:00:00. > :00:11.Now on BBC News it's time for HARDtalk.
:00:12. > :00:18.Welcome to hardtop, I am Stephen Sackur, my guest today is one of the
:00:19. > :00:26.biggest selling fiction writers of all time. Dan Brown. His 2003 novel
:00:27. > :00:31.The Da Vinci Code sparked outrage in the Vatican, he's just published
:00:32. > :00:36.another epic tale, this time about man's quest for the origins of life.
:00:37. > :01:05.Is there still a public appetite for Dan Brown's high-fibre blockbusters?
:01:06. > :01:15.Dan Brown, welcome to hardtop. Usually the phrase which follows
:01:16. > :01:24.your name is best author but in reviews of your latest novel,
:01:25. > :01:29.Origin, the new phrase for you, and novelist of ideas. I like that. I
:01:30. > :01:33.have heard many things but I like that. I would did it and thought I
:01:34. > :01:38.had not heard about it but it is sort of what you are about. I love
:01:39. > :01:43.to write about the grey area between right and wrong, big ethical
:01:44. > :01:52.questions, will God survive science is what I tackled in Origin. In some
:01:53. > :01:56.ways it would seem hard to package that into a genre that maybe you
:01:57. > :02:02.don't like this word but people would regard as thriller. I love the
:02:03. > :02:07.word. I write books I want to read. Thrillers are fun to read but I'll
:02:08. > :02:10.select a learned so what I try to do and it's an intentional thing is
:02:11. > :02:16.create a book which is fun to read but that you also learn something
:02:17. > :02:20.along the way. Watchword boards and entertainment are learning? They go
:02:21. > :02:24.hand-in-hand, they had to be intertwined or else the style does
:02:25. > :02:27.not work. It either reads like a travel journal or a empty thriller
:02:28. > :02:33.and I want to create something that tastes like ice cream but you're
:02:34. > :02:37.getting vegetables. LAUGHTER Most kids would say that their mum
:02:38. > :02:40.and dad forced them to eat too many vegetables. Do you ever think you
:02:41. > :02:46.are putting too much into it, you are just trying to be too didactic,
:02:47. > :02:51.making it too dense? All the time and that is where editing comes in.
:02:52. > :02:59.For every page in Origin I wrote there were ten which fell to the
:03:00. > :03:02.floor. Let's think of the substance the balance, when it comes to human
:03:03. > :03:08.beings trying to explain where we have come from and what life is, the
:03:09. > :03:15.balance between religious explanation and the scientific
:03:16. > :03:20.explanation. You are struggling with this central idea that maybe science
:03:21. > :03:27.has replaced God. Historically science has. If you look at the
:03:28. > :03:31.agents they had a whole pantheon of gods to explain everything they did
:03:32. > :03:36.not understand from rising tides to love. When the tides would rise it
:03:37. > :03:39.used to be per side and then science came along and said it was more to
:03:40. > :03:45.do with the moon and gravity and Poseidon fell. Are we naive enough
:03:46. > :03:51.to think history will not repeat itself? That the gods of today will
:03:52. > :03:56.survive? Historically they will not. I right thinking this is personal?
:03:57. > :04:02.Your background is interesting in that your family life involved a
:04:03. > :04:05.mother who was quite religious. Involved with her church. And the
:04:06. > :04:12.father who was a rationalist maths teacher. I grew up with one foot in
:04:13. > :04:17.each world. I was very comfortable in this existence up until I was
:04:18. > :04:21.about nine years old, I learned about Adam and Eve De Angelis is and
:04:22. > :04:24.I went to the Boston Museum of science and found out about
:04:25. > :04:30.evolution. I went to my priest and said which story is true? This man
:04:31. > :04:33.said nice boys don't ask that question and that was the moment
:04:34. > :04:39.from the that I realised I was going to be asking a lot of questions. Is
:04:40. > :04:45.that the moment you say to yourself now, that that began your journey
:04:46. > :04:50.away from religion? Absolutely. I moved toward the solid foundations
:04:51. > :04:54.of science. I found the further I went in science the mushy Legrand
:04:55. > :05:01.started to get in terms of concrete science. His becomes metaphysics,
:05:02. > :05:10.numbers become imaginary, it makes and Bury a circle into philosophy.
