not want his wife involved in the court case.

The lawyer suggested she could have given evidence via video link or given a witness statement.

Mr Brown has maintained that neither he nor his wife and assistant Blythe Brown used The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail while his best-selling book was being prepared.

He has admitted to using the work while The Da Vinci Code was being written, but said it was used as one of several sources and did not use its central themes.

A judgement could take several weeks to be reached.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/4825564.stm
 
rynner said:
Turning to another document, Mr Rayner-James directed Mr Brown to one of his own research papers, which quoted heavily from HBHG but with comments and annotations which, counsel suggested, appeared to be the work of Blythe Brown, his wife. “That has been downloaded from the internet,” Mr Brown insisted, although unable to be precise about its origins. “Look, it has British spelling and British punctuation. My wife would never spell ‘behaviour’ like that.”
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0, ... 43,00.html

I feel I should point out that while I'm American(And educated in America), I tend to use British spellings for some words(theatre, behaviour, etc) and have had that preference(purely aesthetic, I admit) for years. I don't think it's all that unusual..I think the more you communicate textually with someone, the more of their grammar you're likely to pick up, and I've always had a lot of interaction with Europeans(I say Europeans because I've known most other Europeans, besides the British themselves, to use the British spelling.) If routinely communicating with other people in textspeak/netspeak can cause you to become accustomed to speaking that way, why not in other forms of grammar?

Of course this is all moot considering I don't know anything about Brown's wife. I just find it funny that he made the statement he did, like nobody in America ever uses British grammar!

Edit: Oops, I made a typo. Hee. :lol:
 
Back
Top