I’ve been maintaining Magdalene.org for twelve years now.  Much of that time it has been very, very little maintenance has been involved, as in, I haven’t been as attentive as I should have been.  One of the reasons for that is that it’s not easy to maintain a website that is entirely hand-made.  And by hand-made I mean that I’ve written all of the markup for it, all of the content for it, and have created most of the images for it, with the exception of the redesign done by my brother-in-law in 2005.

When I started Magdalene.org, it was well before the advent of blogging software.  Now that I’m familiar with WordPress from blogging The Magdalene Review, I’m liking how easy it is to add and maintain content.  Everything is stored in a database and is easily findable via search.  Not so with my static Magdalene.org site, which, although a labor of love, is more labor than it really needs to be, which makes me love it less.

Thus I’m seriously considering a merge of Magdalene.org and The Magdalene Review into a single site with a new format.  The Magdalene Review will go away, and all of my Mary Magdalene blogging will be under the auspices of Magdalene.org.  All of the current Magdalene.org content would live there.  And the gallery, which is currently a monstrous nightmare to build and maintain (which is why it has gone unfinished for so long), will be relatively easy to set up and grow.

I think the time has come for a shift in thinking about the way I manage my sites.  Since it’s just me working on these projects, I need to reduce the amount of “manual labor” involved so that I can focus more on content than presentation.

Yes, I think I really like this idea.  I wish it would have occured to me before I engaged in a major site redesign, but there is still no time like the present to make improvements.

It seems I’ve had no success in reviving this blog, in spite of my best intentions. Given that I’ve channeled the energy formerly devoted to my Mary Magdalene work into my day job, I’m left with little time or energy to pour back into this blog or Magdalene.org.

That problem aside, it occured to me today that *should* I begin any project for this blog in the near future, it would be interesting to survey and compare the state of Mary Magdalene culture and studies today versus when this blog was most active, as the Da Vinci Code craze was winding down.

Just as a parent who sees a child every day doesn’t appreciate his/her growth as much as an aunt or uncle who only sees the same child every two (three?) years, perhaps examining Mary Magdalene opinions after an interval of two years would be useful in some way.

How have things changed? What Magdalene discussions are occuring in academic circles today? Are they occuring at all? What about popular culture? How about Mary Magdalene “movement” devotees? What related web searches are being performed? What art has proliferated? What books have been written?

I, for one, would be interested in seeing the results of this sort of survey.

I’ve tried thus far to make it a point to avoid discussing much about my non-Mary Magdalene activities in this blog, because, well, it’s a blog about Mary Magdalene. But in light of my reduced posting frequency, I thought an explanation might be appropriate.

Actually, there are a couple of reasons for the lack of activity here. First, I’ve started a new job that doesn’t have the flexibility for posting during the day, and my evenings are usually devoted to the always-bouncing three-year-old in our house. There is always a period of adjustment when I start a new job until I find a place in my new schedule for Mary Magdalene work. I’m sure it will open up fairly soon.

Second–and this is probably the more relevant reason–I’m still suffering from a bit of Da Vinci Code burnout. It isn’t that Mary Magdalene or Biblical studies or Christian art are any less important to me than they were six months ago, it’s just that I feel like I’m hearing the same song on the radio every time I turn it on. That’s enough to tarnish even a favorite melody for a time.

In spite of my posting inactivity, I do have a couple of things that I’m working on. I’ve started collecting more personal stories about Mary Magdalene for what I hope will be a book-length project. I’ve also started gathering references and resources for a web page / essay about the recent gossip that Mary Magdalene was represented as pregnant in many famous works of art. As far as I know, this rumor started with Margaret Starbird, and it has always bothered me deeply. I think it’s a case of viewing works of art way outside of their intended context, so what I’m attempting to do is establish some context for people who might not be aware of it otherwise. My husband, Chris, has been conversing with some medieval costume historian-types to support me in this endeavor, so we have yet another list of titles to check out from the UW library. I’ve also been in touch with a few art and fashion historians myself, with mixed success.

My to-do list is growing stagnant and neglected (and you should see my email inbox!), so I’ll be trying to get down to more Mary Magdalene business soon!

I am working on a project that involves compiling personal stories about Mary Magdalene. In order to put together a piece that is representative of the many different views of Mary Magdalene in circulation, I’d like to interview as many people as possible. Here are some details:

• The interview will be via email, and could involve the exchange of a few messages in order to really understand personal experiences of Mary Magdalene.
• I’d like to get a real diversity of perspectives, including (but not limited to!) the following:
  • women AND men who are interested in MM
  • traditional Christian approach to MM
  • Da Vinci Code inspired interest in MM
  • non-Christians who belong to another major religion (Buddhist, Hindu, Muslim, etc.)
  • non-Christians who adhere to any other spiritual system
  • non-religious interest in MM
  • Gnostic, Holy Grail/bloodline, Holy Grail/sacred union, temple priestess, Beloved Disciple, etc. are all views that are welcome

Right now I am collecting email addresses from people who would like to participate. I’m going to sort through the responses and then get back to folks with my questions, but it should be relatively quick as I’m working on a short deadline.

If you would like to help out with this project by being interviewed, please write to interview@magdalene.org. Please include your email address and a brief message about your personal interest in Mary Magdalene.

Please feel free to pass this invitation around to anyone who might be interested, mailing lists, etc.

Rather than doing all of the things I should be doing, I decided to copy a table out of Raymond Brown’s book, The Death of the Messiah, that compares all of the people present for the crucifixion, entombment and emtpy tomb narratives across the four canonical gospels. It’s quite handy.

You can find the table here.

I am considering adding to this table as I have time, to include the lists of those present in these three scenes in non-canonical texts. It would add another dimension to the discussion, I think, particularly where pre-4th century texts are concerned. The Gospel of Peter and Epistula Apostolorum are two that come immediately to mind, and a variant present in one MS of the Diatessaron. Maybe it should include Gospel textual variants as well.

If I’m feeling really ambitious, I’ll make a table with this kind of comparison that includes the works of patristic writers, Gnostic texts, and non-canonical “orthodox” texts through the end of the 6th century. There were some odd variations floating around, and it might make for an interesting study.