“Mythology Today” by Roland Barthes from The Rustle of Language

Introduction: “Mythology Today” by Roland Barthes

“Mythology Today” by Roland Barthes, first published in 1957 as part of the collection Mythologies, was translated into English by Annette Lavers in 1972, is an academic essay in the field of literary and cultural studies. Barthes expands on his earlier work in Mythologies, where he introduced the concept of myth as a second-order semiological system that naturalizes cultural and historical phenomena. In “Mythology Today,” he delves deeper into the mechanisms of myth-making and its implications for contemporary society. The essay is significant as it marks a shift in Barthes’ approach from a structuralist analysis of myths to a more dynamic and critical engagement with their political and ideological functions. It highlights the importance of demythologizing dominant narratives and challenging the naturalization of cultural ideologies.  

Summary of “Mythology Today” by Roland Barthes

Heading	Explanation	Quoted Phrase
Contemporary Myth as Collective Representation	Contemporary myth functions as a collective representation, reflecting societal values and norms through various media such as press, advertising, and mass consumption. This concept, closely related to Durkheimian sociology, highlights how myths serve as a mirror of the social determinations and ideologies prevalent in society.	“Myth, close to what Durkheimian sociology calls a ‘collective representation,’ can be read in anonymous statements of the press, advertising, mass consumption; it is a social determinate, a ‘reflection.'”
Inversion of Culture into Nature	Myth transforms cultural, social, and ideological constructs into perceived natural phenomena, masking their origins as products of societal and class divisions. This inversion makes these constructs appear as inherent truths and common sense, obscuring their contingent and constructed nature.	“Myth consists in turning culture into nature, or at least turning the social, the cultural, the ideological, the historical into the ‘natural’: what is merely a product of class division and its moral, cultural, aesthetic consequences is presented (stated) as a natural consequence.”
Discontinuity and Insidious Nature of Modern Myth	Modern myths have become discontinuous, fragmented into discourses and stereotypes rather than extended narratives. Although traditional myths may seem to have disappeared, their remnants persist in subtle and pervasive ways, making them all the more insidious in contemporary society.	“Contemporary myth is discontinuous: it is no longer stated in extended, constituted narratives, but only in ‘discourse’; at most, it is a phraseology, a corpus of phrases (of stereotypes); myth disappears, but the mythic remains, all the more insidious.”
Semiological Correction of Mythic Inversion	Semiology corrects mythic inversion by breaking down messages into two semantic systems: an ideological connoted system and a denoted system that naturalizes class propositions. This decomposition helps reveal the underlying class interests masked by myths, allowing for a clearer understanding of their societal impact.	“Contemporary myth issues from a semiology which permits the ‘correction’ of mythic inversion by decomposing the message into two semantic systems: a connoted system whose signified is ideological and a denoted system whose function is to ‘naturalize’ the class proposition.”
Unchanged Nature of Myth and Its Analysis	Over the past fifteen years, the nature of myths and their analysis has remained largely unchanged. Myths continue to be pervasive, anonymous, and fragmented, existing on a different time scale from political history and remaining subject to ideological criticism and semiological dismantling.	“Has anything changed? Not French society, at least on this level, for mythic history is on a different time scale from political history; nor the myths, nor even the analysis; there is still a great deal of the mythic in our society.”
Shift in the Science of Reading and Myth Analysis	The science of reading has undergone significant changes over the past fifteen years, transforming myth into a different object of study. This shift requires new approaches to understanding the role and function of myths in contemporary society, reflecting advancements in the field of semiology.	“What has changed in the last fifteen years is the science of reading, under whose scrutiny myth, like an animal long since captured and observed, nonetheless becomes a different object.”
From Demystification to Semioclasm	Semiology has shifted its focus from demystifying myths to challenging the structure of signs and meaning. This approach aims to perturb the representation of meaning itself, moving beyond uncovering latent meanings within mythic statements to fundamentally questioning how meaning is constructed.	“It is no longer the myths which must be unmasked (the endoxa now undertakes that), but the sign itself which must be perturbed: not to reveal the (latent) meaning of a statement but to fissure the very representation of meaning.”
General Theory of the Language of Writing	Myth should be integrated into a comprehensive theory of the language of writing and the signifier. This theory, informed by ethnology, psychoanalysis, semiology, and ideological analysis, must extend its scope to include sentences and utterances, acknowledging the pervasive presence of mythic elements in all forms of communication.	“Myth in fact must be included in a general theory of the language of writing, of the signifier, and this theory, supported by the formulations of ethnology, psychoanalysis, semiology, and ideological analysis, must extend its object to take in the sentence, or better still, to take in sentences.”
The Task of the New Semiology	The new semiology must move beyond simply reversing mythic messages to creating new objects of study. This shift involves generating new starting points for semiological analysis, aiming to advance the field in line with broader scientific and theoretical developments, ultimately fostering a deeper understanding of myth and its implications.	“The new semiology is conscious of its task: no longer merely to reverse (or to correct) the mythic message, putting it right side up, but to change the object itself, to engender a new object, point of departure for a new science.”