:05:11. > :05:16.Are you anti-religious? No, it does a lot of good in the world. That
:05:17. > :05:20.moment with the priest, he made you feel uncomfortable, he said nice
:05:21. > :05:25.boys don't ask that question, surely the extension of that is that
:05:26. > :05:31.religion became something that made you feel uncomfortable? That is
:05:32. > :05:35.absolutely true, what I became uncomfortable with is not religion
:05:36. > :05:40.but the banner of religion being waved as some kind of immunity from
:05:41. > :05:45.having to endure rational scrutiny. Don't tell me I cannot ask a
:05:46. > :05:48.question, religion is not doing any favours to the young people today by
:05:49. > :05:53.seeing to participate you need to turn off the rational part of your
:05:54. > :05:58.brain. I will just add the story of Adam and Eve I can now read as a
:05:59. > :06:02.beautiful morale detail, as a fable, an important part of understanding
:06:03. > :06:07.where we came from. But it's amazing to me than in year 2017 we in my
:06:08. > :06:12.country have congressmen who will stand up and say the earth is 6000
:06:13. > :06:17.years old. That the fossil record was put there to test our faith.
:06:18. > :06:21.This is where the danger lies. It's inevitable that people when they
:06:22. > :06:25.listen to this conversation we are having our mindful that you are Dan
:06:26. > :06:30.Brown of The Da Vinci Code, a period after you wrote it in 2003 when the
:06:31. > :06:36.Catholic Church in particular piled onto you, accusing you of egregious
:06:37. > :06:49.falsehoods, of undermining the key tenants of the faith in a way they
:06:50. > :06:55.said was purely falls. Has that encouraged you to want to take on
:06:56. > :06:58.religion more? Perhaps, it's interesting, this was sent me but
:06:59. > :07:01.when The Da Vinci Code came out I had no idea it was going to be so
:07:02. > :07:06.controversial. I was asking a hypothetical question. For those who
:07:07. > :07:11.have not read it of whom are not many, let's remind them, you
:07:12. > :07:16.posited, a complex story that other hard that the notion that there was
:07:17. > :07:21.and is a conspiracy at heart of Christianity to hide the true story
:07:22. > :07:26.of Jesus Christ. That he was a mortal prophet not literally the son
:07:27. > :07:32.of God. Yes, a hypothetical... And you didn't realise it was going to
:07:33. > :07:36.be controversial? Because it's a thriller. If your faith is shaken to
:07:37. > :07:39.the court by a thriller you have to look at your faith. The reason the
:07:40. > :07:45.book was so controversial I guess is the only word is that because for a
:07:46. > :07:49.lot of people the story I told made more rational sense than the story
:07:50. > :07:55.they heard on Sunday school and certainly for me the story I told
:07:56. > :08:02.makes more logical sense. That is what was so dangerous. It sold
:08:03. > :08:06.hundreds of millions of copies in the end and that it's been
:08:07. > :08:12.translated all around the world but one of the problems those defending
:08:13. > :08:16.the Christian story had with the book was they felt Chielewski and
:08:17. > :08:20.fact and fiction in a way which was completely unreasonable and led many
:08:21. > :08:25.breeders to be deeply confused about where the lines between fact and
:08:26. > :08:29.fiction wearer. That's what I do, I do something intentional with these
:08:30. > :08:35.books which is blend that line. What I true to do is take real documents,
:08:36. > :08:40.real art and history and interweave fictional characters discussing them
:08:41. > :08:46.and they have their own ideas and they debate these topics. Guessed
:08:47. > :08:50.that your altars voices telling us, I think, correct me if you think I
:08:51. > :08:54.am wrong, telling us that you believe in certain things like this
:08:55. > :09:01.secretive movements, the Priory of Sion in France which in the book
:09:02. > :09:09.becomes a movement that is trying to deliver into power descendants of
:09:10. > :09:14.Jesus Christ in a secretive way. The feeling one gets is that you believe
:09:15. > :09:19.that was true. And I personally do believe it's true, I spent a long
:09:20. > :09:24.time researching this book. But you know it has been thoroughly
:09:25. > :09:28.debunked. Any time you read a book, if you read about challenging
:09:29. > :09:31.religion, the premise of the book is that his today as we know it is it
:09:32. > :09:35.is not like it is of course historians will say it is not
:09:36. > :09:39.accurate. But this is so germane to the times we live in today, you are
:09:40. > :09:45.suggesting is what is true and what is not is not always truly
:09:46. > :09:51.decipherable, if ever. But it's beyond doubt is it not that this
:09:52. > :09:59.idea of the secretive Priory of Sion was a hoax developed by a French
:10:00. > :10:04.bloke in the 1950s, the research is in and it was a hoax and you may be
:10:05. > :10:11.hoaxed by it but was it not time for you to say you got it wrong? I'm
:10:12. > :10:15.talking about my beliefs of the story of Jesus Christ. How I tell
:10:16. > :10:19.the story, it's a creative art, I can take some of what I want from
:10:20. > :10:24.history, some of its real and some of it not, I do not know enough
:10:25. > :10:28.about the Priory of Sion to savour a bag that is true or a hoax, I have
