Easter Egg Post
Updated: Apr 8
As my Easter gift to you, reader, I have decided to give you insight to how the Easter period has influenced my writing life. I am calling this an Easter Egg, because as I write this, my blog is inaccessible from the site and so if you find it? Bonus content! The drama of the Easter Story meeting the playfulness of egg hunts, and egg and spoon races, and daffodils and joy, for me is the perfect melting pot of life.
A young girl stands on a wooden box at the front of the stage. She delivers a speech detailing how Jesus washed the disciples’ feet at the last supper.
One of my earliest on stage experiences was due to the marriage of drama and religion – something actually reflected in my parents’ actual marriage – Dad a vicar, and mum was a drama teacher at the time. Every Easter, my brothers and I would join the ranks of Grandma’s dramatic group and tour churches across Bradford Diocese. The story was told through the eyes of both the named and the unnamed characters from the story – disciples, Mary Magdalen, Mary Mother of Christ, Innkeepers, a child helping to serve the Last Supper.
As the youngest member of the troupe, I was always in the role of the child serving at the last supper, Mary pregnant with Jesus or the child that Jesus called to him to make his point about childlike innocence needed to enter heaven. As you might imagine, young me was not impressed to be always side-lined – especially as my elder brothers got to be disciples. However, it did give me an appreciation for the power of the marginalised voice, and what it meant to give a platform to them.
Jesus would have no bowl of water to wash the disciples feet had my character not been the one tasked with bringing it.
It is not new to say that women’s voices have been sidelined to the domestic. The New Republic article here talks about the continuation of the ‘lady writer’ as if the fact that women writing about the domestic is a bad thing. If my Easter theatre experience taught me anything -the perceptions of the small voices around the big events are just as, if not more powerful, that the representation of the powerful men behind closed door. In my view, this idea that women should change their voice or style to be more ‘masculine’ is offensive. Why is it ‘small’ to show the effects of an attitude or political policy on the small scale – behind the closed door of the home?
That is not to stay that women should not tackle the big venues – just that critics and thinkers should broaden their view of what is important, what has impact, what changes the audiences. Sometimes those ‘minor’ characters create insight or instigate actions, without which the important moments could not happen.