Literary Terms in “Mythology Today” by Roland Barthes

• Myth:
  • Definition: A second-order semiological system that transforms history into nature.
  • Explanation: Barthes defines myth as a mode of communication that naturalizes cultural and historical phenomena by emptying them of their specific meaning and imbuing them with a universal and timeless quality.
• Signifier, Signified, Sign:
  • Definition: The basic components of a semiological system.
  • Explanation: The signifier is the material form of a sign (e.g., an image, a word), the signified is the concept or idea it represents, and the sign is the combination of both. Barthes uses these terms to analyze how myths manipulate signs to create ideological messages.
• Denotation, Connotation:
  • Definition: The literal and associative meanings of a sign.
  • Explanation: Denotation is the primary, dictionary meaning of a word, while connotation is the secondary, cultural meaning associated with it. Barthes argues that myth works by distorting the relationship between denotation and connotation to naturalize its ideological message.
• Mythologist:
  • Definition: The creator or perpetuator of myths.
  • Explanation: Barthes introduces this term to describe those who consciously or unconsciously create and disseminate myths. He emphasizes that mythologists are not necessarily malicious; they can be anyone who participates in the cultural production of meaning.
• Demythologization:
  • Definition: The process of exposing the ideological mechanisms of myths.
  • Explanation: Barthes advocates for demythologization as a critical practice that involves uncovering the hidden meanings and ideological functions of myths. He argues that this process is essential for challenging dominant narratives and promoting social awareness.
• Metalanguage:
  • Definition: A language used to describe or analyze another language.
  • Explanation: Barthes employs metalanguage in his essay to dissect the semiological structure of myths and reveal their underlying ideological messages. He uses linguistic tools to examine how myths manipulate language and meaning to naturalize their ideological content.

Contribution of “Mythology Today” by Roland Barthes in Literary Theory

Heading	Contribution
Understanding Myth as Collective Representation	By positioning myth as a collective representation, Barthes offers a framework for examining how societal norms and ideologies are reflected and reinforced through everyday media and communication.
Inversion of Culture into Nature	This concept helps in deconstructing how myths naturalize and legitimize social and cultural hierarchies, making them appear as common sense, thereby providing tools for ideological critique.
Fragmented Nature of Modern Myths	This insight emphasizes the need for continuous vigilance and analysis of everyday communication, as myths persist in subtle and pervasive forms, influencing public opinion and behavior.
Semiological Approach to Myth Analysis	By using semiology to analyze myths, Barthes provides a methodological tool for dissecting how language and signs are used to perpetuate ideologies, enhancing critical reading and interpretation skills.
Consistency of Myth and Its Analysis	This recognition underlines the enduring relevance of myth analysis in understanding contemporary social dynamics and the persistent influence of myths in shaping societal values.
Evolution in the Science of Reading	This shift encourages scholars to adopt new theoretical frameworks and methodologies in literary theory, fostering innovation and deeper insights into the analysis of texts and cultural phenomena.
From Demystification to Semioclasm	This perspective broadens the scope of literary theory to include a more profound interrogation of language and signs, enhancing the critique of cultural and ideological constructs.
General Theory of the Language of Writing	By integrating myth into a general theory of writing, Barthes provides a comprehensive framework for analyzing the interplay between language, signs, and myths, enriching the field of literary theory.
Task of the New Semiology	This vision encourages ongoing development in literary theory, promoting the creation of new methodologies and theoretical approaches to better understand and critique the role of myths in society.

Examples of Critiques Through “Mythology Today” by Roland Barthes

• The Great Gatsby (F. Scott Fitzgerald):
  • Critique: Barthes might argue that Gatsby’s pursuit of the American Dream is a myth that naturalizes the idea of social mobility through wealth accumulation. The novel reinforces this myth by romanticizing Gatsby’s rise from poverty and his extravagant displays of wealth, thus emptying them of their historical context and imbuing them with a timeless quality. This obscures the social inequalities and injustices that underpin the American Dream.
• The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn (Mark Twain):
  • Critique: Barthes could analyze the portrayal of Jim, the escaped slave, as a potential site of mythologization. While the novel challenges racist stereotypes, it might also inadvertently reinforce them by depicting Jim as a simplistic, childlike figure whose primary concern is his own freedom, rather than a complex individual with agency and desires. This could be seen as a form of myth-making that reduces Jim’s character to a set of signs that signify his subservience and dependence on white characters.
• Heart of Darkness (Joseph Conrad):
  • Critique: Barthes might examine how the novel’s portrayal of Africa as a “dark continent” perpetuates a myth of European superiority and justifies colonialism. The depiction of African characters as primitive and uncivilized serves to reinforce this myth and naturalize the idea of European dominance over other cultures. This can be seen as a form of mythologist discourse that uses language and imagery to construct a distorted reality that serves the interests of the colonizers.
• Jane Eyre (Charlotte Brontë):
  • Critique: Barthes could analyze the novel’s portrayal of gender roles as a potential site of myth-making. While Jane challenges traditional expectations of women, the novel ultimately reinforces the myth of romantic love as a solution to female empowerment. Jane’s happiness is contingent upon her marriage to Rochester, suggesting that her independence is ultimately subservient to her romantic fulfillment. This could be seen as a form of connotation that attaches a specific meaning to the sign of female empowerment, limiting its potential to challenge patriarchal structures.