:10:29. > :10:34.no idea. At the time I wrote the book I believed it was true. Has
:10:35. > :10:38.your ideas and further research change your mind in any way? Gonna
:10:39. > :10:45.that hasn't, I have moved on from that story and left it behind. It is
:10:46. > :10:50.important, I am not trying to convince anyone of an idea, I am
:10:51. > :10:54.trying to write an enjoyable book which gets people talking. If people
:10:55. > :10:58.decide to believe the story then great, if they decide to say it's
:10:59. > :11:02.just a thriller and crazy talk that is fine too. It's just intended to
:11:03. > :11:08.get people thinking about why they believe what they believe. The idea
:11:09. > :11:13.fake news now is absolutely germane to the conversation, how do you know
:11:14. > :11:17.what is true and what is false? But do you or do you not believe there
:11:18. > :11:26.is truth that in falsehoods and we as human beings has a duty to
:11:27. > :11:30.differentiate? I believe we do as historians. As creative novelists we
:11:31. > :11:35.have the duty to get people to go and ask questions about their own
:11:36. > :11:43.sources. That brings me back the latest work, Origin. At its heart is
:11:44. > :11:51.this figure who is perhaps an hour just to some of the great kick gurus
:11:52. > :11:59.of our time, Elon Musk or whoever, he believes he has unlocked the
:12:00. > :12:08.secret to how life began. The essence of what we are. In the end,
:12:09. > :12:12.if I am reading the book correctly your conclusion seems to be there is
:12:13. > :12:19.a truly scientific explanation for life, it is out there, somebody has
:12:20. > :12:27.got the secret. So science wins in your view. It is funny, every
:12:28. > :12:31.religion has a creation story that involves a supernatural power of
:12:32. > :12:38.some sort. To basically say what if life just happens, that is enormous
:12:39. > :12:43.implications for religion. If we don't need God, if we do not need a
:12:44. > :12:47.creator... That is what I am driving at and that is why I lead you
:12:48. > :12:51.through this question, what do you believe, are you able to tell me
:12:52. > :12:58.what you believe about for example where life began? Sure, coming
:12:59. > :13:00.through the process of writing this book and talking to physicists and
:13:01. > :13:05.microbiologists and reading about what is happening right now
:13:06. > :13:09.literally in the last two years, I personally believe the laws of
:13:10. > :13:19.physics are enough to create life. There is no God? I said I did not
:13:20. > :13:23.see that. If you ask me what I specifically believe, I no longer
:13:24. > :13:28.believe in the God of my childhood, IDT sending his son dying to be
:13:29. > :13:34.crucified for my sins. But if I lie out under a starlit sky I feel there
:13:35. > :13:38.is something a lot bigger than us. I don't know what it is, I don't have
:13:39. > :13:48.a word for it. I would not presume to try to describe it. It's hard to
:13:49. > :13:51.take that step into atheism. I am moving in that direction but for me
:13:52. > :13:57.in my life it is still hard to say there is nothing. Is it partly hard
:13:58. > :14:01.because you live in a society in the United States where it is quite
:14:02. > :14:06.difficult to be a public figure who says I am an atheist? You are right
:14:07. > :14:12.but it's getting easier to step out and say you know what... Is it, in
:14:13. > :14:17.America today? OK, today we have some strange things going on in
:14:18. > :14:23.America, I considered writing the Trump code but it was too
:14:24. > :14:29.unbelievable even for me. It's easy to smile but perhaps also easy to be
:14:30. > :14:33.alarmed, are you? Of course I am. One of the challenges with that
:14:34. > :14:39.religion is reading metaphor as fact, that's one of the big dangers
:14:40. > :14:44.of religion, to take metaphors like the story of Adam and Eve and see it
:14:45. > :14:47.as fact, not only can you not ridicule it and we will debate if we
:14:48. > :14:52.will teach you to children and that is where it a problem. Other aspects
:14:53. > :15:00.of the public debate where people increasingly have questions about
:15:01. > :15:07.expert opinion and its validity, climate change for example. At the
:15:08. > :15:10.top of the government are people deeply sceptical about what appears
:15:11. > :15:19.to be the consensus science on climate change. Do you see that as a
:15:20. > :15:24.trend which could take us human beings into dangerous place? I do
:15:25. > :15:29.and it has less to do with science and more to do with politics. I
:15:30. > :15:33.think if the politics favoured global warming taking place them
:15:34. > :15:37.global warming would be taking place. I entirely believe global
:15:38. > :15:41.warming is a major issue for all of humanity and it's astonishing to me
:15:42. > :15:45.that it remains, that there are questions at the upper levels of
:15:46. > :15:49.government, it is amazing to me. Another theme in this book and I
:15:50. > :15:53.suspect something you are personally interested in is artificial
:15:54. > :16:00.intelligence. In some ways you appear to be close to believing the
:16:01. > :16:11.next phase of evolution will involve human beings somehow transforming
:16:12. > :16:17.with the help of machines. I am not close to believing it, I believe it.
