Misrepresenting the Facts - Part 2

I mentioned a couple of posts ago that items 1, 5 and, 7 of Random House's April 22, 2005 filing misrepresented the facts. Actually item 6 should have been included as well.

Let's look at item 6

The filing states that I do not challenge:

"(6) the different treatment of religion in the characters' lives and the two books (religion is an important element in Perdue's characters' lives and each takes a personal religious journey, whereas Brown's book and characters are more secular and express no imperative to search for a relationship with God)."

However, that is NOT supported by Dan Brown or The Da Vinci Code.

"religion is an important element in Perdue's characters' lives"

And that's NOT the case in DV Code? Hardly! The entire book, like Daughter of God, is a quest driven by religion. Religion is vital to all of the characters in both books.

Secular?? Aringarosa and Silas the "monk" are hardly secular and while Langdon begins in a very secular way, by the end of the book, he experiences a religious epiphany and ecstasy to rival that of St. Francis or any other Catholic mystic.

From DVC: "Langdon felt himself awaken fully now to the thrill of unthinkable possibility...Alive with wonder, he stared once again downward through the glass at the tiny structure below....With a sudden upwelling of reverence, Robert Langdon fell to his knees...For a moment, he thought he heard a woman’s voice. . . the wisdom of the ages. . . whispering up from the chasms of the earth. THE END"

If this does not qualify as a "personal religious journey," then what does?

In addition, the Random House statement implies that all the characters in my books are on a personal religious journey. That is not correct either.