Goddesses & Consorts at Altes Museum in Berlin: An Unsolicited, But Honest, Review

Written By Ilaria Viu

After visiting Goddesses & Consorts (Göttinnen & Gattinnen) at the Altes Museum in Berlin, I felt the need to share this review of the exhibition, as  it seemed a representative example of superficiality at best and purple-washing at worst.

The exhibition is presented as “a fresh look at the goddesses and heroines” of Ancient Greece and Rome.  “Myths can be adapted to the social environment, meaning that our interpretation of ancient objects always reflects our personal perspective. The special exhibition therefore deliberately approaches its protagonists from two perspectives: the ancient and the modern.” The presentation on the website then continues to say: “The images and myths are viewed against the background of the ancient world. They arose in a fundamentally binary and male-dominated society with corresponding role models. For women, this often entailed subordination. However, the mythological female figures adhere only partially to these norms.”

The final sentence sounded misleading, but it deepened my curiosity on this exhibition. Mythology offers endless opportunities to analyse how the stories we tell influence our culture and behaviours across different centuries. In this case, it seemed an ambitious but interesting goal to look at how it helped shaping gender roles expectations and the condition of women in society.

But unfortunately visiting Goddesses & Consorts turned out to be a relatively underwhelming experience. It lacked depth and critical reflection on the stories recounted, while jumping too quickly to reconsider the myths presented as positive narratives for today’s standards. In fact, this exhibition probably made me reflect more on how little effort and money is invested by our institutions, when it comes to encouraging meaningful conversations about the flaws of Western culture and societies

Between the Lines: Curatorial Words Are Important

The Goddesses & Consorts exhibition is included in the regular entry ticket for the Altes Museum and it is held in the very last room of the suggested visiting path. However, we can already find additional description panels from the exhibition next to some artworks in the permanent collection, that give us more context about the life of women of Greek and Roman societies. In fact, outside of the theme of this temporary exhibition, in the museum we do not find many references to women and their unique condition in society.

One exception is the wall text about The Symposium A Ritual of Greek Men, where we learn that during these drinking parties, men would discuss various topics such as philosophy and politics. They would also be amused by the presence of young women educated in the arts of entertainment and “prepared to render sexual services. As a consequence, the wives were excluded”. I find myself confused by this piece of information. Women in Ancient Greece did not have political rights or representation, hence I would expect the “wives” to be excluded a priori from an event were politics is discussed. Their lack of political rights is also confirmed in another brief mention of women in the permanent collection texts, where we learn that only men with full citizenship (alas excluding women, children, slaves and foreigners) could participate to the “Athenian democracy”. So, blaming the “young girls” for the lack of inclusion of women at the symposiums sounds quite unfair to me.

I hope that the Goddesses & Consorts additional panels will offer the visitors a clearer and more honest picture.

A first example of a new artwork label from the special exhibition that aims to correct the existing descriptions is found for the relief of Leda and the Swan. It says that the phrase “Zeus unites with Leda” in this case is inappropriate, because it suggests a consensual act. Instead, in the image we can see Leda turning away, therefore suggesting that it was sexual violence. Thus, the label says, as museum curators they need to think carefully about how to describe ancient myths.

Relief: Leda and the Swan, Altes Museum

I definitely appreciate the critical reflection on how words need to be carefully chosen, in particular when describing ancient myths. I just wished such care had also been spent throughout the rest of the exhibition. In other instances of the texts belonging to the Goddesses & Consorts exhibition, I can’t help but question the choice of language.

Next to Funerary Statue of a Woman So-called Berlin Goddess, there is another extra information panel related to the temporary exhibition. It informs the viewers that the woman represented in this statue, likened to Persephone, probably died before she could marry and have children, “which was an important life goal for women at the time”. This is a very interesting choice of words, specially for a project that aims to free the stories from the more prevalent male point of view. A life goal is usually understood to be a choice and a very much personal one. For some, it may be to marry and have children, but for others may as well not be. What we know is rather that this was what society expected of women, as we gather not only from mythology, but also other forms of records. It is a very simple change of words, it does not complicate the sentence - if simplicity of communication was the concern. But surely the message we get is quite different. The original one implies that women were intentionally choosing to fulfil that role, the other reports the context they lived in, without making assumptions about their individual will.

We find another example of a debatable choice of words at the Statue of Priestess Nikeso, where the Goddesses & Consorts side note says that “Women in Ancient Greece did not hold political offices as we know them today. But this does not mean that the lives of all women where limited to the household and caring for children. We now know that they played an important role in the cults of various deities […] and could be priestesses. This sentence seems to suggest that, despite political exclusion, life was not that bad for women after all. Women could become priestesses by inheritance or lottery and it was mainly available to those from aristocratic classes. So, even if it is true that being a priestess meant to hold a respected and prestigious role, this again was not simply a matter of choice.

At this point, all I can hope for is that in the actual exhibition will give more space to explore these topics on a deeper level and provide a more accurate context. So let’s get into it.

Meeting Mythological Women: I Bet Circe Was Also Smart

We finally enter the last room of the museum, a relatively small room with very little artefacts and statues on display. I am already disappointed, unfortunately the space was not given.

But my motto is quality over quantity, and I start reading the first introductory panel.