:16:18. > :16:21.Explained. If you look at how we live now, we carry little computers,
:16:22. > :16:25.they will be part of us, they already are, we cannot function
:16:26. > :16:33.without our little machines. Hearing aids will be implanted. Scientists
:16:34. > :16:37.disagree if this is good bad, some believe the power of artificial
:16:38. > :16:42.intelligence will save us and solve global issues of scarcity and
:16:43. > :16:47.overpopulation. Others believe it will kill us, that we as a species
:16:48. > :16:53.have never created a weapon, are never created a technology we have
:16:54. > :16:57.not weaponised. Fire, cooked food but went on and burned down in
:16:58. > :17:02.neighbouring villages, nuclear power turned into weapons. We would be
:17:03. > :17:05.naive to think there will not be a dark side to artificial intelligence
:17:06. > :17:10.but I am an optimist and tend to think there is more love than hate
:17:11. > :17:13.in the world and we will learn how to use artificial intelligence
:17:14. > :17:21.Brigade. Rodney asked about how you write, because you unlike some
:17:22. > :17:28.extraordinary successful thriller writers do not churn out novel after
:17:29. > :17:30.novel after novel. We know of some writers who almost have writing
:17:31. > :17:35.factories where they have assistance to help them with plotlines and to
:17:36. > :17:41.develop the novel and then the master craftsman comes and policies
:17:42. > :17:47.it up, you're not like that at all. I have looked at the record, 4-6
:17:48. > :17:53.years pause between the release of the next epic tale. There is no
:17:54. > :17:57.pause, I am working the whole time. To research Origin took about a year
:17:58. > :18:03.and a half, read everything I could about artificial intelligence,
:18:04. > :18:08.criticism, modern art, enough to go to these locations and have
:18:09. > :18:12.intelligent conversations, I excused myself to the point I knew what to
:18:13. > :18:16.ask. These books are intricate and I want to make sure they are done
:18:17. > :18:21.right and it takes me forever. I'm a slow writer, I do not get it right
:18:22. > :18:23.the first time. I write scenes from many points of view to figure out
:18:24. > :18:30.how the scene is affecting each character. It's a pretty lonely
:18:31. > :18:34.life. It is, it's funny, we were joking that I is Ben four years all
:18:35. > :18:41.in the dark and then suddenly you are out in public, a in-your-face
:18:42. > :18:49.seen be fascinating. This is your moment in the daylight! Exactly! But
:18:50. > :18:54.in a funny sort of way that makes you public property and a public
:18:55. > :19:01.figure but somebody who is hardly ever around. Don't you ever have,
:19:02. > :19:05.even in this conversation you have said fascinating things about
:19:06. > :19:09.science and your concerns and your own country about your concerns
:19:10. > :19:13.about where humanity is taking itself and yet three years on end
:19:14. > :19:18.you are entirely silent. That is true I am putting all that into a
:19:19. > :19:22.novel to share with the world. I find it's the only way I can write
:19:23. > :19:27.because I don't like being influenced enormously by having to
:19:28. > :19:32.formulate my ideas in public before they are formed. Writing these books
:19:33. > :19:37.is how I figure out what I believe. I am not assuming anything about
:19:38. > :19:39.your politics but given what we see in American politics today don't you
:19:40. > :19:47.ever feel like playing perhaps a more prominent role in being a
:19:48. > :19:50.public voice, maybe some sort of conscience, using a platform to talk
:19:51. > :19:56.openly about what you see in front of you? I feel like I do that
:19:57. > :20:01.through these books. They reach an enormous portion of the population.
