Myth Today by Roland Barthes
Myth Today, by Roland Barthes, was challenging to read as a whole. In my own opinion, Roland Barthes was analyzing the idea ‘myth’ and how it contributes to semiology, the parts that build up mythological speech and the functions of them, and finally, the role of myth to the public and to linguistic as a whole. Barthes used two examples throughout the passage: quia ego nominor leo and the young boy saluting poster on the cover of Paris- Match.
I think the two most challenging parts of reading are Myth on the Left and Deciphering Myth. I had no clues what are the difference between the two throughout reading them. The only similarity and differences I notice are the political aspect of myth. Therefore, I researched both of them and saw how politicians used myth approaching their purpose. The Stalin example in Barthes’s text shows the idea of “depoliticization,” and that is basically what Myth on the Left is all about. “above all, this myth is, in essence, poverty-stricken. It does not know how to proliferate... It lacks a major faculty, that of fabulizing.” I think it plays a role of ‘veiling the truth’: ‘Left-wing myth is always an artificial myth, a reconstituted myth: hence its clumsiness.’
On the other hand, Barthes listed three types of reading of myth that attracted me. He concludes that the first two ways are more analytical, and the third type is more dynamic. The third way is to focus on the mythical signifier, but will then receive an unclear meaning as a whole. The message signification will, therefore, be ambiguous. I think the third type of reading is a more usual way or familiar way. As readers, we won’t focus on linguistic and mythical strategies while reading, unconsciously, we will not be doing the action ‘decipher.’ Therefore, an ambiguous understanding of myth is common.
Comments