‘Da
Vinci Code’ controversy about work
of fiction
Molly
Stewart
In
case you’ve been living under a rock
for the past three years, Dan Brown’s
thriller, “The Da Vinci Code,” has
become one of the most popular books of
all time since its debut in 2003. Other
best-selling authors like Ann Rice and
James Patterson focus on similar themes
(secret cover-ups, good vs. evil, murder)
as Brown, but his novel has created a storm
of controversy.
Why do people have a beef with Brown? It’s because his mega-hit centers
on a touchy subject: religion. The plot of the novel involves a conspiracy
by the Catholic Church to cover up the true story of Jesus. According to the
novel, Jesus married and had a child with Mary Magdalene, one of his disciples.
The novel shows the Catholic Church doing anything, including murder, to conceal
the truth about Jesus.
Christians worldwide are outraged, calling the book sacrilegious, dangerous
and offensive. Religious leaders are protesting the book, calling it heresy.
Despite Brown’s claim that, “all descriptions of artwork, architecture,
documents and secret rituals in this novel are accurate,” he does state
that, “‘The Da Vinci Code’ is a novel and therefore a work
of fiction.”
Not only is Brown being accused of being anti-Christian, he’s also being
dubbed a thief. Lewis Perdue claimed Brown stole ideas for “The Da Vinci
Code” from his books, “The Da Vinci Legacy (1983),” and “Daughter
of God (2000),” but his case against Brown was dismissed last summer.
However, currently two British authors, Michael Baigent and Richard Leigh,
authors of “The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail” (1982), have charged
Brown with “lifting the central theme of [their] book.” The men
have brought a lawsuit against Brown’s publisher, Random House. The case
is currently still in progress, but if the two men win an injunction to bar
use of their material, the film’s May 19 opening could possibly be delayed.
Sony Pictures isn’t scared, saying that the film with open on time.
I haven’t read The Da Vinci Code, but I think I’m one of the few
people in America who hasn’t torn through the book in about two days.
It’s a made-up, suspenseful, interesting ficion about an idea that’s
been around for centuries. The theory that Jesus had a kid with Mary Magdalene
is nothing new. True, Brown takes it further by asserting the Catholic Church
is involved in a twisted, malicious cover-up. But that’s why it’s
on the shelf next to “Memoirs of a Geisha””and “Harry
Potter and the Half-Blood Prince,” not the”Bible. It’s a
work of fiction, not fact.
Brown wanted the story to, “serve as a catalyst and a springboard for
people to discuss the important topics of faith, religion and history.” Why
don’t people use the novel as a topic of discussion instead of taking
it so seriously as an attack on the Christian faith? I suggest we put down
the protest signs and let the novel be nothing more than it is: a good book
that finally got us to turn off our televisions and read for once in our lives.
Molly Stewart is a freshman journalism major.
|
