I've cracked the code of 'Da Vinci Code' hypomania

During her keynote address at the N.C. Festival of the Book last month, Barbara Kingsolver articulated one of the great riddles of literature: When she writes nonfiction readers think she's spinning the facts, but when she writes fiction they believe she's telling the truth.

Kingsolver's insight is particularly relevant as the movie version of "The Da Vinci Code" comes to theaters Friday. Dan Brown's book has sold more than 40 million copies worldwide and become the best-selling work of adult hardcover fiction in history in no small measure because many readers believe that his novel reveals secret truths about Christianity.

Although Brown's publisher claims the thriller is based on "meticulous research," it owes far more to fantasy than fact: "The Da Vinci Crackpots" would have been a more accurate title. Yet the book draws from so many deep wells -- including ancient conspiracy theories and modern scholarship -- that it can help us clarify mysteries about faith, literature and truth.

Opening with a murder at the Louvre, "The Da Vinci Code" follows two main characters, Harvard art historian Robert Langdon and French cryptologist Sophie Neveu, as they seek to decipher ingenious clues left by the victim. During the next 24 hours, while fleeing the police and an albino assassin, the pair untangles a serpentine web of puzzles and codes to discover a truth that the Catholic Church has long suppressed.

In a nutshell (pun intended) they learn that Jesus had been married to and had children with Mary Magdalene (His DNA is still out there!). This fact, Brown's book maintains, was covered up by the Church because it proved that Jesus was not divine but an inspired man. In addition, Brown asserts, Jesus had wanted Mary to lead his church. To disciples like Peter, this was anathema. After the crucifixion, they forced Magdalene to flee to France and erased the central role of women -- what Brown and others call the "sacred feminine" -- in Jesus' teachings.

But Mary's story was not lost. She kept a diary, and others chronicled her life. These secret teachings revealing the duplicity and misogyny of the church were safeguarded through the centuries by a series of famous figures -- including Sir Isaac Newton, Sandro Boticelli, Leonardo da Vinci and the murder victim -- who belonged to the mysterious Priory of Sion.

While waiting until humanity was ready to hear the truth, these men left tantalizing clues about the relationship between Mary and Jesus, the most famous of which are those hidden in da Vinci's "The Last Supper."

There's much, much more. And despite the frequent insistence of Brown's characters that this history is well documented, almost all of it is bogus. Indeed, the success of "The Da Vinci Code" has inspired scores of debunkers including "Truth & Error in the Da Vinci Code" by Mark L. Strauss, "Da Vinci Code Decoded" by Martin Lunn and "Secrets of the Code," edited by Dan Burstein. It's hard not to conclude that the only thing Dan Brown got right was the spelling of his own name.

Of course, "The Da Vinci Code" is a novel. But it raises the question of what responsibility works of historical fiction have to the known record. My rule of thumb: The better known the subject, the more liberties the author may take. A novel about an obscure figure -- which may largely shape our memory of the person -- must hew closely to the facts.

When the figure is a titan like Jesus, all bets are off because so much other reliable information is available. True, readers may be misled by "The Da Vinci Code." But they can easily avail themselves of works that get the story right. Because of this vast literature, Brown's arguments will never become mainstream. Their impact will always be minimal.