How much truth do you think there is in Dan Brown's novels?

Answer 1

They're exciting books but as an historical novelist Brown is a joke, as any true historian would tell you. He ignores the accpeted rules of historical novel authorship and paints his own picture of history which has caused a great deal of misunderstanding regarding historical people and things of which he writes. He's done a diservice to his reading public in this way. Truth and fiction, history and fantasy are so mangled in his writing that excellent novel ideas have turned into heated argument and mud slinging.

Answer 2

Brown's skill is in making his details highly truthful. You can take an Angels and Demons tour of Rome that will show you all the accurate detail that he has included. Because he makes the details so very truthful, it makes the plot seem far more plausible. However, there's no truth in the basic premise of his books.

Beyond the fact that it's really impossible to believe that any lie that big (no matter how convincing) could be sustained for 2 millennia. It's also hard to believe that if it WERE true, there would be only 2 living descendents of Jesus. If we assume 2 is the correct average number of children - assume each of those 2 have 2 children (4), who each have 2 (8), who each have 2 (16), who each have 2, etc. If you assume an average age of 25 for having kids (far too old for the first 1000-1500 years of the premise - when families were also far larger, but let's be conservative), you're up to 80 generations - that's 1.2*10^24. (1 followed by 24 zeroes).

Even VERY conservative estimates would assume hundreds, if not thousands of descendents now.

Answer 3

I don't think there is much truth in fiction, but he surely knows how to use his imagination and create sensationalism. For three days I couldn't take my eyes off his novel. Only deficiency that I've found in Da Vinci code is that he doesn't knows how to end an epic novel. All the clues were leading in another direction and all of a sudden he starts throwing all blame on that British historian. The last 100 pages were completely incongruous with the rest of the novel.

Answer 4

As to the Da Vinci Code: None, except that there is a painting called Mona Lisa in the Louvre in Paris.
But seriously: In many parts, the novel's plot is similar to the alleged findings Michael Baigent and Richard Leigh that have long been proven unfounded.
Jesus may have had children (no proof), but whether they were members of an aged conspiracy or not noone can tell.
I would recommend to read Eco's Foucault's Pendulum, he has his own intelligent way to deal with conspiracy theories.

Answer 5

Think about what the word faith means to you and then apply it to the bible, Dan Brown's books, and the The Iliad By Homer. You’ll find your own answer it there somewhere.

Answer 6

Who cares! If his or anyone's books are an enjoyable read, who really gives a damn whether they are truth or not. If you read the prologue he or his publishers put a disclaimer in in the first sentence. "This is a work of fiction". Do you or any of the other morons out there understand the word "fiction"? If not go to a dictionary and look it up.

Answer 7

I reckon about 25% - after all he knows where London and Paris are, if not how they are laid out. The historical detail is all fiction and doesn't obey the rules of plausibility never mind truth.

Answer 8

Well there's always some truth in fiction because it all come from a real source. As for how much truth there is to it, i think a big part of the church scandals are true.

Answer 9

certain, that's actual. that's a fiction e book. yet in a roundabout way, Dan Brown have a study before write the e book. i have self assurance there is quite some reality contained in the e book. He writes the tale with regard to the very reality..

Answer 10

I have read DaVinci Code and Angels and Demons. I think there is a great deal of truth to those. But Mr Brown wisely says they are fiction!