"All descriptions," Brown writes, "of artwork, architecture, documents,and secret rituals in this novel are accurate."
OK, so what does all this cloak-and-dagger detail mean? Is the Christianchurch based on a lie? Does a secret society, once led by Leonardo da Vinci,protect the truth? Are tourists tramping all over it right now?
If these are among your questions, you've probably read the book, a realpage-turner about Harvard University "symbologist" Robert Langdon and hishair-raising encounter with the Holy Grail. It's hovered near the top of theNew York Times best-seller list for 15 weeks. Columbia Pictures has boughtthe movie rights, with the hope that some actor will do for symbology whatHarrison Ford did for archaeology.
But back to the question at hand. What does all this "accurate"description add up to? How much of "The Da Vinci Code" is true and how muchis a good story? And what difference does it make?
"It touches on enough strands of popular speculation and mythology thatreaders will think of it as more factual than it is," says Charles Lippy, ahistory of religion professor and an expert on popular culture who says heenjoyed the book but never forgot it was a novel. Other readers may be moregullible.
Combine that, Brown's authoritative tone and some readers' penchant forconspiracy theories, and it may be that "The Da Vinci Code" could use alittle cracking. Without giving too much away, here's a quick reader's guideto some key concepts.
Schombert decribes the number as a visual equivalent of music, a proportion that is pleasing to the eye. A painting, one of Leonardo's for example, painted along those lines may be divided into rectangles with the same proportions and each will be balanced.
Schombert sees the golden ratio as evidence that "the universe isproperly built," but he and some other scientists stop short of seeing it asa calling card of divinity, either masculine or feminine.
Joseph Manca, an art history professor at Rice University who teaches acourse on Leonardo and has written about him, hasn't run across the theoriesthat Brown's hero, Langdon, and his fictional colleague, Leigh Teabing, trotout in "The Da Vinci Code."
The "Mona Lisa" may be an encrypted ode to nature, Manca says, but thedescription of her as the epitome of androgyny isn't exactly the "insidejoke" Langdon describes.Manca also quibbles a bit with Langdon and Teabing's interpretations ofthe artist's "Last Supper." The "disembodied" hand that grasps a dagger isclearly St. Peter's, Manca says. The disciple holds the weapon to foreshadowhis attack on a Roman guard later that night. The redhead at the dinnertable is John the Beloved, Manca says. He was the youngest of Jesus'disciples and is usually depicted as cleanshaven, he said.
There is a Gospel according to Philip (with a passage like the one Brownquotes) among the books that didn't make it into the New Testament canon.But it's tough to blame that on Constantine, who didn't become a Christianuntil he was on his deathbed, Lippy says. The official collection, or canon,took years to develop, and to ascribe what made it and what didn't to anyone person is an oversimplification, he adds.
The legend that Mary Magdalene ended her life in France has been aroundat least since the Crusades, says Lippy, who last summer stood over whatsome believe are her bones, which lie in a small church in Vezelay.
And there was a Priory of Sion, with connections to the Knights Templar,but Grail experts are divided over whether the secret group persisted intothe current century and whether the documents that listed its grand mastersare real or a hoax.
"The Da Vinci Code" is fun to read, but its pages hold little "realevidence," Lippy says. "There is nothing that corroborates all this, otherthan almost a wish to have these things be so." It was just enough to sendLippy to the library, enough to make him wish he'd written the storyinstead. "There's a glimmer here, a glimmer there and then he adds the `MonaLisa,"' Lippy says. "Who is she smiling at? We readers just pounce on stufflike that."