:20:02. > :20:05.I don't like to presume I have the answers. I liked our people raise
:20:06. > :20:08.the questions under five created even dinner time conversation is
:20:09. > :20:14.about important topics I've done our job. To get people to start venting.
:20:15. > :20:17.The real danger is when we just sort of think we believe something
:20:18. > :20:23.without really asking ourselves why we believe it. The second, for many
:20:24. > :20:27.of us, the second we ask why do I believe this we have to start to
:20:28. > :20:31.quantify and codify and articulate what it is you believe and you
:20:32. > :20:37.realise you do not believe it at all. That's a process which is most
:20:38. > :20:43.gratifying. Do you have a lot of strong core beliefs yourself? I do.
:20:44. > :20:47.I try to be fair and argue both sides of the question and the one
:20:48. > :20:52.thing which was fun about writing Origin is it felt like land had
:20:53. > :20:57.thrown off the shackles of bit and through the character of Edmund was
:20:58. > :21:04.able to say we are in a dangerous time into revolution and religion is
:21:05. > :21:09.bling a dangerous role. The positive role also about the dangerous role
:21:10. > :21:13.and the idea of having to shut down rational thought in order to be
:21:14. > :21:18.religious is extremely dangerous and I was able to come out and
:21:19. > :21:22.articulate that. Interesting that you are so fascinated by the role of
:21:23. > :21:28.religion and can see its dangers yet you are always, one has to say in
:21:29. > :21:33.the books from da Vinci code to Origin, you focus on Christianity.
:21:34. > :21:37.Why are you not, given the way the world works today and some of the
:21:38. > :21:40.other dangers we see arising out of some forms of religious belief why
:21:41. > :21:47.are you not addressing other religions? This book does address,
:21:48. > :21:51.Islam, Judaism and Christianity share the gospel and there are
:21:52. > :21:55.characters from all faiths. I just wonder if you led the same critical
:21:56. > :21:59.eye that you have led to Christianity to Islam for example,
:22:00. > :22:03.if you are fearful, mindful of what has happened to other writers like
:22:04. > :22:08.Salman Rushdie. It's not occurred because it's not something I would
:22:09. > :22:12.do, Christianity, I write these books to ask myself these questions
:22:13. > :22:16.and Christianity is my experience. It's the world that affect me most
:22:17. > :22:20.because it's how I grew up. These are my core values. I write these
:22:21. > :22:27.books in many ways for myself, to explore these ideas. That's why I
:22:28. > :22:32.continually choose Christianity. You just mentioned Robert Blanton and
:22:33. > :22:43.how he is cutting loose, would it be right to say that Professor Roberts
:22:44. > :22:47.Langdon with his travel and code breaking and of thing else is the
:22:48. > :22:52.guy you'd love to be? That is the best way to say it, he's the man I
:22:53. > :22:55.wish I could be, he is more daring and intelligent. Somebody once joked
:22:56. > :23:04.that how could he be more intelligent because he says
:23:05. > :23:08.everything you think. But then I pointed out when he says something
:23:09. > :23:13.off the top of his head about a painting, it took me three days to
:23:14. > :23:18.research that. How long can Langdon go on? He has tough luck and ends up
:23:19. > :23:25.in some pretty bad situation so I don't know! If I was him I might go
:23:26. > :23:31.home for a while. I think Langdon need a vacation and he might take
:23:32. > :23:40.one. You're now so well known for the series, could you see yourself
:23:41. > :23:44.as, still a young writer, just going into a different genre, writing
:23:45. > :23:50.something left field, that your stable audience would be completely
:23:51. > :23:57.be surprised by. I have some ideas I cannot possibly put out but sure. It
:23:58. > :24:03.is just between you, me and millions of years. I have some ideas for a
:24:04. > :24:07.book which would shock everyone, it's so far outside the realm of
:24:08. > :24:15.what I am known for. But it would be a lot of fun to write. Fiction?
:24:16. > :24:23.Nonfiction. You will come back when... I will, hopefully in a room
:24:24. > :24:25.as spectacular as this. Dan Brown we have to end it there but thank you
:24:26. > :24:30.very much for being on HARDtalk.