Half way through, it reads “Gender boundaries and roles were clearly defined in the ancient societies of Greece and Rome. In the myths, however, we find an openness towards these limitation that has often been overlooked” - I remind myself to breath in and I keep reading - “What is special is that there is no single correct version of the myth. Even in ancient times, different narratives could exist side by side. […] Even today, each of us can find our own approach to them, depending on our perspective”. I do not debate the opportunity to reinterpret the ancient myths and change them into more empowering narrative for women. Stories always had a fundamental role in the development of cultures and consequently the way we relate with each other as a society - this is at the base of my work. However, I do not agree can we can simply take these stories as they are and arbitrarily reinterpret them to suit our modern narratives, as something we prefer them to mean. This would be very simplistic, if not borderline revisionism. As Mary Beard more more clearly writes in her Women and Power, a book available for browsing in the exhibition: “Greek imagination […] has offered our imaginations a series of unforgettable women […]. They are not, however, role models - far from it. […] it is the unquestionable mess that women make of power in Greek myth that justifies their exclusion from it in real life, and justifies the rule of men”. Thus, the ancient myths do have a clear teaching and the way events take place do not leave much room for an interpretation that “depends on the personal or social circumstances”, like the curator is suggesting.

The exhibition introduces us to different mythological women, from Penelope, to Hera, to Aphrodite and more. All narrated in a very few sentences, that often leave me with more questions than when I entered.

For instance, all we are told about Circe is that she turns Odysseus’s companions into pigs, for what reason is not given to know. We do not learn anything about Circe herself, besides the fact that she is a “dangerous - albeit beautiful and seductive - woman”. “Circe was often demonised in modern times” - I would have expected in older ones too - “as an anti-male witch”. Then we are asked: “Do men fear a powerful woman?” - Sure thing - but why are they supposed to be wrong in this case is not clear. Purely based on the description shared here, I would be quite uncomfortable too in her presence.

Nevertheless, the mythical woman that probably is the most explanatory of the communicative shortcomings of this exhibition is Athena. The artwork label besides her statue tells us that she is armed, she does not marry, remains a virgin and supports her males protégés against powerful female opponents. It then asks the viewer “Does this make her an accomplished of male-dominated society? Or is she a beacon of empowerment for breaking away from traditional gender-specific roles?” - The first one, clearly. As it is written a few steps later on the next wall, Athena is the one who turns Medusa into a monster as punishment for losing her virginity, because the god Poseidon had raped her in one of Athena’s temples. As a monster, Medusa needs to be defeated and Perseus famously decapitates her and gives the severed head to Athena, who then wears it on her armour (as we can also see here on the goddess’s statue in the exhibition). However, this time we are not asked if we still consider Athena “a beacon of empowerment”. Are we asked to ignore the fact that Athena lets a rapist go unpunished, whilst blaming the victim for what is done to her? And instead reflect on whether to consider Athena a beacon of female empowerment just for wearing an armour?

Right: Athena, Left: Aphrodite, Goddesses & Consorts (Göttinnen & Gattinnen), Altes Museum

If we really have to find some flexibility in gender roles, it is easier to do so with the myth of Omphale and Heracles. We read that Heracles must serve Omphale as a punishment, performing “traditional ‘women’s work’”. He then falls in love with her and gifts her his lion skin and club. The exhibition presents some beautiful gemstones representing the couple, a sign of the popularity of this myth in ancient Rome. On this specific topic, the curator tells us in a social media video that “this shows that there was a kind of gender equality back then”. What even is a “kind of gender equality”? I thought there was only one kind of equality: equality. Of course this phrase did not go unnoticed, and many users critised negatively such choice of words in the comments. The museum’s social account replied to the these comments by saying that in the antique world there was no equality “as we understand today”. But because images of mythical women like Omphale “presented themselves as powerful women beyond traditional role - and this was accepted by a male society - from our perspective today, we can therefore see them as role models.”

As I finish my visit, I still do not understand, nor agree, with such insistence in asking us to see these mythical women as role models - male society permitting - as long as we do not know much about their stories.

Final Thoughts Before Leaving

The reason why I feel so compelled to write this unsolicited review is because the exhibition takes place in a state funded institution, which is, like any public museum, an integral part of the educational system of a community, by preserving and promoting art and history. Thus, we need to hold them to a higher standard.

When we consider the wider context this institution is placed, such as modern day Germany, the stats on gender inequality and violence are not very encouraging. In Germany, the average gender pay gap as of 2024 is 16%, with Berlin, where the museum is based, as high as 17%. Whilst violence against women is on the rise, with 360 women killed by men during 2023. In Berlin alone, every week on average two men kill their partners or ex-partners. However, Germany does not recognise femicide as a separate criminal offence, these gender-based crimes are just categorised as murder or manslaughter. At the same time, due to the country’s low investments, women refuge shelters lack 14000 spaces. Therefore, I cannot help but to draw the links between a lack of collective education on our engrained biases and the way women find themselves disadvantaged or even endangered in their daily lives.

I do not believe that such a superficial re-writing of ancient myths like in Goddesses & Consorts, by handpicking the parts that serve a specific intention, does any service to anybody, either women, men or gender non-conforming people. Just “reclaiming” narratives without first understanding what they really were intended for serves no purpose. These stories have been used for millennia to define strict gender expectations, to silence women and warn societies against them when in position of power. Thus, it appears to me this exhibition is trying to only give the impression that these institutions are somehow contributing to the conversation on gender equality. While at the same time, it functions as an excuse to avoid a meaningful critical reflection on our cultural dogmas and how the way we tell history can serve outdated established power dynamics. To quote Mary Beard in Women and Power once more: “there are not simple lessons for us in the history of the ancient world. […] That said, looking harder at Greece and Rome, helps us to look harder at ourselves to understand better how we have learned to think as we do”. Only by reckoning with the narratives we have inherited, we can decide which to keep and which to leave behind, so we can finally redefine on our own terms what an empowered heroine looks like.

Sources:

Ilaria Viu
Next

Witch Hunts and Women’s Rights: Why the Past Still Matters