LennyeTran wrote:I've watched a documentary about the DaVinci code, and they did mention something about the holy blood and the holy grail. That book came way before the da vinci code. That's why they said he's stealing their work. I'll check for this info again.
Dixie wrote: I don't see what the fuss is all about anyway. I'm going to get The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail so I can figure out. I never thought both books could be compared. The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail is the result of an exhaustive research, whereas Brown's just a fictional novel based on that info.
I guess they also want their share of the cake
But most recently, author Dan Brown in his bestseller The Da Vinci Code (2003), makes reference to this book, also liberally using most of the above claims as key plot elements; indeed, Baigent and Leigh are suing Brown's publisher, Random House, for plagiarism, on the grounds that his book makes extensive use of their research and that one of the characters is named Leigh, has a surname (Teabing) which is an anagram of Baigent, and has a physical description strongly resembling Henry Lincoln. In the book Brown also mentions Holy Blood, Holy Grail as an acclaimed international bestseller (chapter 60) and claims it as the major contributor to his hypothesis. (copied from the link above)
I wonder if that part is serious.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests