Woman discovers she's a character in latest Dan Brown novel
Filed under: Extracurriculars
What if you showed up as a major character in a best-selling novel? Imagine what went through Marilyn Schlitz's mind when she realized that she was a character in Dan Brown's latest, The Lost Symbol, a followup to The Da Vinci Code. After catching the rumor via Twitter that a character closely resembled her, Schlitz bought the book and found herself reading fictionalized details of her own research. She told NPR she found the use of her work "very surprising and delightful at the same time." According to the NPR report, a major character in the novel, Katherine Solomon, is, like Schlitz, an employee of the Institute of Noetic Sciences in California, and carries out similar research, with one very important difference: Solomon's work goes further than Schlitz's, all the way into the realm of fantasy.
Brown reportedly did not contact Schlitz before publication, citing security concerns, but he did send a nice note of thanks afterward. Lucky for the author, she appears content with the actions that Brown puts her character through. Her institute "explores the frontiers of consciousness" and "builds bridges between science and spirit," obvious grist for Brown's brand of fiction.
But what if Schlitz had been offended? Could she successfully sue for libel?
There are plenty of examples of books in which authors use real people in authentic circumstances while creating fictional back stories to flesh out the action. Don DeLillo's masterpiece, Libra, does this with Lee Harvey Oswald. Fans of Law and Order are familiar with the way the TV show populates real circumstance with fictional characters. Taking real people and investing them with fictional actions is, in fact, actually quite common.
If you showed up in someone's novel without prior knowledge, could you successfully sue? A libel judgment would depend on several points:
- Would a reasonable reader conclude that you and the character are one and the same? In Brown's case, the character's name and appearance are different. Although her work and employer are the same, O.J.'s jury would no doubt find that they were not the same person.
- Is the action defamatory? This depends on the subject and the jury. Not everyone would be offended by being portrayed as a love machine, for example.
- Could the work be construed as satire or parody? If such comedy was libelous, the Onion would have been out of business years ago.
- Does the defendant have anything to lose? If not, your victory could by Pyrrhic. The world is full of fan fiction in which popular public figures are put through degrading experiences (pity poor Angelina Jolie), but the cost of pursuing these loser authors would certainly exceed the reward.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
10-15-2009 @ 2:50PM
Bertha Maude said...
I've read all of Dan Brown and didn't realize he had a novel named Katherine Solomon. I also didn't realize tacky, unrelated ads and political garbage could be considered comments on a character in The Lost Symbol. (Forgive no italics or underline for title).
The question about whether Schlitz might have been offended is moot. She wasn't. Another frivolous suit avoided.
Reply
10-15-2009 @ 2:55PM
ruby2070 said...
I don't know how advertisements relate to book characters, either. I don't even see the point in the ads. If I were Dan Brown, I would have consulted Marilyn Schlitz beforehand.
10-15-2009 @ 4:19PM
Robert said...
The book is titled "The Lost Symbol" not "Katherine Solomon". Try looking up that title.
10-15-2009 @ 4:22PM
Robert said...
"Imagine what went through Marilyn Schlitz's mind when she realized that she was a character in Dan Brown's latest, The Lost Symbol, a followup to The Da Vinci Code."
10-15-2009 @ 6:15PM
jenni said...
Katherine Solomon is not the name of the novel. She is the character IN the novel.
10-15-2009 @ 6:48PM
Katie said...
The novel in question isn't called "Katherine Solomon." Katherine Solomon is a character in Dan Brown's newest book The Lost Symbol.
10-15-2009 @ 3:20PM
Gary said...
Also remember the late Michael Crichton did that, only he did it to slander someone. In his novel "Next" he had a character that was so thinly veiled that it was obvious. lol
from wiki (yeah I know, it's wiki, but this is actually what happened):
In his 2006 novel Next (released November 28 of that year), Crichton introduced a character named "Mick Crowley" who is a Yale graduate and a Washington D.C.-based political columnist. "Crowley" was portrayed by Crichton as a child molester with a small penis. The character is a minor one who does not appear elsewhere in the book.
