• Random House sued ME; not the other way around.
  • Random House filed suit to silence the facts I was posting on the web.
  • There has been NO trial on the facts, only the Random House effort to prevent a trial.
  • NO expert testimony was allowed despite three international plagiarism experts who were willing to testif that it existed.
  • The only sworn statements made under penalty of perjury are affidavits from me and my experts, nothing from RH.
  • The judge refused to consider any expert analysis.
  • Despite suing me first, Random House & Sony UNsuccessfully demanded that I pay the $310,000 in legal fees they spent to sue me.
  • Contrary to the Random House spin, I am not alleging plagiarism of general issues, but of several hundred very specific ones.
  • This is not about money. Anything I win goes to charity.

Legal filings and the expert witness reports are HERE

I have a second blog, Writopia
which focuses on Dan Brown's pattern of falsehoods
and embellishment of his personal achievements.

Monday, April 25, 2005

Dan Brown challenges the Notion That "Mary Married Jesus" is REALLY What DV Code is about

Random House's statement that DV Code is about "Mary Married Jesus" is NOT supported by Dan Brown's own public statements. Indeed this does not come up until AFTER the news media began to pick up on it.

So, what is it about, really? Here's what Dan Brown has to say:

From the New Hampshire newspaper, the Eagle-Tribune: " Brown described his book as an exploration of why the world has left women behind in religion, going from worshipping gods and goddesses to only gods, and how that shift affected culture.

"I simply explored a story about how and why the shift occurred, how it shaped our past and more importantly, how it may shape our future," he said. "In the major religions of the world, women remain second-class citizens. Why is this a problem?"

On March 20, 2003, Brown told the online book site, Book Reporter the following:

"Q: This novel is very empowering to women. Can you comment?"

"DB: Two thousand years ago, we lived in a world of Gods and Goddesses. Today, we live in a world solely of Gods. Women in most cultures have been stripped of their spiritual power. The novel touches on questions of how and why this shift occurred…and on what lessons we might learn from it regarding our future."

Another key indication of what DVC is actually about can be determined from an examination of the Reading Club Guide prepared by Random House.

Of the 18 questions in the guide, 15 are directly applicable to Linz and Daughter.

The issue of the suppression of the divine feminine is a major defining issue of infringement between my works and DVC because Dan Brown has repeatedly told interviewers that this is the story explored in DVC.

Its top-ranking as a defining issue is confirmed because it has been made a point of contention by those who have attacked DVC.

For example: "Mary is a central character in the novel—not the Mary Magdalene of the Bible, but the one of feminist mythology. She is depicted as Jesus’ head apostle, His wife, and the mother of His children. She is also, Brown writes, the real "Holy Grail." Readers are informed that all of this has been kept hidden by the Catholic Church, often by force and violence." (

Indeed, NOT the Mary Magdalene of the Bible, but as has been noted by many, DVC portrays the Mary Magdalene of the Gnostic texts, a stand-in for Sophia, the Great Goddess which was plagiarized from Linz and Daughter. But DVC doesn't simply adopt the Gnostic interpretation of Mary Magdalene.

Instead, Olson correctly asserts that: "In The Da Vinci Code, historian Teabing declares: "Jesus was the original feminist. He intended for the future of His Church to be in the hands of Mary Magdalene" (p. 248)."

This is by no means historical fact, but an inference from both the Christian New Testament and Gnostic writings. An inference I expressed in Linz and Daughter and which found its way into DVC, unchanged.

This was expressed, starting on page 18 of my Rule 56.1 Counterstatement and on pages 35 and 40 of that brief.

In addition, my Memorandum of Law in Opposition also explains how this is strikingly similar to Daughter of God beginning on page 22.


Post a Comment

<< Home