Written By: Mariela Brown
In recent decades, the publishing industry has overseen the tremendous proliferation of female-centred mythological retellings. Feminist revisionist mythology has been a key cornerstone of second-wave feminism, as we started to see the reframing of various traditional tales in the 1970s and 1980s. But is the current literary trend a tired fad reaping the benefits of over-commercialised feminism? Or does it satisfy a long, unquenched thirst for female perspectives in hyper-masculine mythology? Either way, it is a commercial and political force to be reckoned with.
There is a common misconception that feminist revisionist mythology is a relatively new phenomenon, perhaps due to the arguable oversaturation of this subgenre we’re currently experiencing. Most credit the recent trend of reimagined Greek mythology to Margaret Atwood’s Penelopiad (2005) and Ursula K. Le Guin’s Lavinia (2008), but many other works, such as Angela Carter’s The Bloody Chamber (1979) have attempted to dissect patriarchal power-imbalances in the retelling of classic stories. The present form of feminist revisionism arose from second-wave feminism, when society’s understanding shifted from seeing patriarchy as a purely legal leviathan to acknowledging a more insidious and intangible patriarchal social force. Consequently, this extended to scrutinising the depiction of women in media, including women in traditional stories that have a more complex authorship or origin. Women in Greek myth often epitomised textbook misogynistic stereotypes like the salacious adulteress, Helen of Troy, or the chaste and devoted wife, Penelope. Feminist revisionism allows the author and the reader to approach the archetypal mythological woman from a refreshingly critical angle.
Due to the political nature of feminist revisionism, many controversial accusations have been levelled against such retellings. Some commentators argue that they are inherently anachronistic. Most Greek myths were intentionally devoid of morality to serve an allegorical purpose promoting hierarchy, militarism, and religious observance. In a recent article in the New Statesman, Finn McRedmond asserted, “It is difficult to extract honest feminist parable from stories written in a world that wouldn’t recognise the concept. Admonishing the Iliad for being un-feminist is rather like criticising a horse for not being able to juggle.” McRedmond suggests these books feed into a deeper trend of ‘marketable feminism’, where women are crudely inserted into narratives that are paradoxical to historical reality, for the sake of ‘political correctness’.
Moreover, the popularity of these books in the publishing industry could be due to their easy marketability and lack of nuance. Classics has always been a subject rife with elitism and Eurocentrism, and these narratives do little to dispel that issue. Despite a small number of stories from other cultures, like Vaishnavi Patel’s Kaikeyi (2022), and Sue Lynn Tan’s Daughter of the Moon Goddess (2022), most popular retellings still promote the view of a universal female struggle in the European classical context. They are stories of wealth, royalty, and white feminism but set in the melting-pot of ancient imperial Greece. This is not as inclusive as the publishing industry likes to pretend. This new era of feminist revisionist mythology proves to be a high-profit, low-risk endeavour with minimal marketing costs. It is the perfect addition to post-Fordist consumerism.
Nonetheless, in her essay, When We Dead Awaken, Adrienne Rich writes, “Re-Vision—the act of looking back, of seeing with fresh eyes, of entering an old text from a new critical direction— is for women more than a chapter in cultural history: it is an act of survival.” Despite its arguable descent into shallow commercialism, this literary movement is a byproduct of one of the most salient eras in the history of feminism. Following second-wave feminism was an eruption of female writers who were willing to critically engage in the modern world or the fantastical ancient one. To argue that female perspectives in Greek mythology are historically inaccurate is to foolishly suggest that women did not exist in the ancient world. McRedmond‘s argument rests on the misogynistic idea that such retellings are trying to combat; that female characters in ancient Greek mythology should know their place and remain confined to permanent erasure for the benefit of their male counterparts. Ironically – especially in the case of revisionist fiction – critics will accept gods, sea monsters, and cyclopes as reasonable plot points, but not a female character with agency and a nuanced perspective.
Although ancient Greece was undoubtedly a deeply oppressive place for women, the study of Classics has also traditionally been dominated by elite, white men. This is finally changing, and the study of this subject has moved away from its androcentric roots on both a mythological and historical level. Continuing this positive trend requires the cultivation of more diverse access points and this should include the promotion of revisionist literature. We have a long way to go to make the study of classics more inclusive, but feminist reimaginings of these myths are one of the many helpful mechanisms we have to achieve this. By being easily accessible, they attract a young and loyal audience and remove the traditional associations with misogyny and elitism.
Ultimately, most of Greek mythology exists due to the pre-eminence of a rich and strong oral tradition. In the Homeric era, bards would entertain guests and sing long renditions of legendary myths to their audience. One day, someone wrote it down and made it their own. As with the Greeks, the Romans, the Byzantines, and all later descendants of humanity, we have changed our favourite stories according to our needs and based on the lessons we believe we should learn. Feminist revisionist mythology may be in its commercial epoch, but female perspectives have always existed. Now women are finally the bards, but the stories they are telling remain just as familiar as they did thousands of years ago.
Bibliography
McRedmond, Finn. 2023. “The ancient Greeks will never be feminists.” The New Statesman, June 22. https://www.newstatesman.com/comment/2023/06/ancient-greeks-feminists-women.
Plate, Liedeke. 2008. “Remembering the Future; or, Whatever Happened to Re‐Vision?” Signs 33 (2): 389-411. doi:https://doi.org/10.1086/521054.
Riche, Adrienne. 1972. “When We Dead Awaken: Writing as Re-Vision.” College English 34 (1): 18-30. doi:https://doi.org/10.2307/375215.
Shaffi, Sarah. 2023. “Two sides to a story: why feminist retellings are filling our bookshelves.” The Guardian, March 24. https://www.theguardian.com/books/2023/mar/24/two-sides-to-a-story-why-feminist-retellings-are-filling-our-bookshelves.
Retrospect Journal 