Databáze uměleckých výstav v českých zemích 1820 – 1950

The exhibition of Anna Costenoble in Prague in 1896 was the first to present this artist in Prague. It caused a scandal, with commentators debating whether explicit depiction of nudity and sexuality were socially acceptable.

Anna Costenoble was a German painter and printmaker. Born in 1866 in Danzig, Germany, she began her studies under the painter Karl Gussow in Munich in 1883. From 1888, she continued in Berlin under Franz Skarbina, a co-founder of the Berlin Secession movement. During her professional career, she also illustrated books, creating, among other works, illustrations for Penthesilea: Ein Frauenbrevier für männerfeindliche Stunden (Penthesileia: A Woman's Breviary for Man-Hating Moments) by the German feminist author Leonie Meyerhof.

In Prague’s Topič Salon, Costenoble exhibited her series Tragedy of the Woman, presented as part of an exhibition of graphic art. This exhibition, held in the autumn of 1896, also featured landscapes, nude studies, and a painting entitled Modern Man. Although this was a graphic arts show, Costenoble’s series consisted of five oil paintings depicting the deepest feelings of a young woman, likely a result of the artist’s self-reflection.

The first painting, Young Woman’s Longing for Love, "takes place on a virginal spring morning in the meadow of the lost Paradise." [-Hlaváček 1896, p. 77] In 1900, it was exhibited as part of the annual exhibition of Fine Arts Association.

The second painting, entitled Pure Happiness of True Love, depicts two naked figures in a passionate embrace, which Karel Hlaváček described as "two beautiful naked bodies embracing each other with all five senses" [Hlaváček 1896, p. 78]. The third painting, Despair, a Burning Longing for the Distant One [sometimes referred to as Desperate Burning Love], was described by Teréza Nováková as "the most brutal of the whole cycle." Nováková compares the scene to a line from Goethe's poem Only Those Who Know Desire from Wilhelm Meister's Apprenticeship, which reads: “I feel giddy, my vitals are aflame” [es schwindelt mir, es brennt mein Eingeweide; Lota 1896, p. 15]. In the third painting, the woman comes to the Realization that Happiness is Coming to an End – it is a “hyperrealist expression of the woman’s fear of future abandonment" [Lota 1896, p. 15]. The whole cycle was concluded with the painting entitled The Downfall of a Woman Who Sacrificed Everything to Love. The painting depicts a woman plunging from a cliff into a deep valley, and a male figure in the upper plan, bathed in sunlight.

Another painting in the series, The Feeling of Motherhood, was excluded from the exhibition because of its explicit depiction of nudity. An anonymous reviewer described this decision as unfortunate, as the painting was seen as the culmination of Costenoble’s work. [Anonymous author 1896a, p. 35] Teréza Nováková also noted in her article that the absence of this painting made the entire concept of the series difficult to understand. The context of the series is best illustrated by Costenoble’s poem, also titled the Tragedy of the Woman, which was published in the magazine Moderní revue after the opening of the exhibition in 1897 [Hlaváček 1897]. That same year, Costenoble showcased the Tragedy of the Woman series at an exhibition in Berlin, followed by another exhibition in Dresden two years later in 1898. While the series gained significant popularity among the public, art critics were less enthusiastic, deeming it too provocative due to its sexual content. In Prague, the controversy escalated to the courts, where Costenoble and Moderní revue, which publicly endorsed her paintings, were sued for offending public morals. In his article for Moderní revue, Karel Hlaváček asserted, “This is not a creation of a moronic, prudish, academic brain; here, the soul once again manifests its life” [Hlaváček 1897, p. 77].

Other Prague critics dismissed Costenoble’s series as “a daub that they have brought to Prague from Berlin.” [Anonymous author 1896b, p.] Aside from the journal Volné směry, which was also critical of the paintings, Eliška Krásnohorská desribed the entire series as a caricature and an insult to femininity [Krásnohorská, p. 134].

In contrast, Karel Hlaváček expressed regret over the rejection of Costenoble’s works. He wrote: “Quite predictably, the herd could not face Costenoble’s paintings […]. What I did not expect was that not even a shred of understanding would be found among what has been so hyped in our country in recent days and what repeatedly claims to be young, Czech painting.” [Hlaváček 1896, p. 79] In response to the negative criticism, Costenoble decided to also publish the original engravings for the series, namely in the magazine Ver Sacrum in 1899 and in Bildner Kunst a year later. Through this series, Anna Costenoble presented her interpretation of the modern woman – one bound by desire and unfulfilled love but willing to defy societal conventions or even end her own life. Costenoble’s protagonist represents a stark contrast to traditional ideals of chastity and submissiveness; however, she is not the mysterious femme fatale commonly associated with decadent art. This portrayal ignited strong reactions among reviewers in the press. Costenoble was criticized for depicting the woman as merely a beautiful being who experiences desire, only to ultimately face demise. Some commentators argued that this representation of the "modern woman" regressed society to a state reminiscent of ancient times, comparing Costenoble’s character to Eve who loves and desires until she is expelled from paradise and dies. The series was expected to be an “example of the greatest sensation in Berlin’s decadent art” yet it ultimately divided both the professional artistic community and the general public into two opposing camps. [Anonymous author 1896a] While the artistic vision was undoubtedly decadent, Costenoble seemed to overlook the century-long movement aimed at empowering and elevating the female spirit. This divergence of opinion raised important questions about the nature of modern art and the potential decline of decadent art, as well as broader concerns regarding female sexuality and femininity in general. [Heczková - Pachmanová - Šámal 2014, p. 116].

Kamila Červinková

Works Cited

Anonymous author 1896a: Anonymous author, Výtvarné umění, Zlatá Praha XIV, 1869, no. 3, 27. 11., pp. 35–36 

Anonymous author 1896b: Anonymous author, Feulleton: Kulturní listy, Čech XXVIII, 1896, no. 280, 5. 12., pp. 1–2  

Hlaváček 1897: Karel Hlaváček, Tragédie ženy (Cyklus obrazů Anny Costenoblové), Moderní revue V, 1897, pp. 77–79, 119

Lota 1896: Lota [Teréza Nováková], Tragédie ženy a jiné obrazy Anny Costenoblové, jež byly vystaveny v Saloně Topičově, Ženský svět I–II, 1896, no. 1, 20. 12., pp. 14–16

Heczková – Pachmanová – Šámal 2014: Libuše Heczková – Martina Pachmanová – Petr Šámal, Jako odlesk měsíce v jezeře: česká teorie a kritika umění v genderových souvislostech1865–1945, Praha 2014, p. 116

Further Reading

Karel Mašek, Tři léta s „Mánesem“, Praha 1922, pp. 56–57

Tragédie muže, Šípy IX, 1896, no. 50, 28.11., p. 8 [satirical reaction to the exhibition, il. Karel Krejčík]

čka, Tragédie ženy [satire], Humoristické listy XXXVIII, 1896, no. 48, 27.11., p. 2

Anonymous author [Karel Čapek?], Z Topičova Salonu, Národní politika XIV, 1896, no. 319, 19.11., p. 2

Fra Tito, Výtvarné umění, Naše doba IV, 1896, p. 250, 254

Eliška Krásnohorská, Z nových směrů a proudů, Osvěta XXVII, 1897, no. 2, p. 134