These are just a few examples of how Barthes’ “Mythology Today” can be applied to critique literary works. By exposing the hidden ideological messages and cultural myths embedded in these texts, we can gain a deeper understanding of their social and political implications, and engage in the process of demythologization.

Criticism Against “Mythology Today” by Roland Barthes

Suggested Readings: “Mythology Today” by Roland Barthes

1. Allen, Graham. Roland Barthes (Routledge Critical Thinkers). Routledge, 2003. https://www.routledge.com/Roland-Barthes/Allen/p/book/9780415253832.
2. Barthes, Roland. A Barthes Reader. Edited by Susan Sontag, Hill and Wang, 1982. https://us.macmillan.com/books/9780374521394.
3. —. Camera Lucida: Reflections on Photography. Translated by Richard Howard, Hill and Wang, 1981. https://us.macmillan.com/books/9780374532338.
4. —. Image-Music-Text. Translated by Stephen Heath, Hill and Wang, 1977. https://us.macmillan.com/books/9780374521363.
5. —. Mythologies. Translated by Annette Lavers, Hill and Wang, 1972. https://us.macmillan.com/books/9780374521509.
6. —. The Pleasure of the Text. Translated by Richard Miller, Hill and Wang, 1975. https://us.macmillan.com/books/9780374521608.
7. —. The Rustle of Language. Translated by Richard Howard, University of California Press, 1989. https://www.ucpress.edu/book/9780520066295/the-rustle-of-language.
8. —. Writing Degree Zero. Translated by Annette Lavers and Colin Smith, Hill and Wang, 1968. https://us.macmillan.com/books/9780374521394.
9. Culler, Jonathan. Roland Barthes: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford University Press, 2002. https://global.oup.com/academic/product/roland-barthes-a-very-short-introduction-9780192801593.
10. Lavers, Annette. Roland Barthes: Structuralism and After. Harvard University Press, 1982. https://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674779050.

Quotations with Explanation from “Mythology Today” by Roland Barthes

Quotation	Explanation
“Myth consists in turning culture into nature.”	This quote encapsulates Barthes’ central thesis in “Mythology Today.” He argues that myths transform cultural phenomena into natural ones, making them appear self-evident and unquestionable. This process serves to legitimize and perpetuate existing power structures and social inequalities.
“Myth is a second-order semiological system.”	This concept expands on Saussure’s theory of semiology, which posits that signs are composed of a signifier (the form) and a signified (the concept). Barthes argues that myth adds a second layer of meaning to this system, where the original sign becomes a signifier for a new, broader concept. This allows myth to function as a powerful tool for ideological manipulation.
“Myth is discontinuous: it is no longer stated in extended, constituted narratives, but only in ‘discourse.'”	This observation reflects the changing nature of myth in the modern era. Barthes argues that myth is no longer confined to traditional storytelling forms, but has become fragmented and dispersed throughout various forms of media and communication. This makes it more difficult to identify and critique, as it operates on a subliminal level, shaping our perceptions and values without our conscious awareness.
“The world, taken obliquely by language, is written, through and through.”	This statement underscores the pervasive nature of language and its role in shaping our understanding of reality. Barthes suggests that language not only represents the world but also actively constructs it. This has profound implications for the study of myth, as it highlights the importance of analyzing the linguistic and semiotic structures through which myths are created and propagated.
“Faced with the world’s writing systems, the tangle of various discourses, we must determine levels of reification, degrees of phraseological density.”	This quote emphasizes the need for a critical approach to the analysis of language and discourse. Barthes calls for a deeper understanding of the ways in which language can be used to solidify and naturalize social constructs. By examining the “phraseological density” of different discourses, we can identify the degree to which they are embedded in ideological systems and serve to maintain existing power structures.
“Myth in fact must be included in a general theory of the language of writing, of the signifier.”	This statement broadens the scope of Barthes’ analysis of myth beyond its traditional association with narrative and folklore. By situating myth within a broader framework of language and semiotics, he opens up new avenues for exploring its functions and effects in various cultural and social contexts. This approach has been influential in fields such as literary criticism, cultural studies, and media studies.