A real person named Michael Crowley is also a Yale graduate, and a senior editor of The New Republic, a liberal Washington D.C.-based political magazine. In March 2006, the real Crowley had written an article strongly critical of Crichton for his stance on global warming in State of Fear. Crowley responsed by saying that he was “strangely flattered” by his reference in Crichton’s novel. “To explain why, let me propose a corollary to the small penis rule,” he wrote. “Call it the small man rule: If someone offers substantive criticism of an author and the author responds by hitting below the belt, as it were, then he’s conceding that the critic has won.”
Reply
10-15-2009 @ 5:19PM
sandy said...
Wow, What a childish, petty, vindictive, warped jerk Crichton was! Sounds like his attempts at revenge were,,,, impotent.
10-15-2009 @ 3:29PM
Lady A said...
thats tight
Reply
10-15-2009 @ 4:09PM
KayDf9 said...
I think this is why most authors put in the front, "characters are fictional and not intended to represent any living person". That usually covers anyone suing them because they didn't like the way they were portrayed.
Reply
10-15-2009 @ 5:29PM
People are like sheep said...
why does this article go from talking about how this woman happened to find that she was the made into a character in a book to "WHAT IF" she wanted to sue him. "COULD" she sue him. "IF" you find out that an auther used you as a character can you sue them. Then they say that such lawsuits are uncommon, WTF is the point? Its funny because they probably had that on their minds because it would make a juicy story.
Reply
10-15-2009 @ 5:37PM
No Monkey Here said...
I'd sure be angry if someone accused me of using heroine.
Reply
10-15-2009 @ 6:13PM
dahtheimperial said...
really. i don't think you read the article well. she was the HEROINE of the story. not a HEROIN user. wow.
10-15-2009 @ 6:10PM
Harper said...
Thank you No Monkey for reminding folks that Life should not always be taken so seriously. Folks, this is Entertainment News. It's not showing up on Prime Time or 60 minutes or even being mentioned on local news anywhere, besides possible the subject's home town as a "fluff" piece. Its purpose is to entertain and to inform with an obvious leaning towards the former. I enjoyed it. It entertained me slightly. Am I offended because the article promoted one thing then drifted on to another subject? No. Its not news..its non-news. No worries :D
10-15-2009 @ 6:27PM
Boneman163 said...
Wow dude she wasn't ON heroine, she WAS portrayed as the heroine of the story. As in female hero. Dude, did you even read the article or just the title?
10-15-2009 @ 7:58PM
koko said...
Fat bitch.
Reply
10-15-2009 @ 6:11PM
J said...
You forgot the quotes around "masterpiece" before the word Libra.
Reply
10-15-2009 @ 6:42PM
Lonelypoet said...
The person who wrote this article forgot about the little statement in the front of almost every novel/work of fiction which goes something like this:
"This is a work of fiction. Names, characters, places, and incidents are products of the author's imagination or are used fictitiously and are not to be construed as real. Any resemblance to actual events, locales, organizations, or persons, living or dead, is entirely coincidental."
The above statement in works of fiction(novels) protects the author from being sued. So, the author of the above article never did their homework. LOL!!!!
Reply
10-15-2009 @ 7:02PM
HW said...
@Bertha Maude - if you would read the article you would know that it doesn't say that he has a NOVEL named Katherine Soloman but that it is the characters name in the novel, The Lost Symbol. Maybe you should read the article before you post so that you don't sound like an idiot. I'm suprised you have read any of his books considering you can't read an article. Have a great day.
Reply
10-15-2009 @ 7:21PM
miguelito said...
A brilliant display of free publicity. I have used it myself in the food industry. For those that don't know the trick, just add your name to an up and coming home run saying somehow you were a distant cousin to the issue at hand. Works perfectly. If they deny that you are the person, good for you, if they admit your were in the mix, better for you. Cheaper then a public relations idiot. Blessings to all whom I have offended. Miguel
Reply