The name of Tracey's website's, Chapter 23, refers to the section of the error-riddled work of potboiler thriller fiction called
The DaVinci Code, which the spirits told her to read.
Page 17.
... for weeks Reg continued to repeat certain information and instruction "Read the Da Vinci Code" He'd been asking me to read the book since November. I had a fair excuse for not reading the book yet, no time, even though the spirits had practically handed the book to me, I just don't read books. "Okay Trace, you've read the beginning headed "Fact:" now read chapter 23" Chapter 23 really was an eye-opener, and possibly explains the reason why the spirits often spoke of Da Vinci .
In the cited novel, author Dan Brown makes a number of factually incorrect and internally self-contradictory claims about Leonardo Da Vinci and his work. Among these are that Leonardo (the name by which historians and artists know him, not "Da Vinci" which only refers to the town of his origin), was a "prankster" who inserted "hidden symbolism" and pagan messages into his paintings, like a mischievous schoolboy. For whom these messages were intended is never explained; it could not have been for the Priory of Sion (the overarching fictional organization behind much of the novel's plot) because its members already knew the "secrets" supposedly on display. it further staggers belief that Leonardo would have risked exposing himself and this magnificent secret information purely for the thrill of danger or for pushing the limits of what he could get away with, when he supposedly knew the homicidal lengths to which the Church would go to suppress these "secrets".
A second absurd claim is that Leonardo was a "flamboyant homosexual", which is not supported by any account of the man either from himself or by those who knew him. He might have been secretly gay, we'll never know, but he certainly was not "flamboyant" about it.
A third claim made by the pagan-leaning novel Tracey says the spirits wanted her to read is that one of Leonardo's paintings,
The Virgin of the Rocks, was so filled "with explosive and disturbing details" that it was rejected by the Catholic organization that had commissioned it. This claim contradicts the earlier claims of "hidden symbolism" which Brown asserts the artist placed into his paintings. If these messages were so "hidden", how could they have been recognized as "explosive and disturbing" by non-Priory members?
This kind of unsupportable, contradictory accusation goes on for the full text of Brown's awful novel. The book pushes an attack on the historical foundations of the Catholic Church and propounds the belief that Jesus never died nor was resurrected, but married Mary Magdalene after being taken down from the cross, and raised children with her. Maybe all that is true -- who knows? -- but that Tracey cites this anti-Catholic work of fiction as a touchstone for her imaginary spirits only underlines the fact that her entire enterprise here is based on falsehood and fiction.
and all will have a good laugh about it later 
