Barthes and Mythologies

"To keep a spatial metaphor...I shall say that the signification of the myth is constituted by a sort of constantly moving turnstile which presents alternately the meaning of the signifier and its form, a language object and a metalanguage...Myth is a value, truth is no guarantee for it; nothing prevents it from being a perpetual alibi: it is enough that its signifier has two sides for it always to have an elsewhere at its disposal. Meaning is always there to present the form; the form is always there to outdistance the meaning." (Barthes, 123)

To Barthes, myth is a "sign" (combination of signified and signifier) with a unique relationship to its corresponding words, images, or other representations of objects (signifier); the objects that they refer to (signifier); and a larger body of meaning, which he calls "signification". Unlike other signs, myths can have many physical and visual representations; these "forms" point to higher-order, abstract concepts like "imperialism" or "colonialism" or "justice" that attain the status of myth because their meanings are ambiguous, powerful, "motivated" (as Barthes describes them), and connected to our historical and physical contexts. A myth is a representation with deep, often disputed meaning(s) embedded in social norms, activities, objects and ideas, and as I understand it, deeply related to our beliefs and assumptions. A myth is "speech stolen and restored" (125)

My reading of Mythologies leads me to understand Barthes as a kind of detective of meaning. He uncovers the power behind cultural practices and habits that we often perceive to be superficial and popular distractions. The activities of wrestling and striptease are embodiments of spectacles of justice and fear, respectively. Barthes also looks at why these activities have attained such predictability in their execution/performance, and reliability in how they amuse or titillate audiences. As myths, these activities are both capable of fulfilling certain expectations of how we think we should act and behave, and also capable of instilling a sense of fulfilllment (for example, in the witnessing of naked "sex" in striptease, or the thrill and catharsis of seeing someone "deserve" physical defeat in wrestling). What can be considered mythic in our contemporary world according to his analysis? What cultural symbols, activities or representations have meanings that might possess this contradiction of "obviousness" and ambiguity? Barthes seems to consider myths as representations of meaning that can communicate at an individual, personal level, and also at a level that functions in the realm of a "collective experience" or memory. Are myths culturally similar or dissimilar? Can certain types of myths be generalizable across cultures? In other words, do cultures have the same myths? Or same types of myths? How do myths enter and exit in historical relevance? What does it mean to be living in a world where we can continually inscribe meaning onto objects- physical, digital, biological- through recontextualization?

Here are a few quick myth mashups for you. I really couldn't think of anything else, right now, except for Che (sorry Che for more representational abuse- but I use these as illustrative examples). Are myths more or less powerful now because of the sheer number of mythic representations out there, or because now so many more people can repurpose mythic representations, thereby evoking (I speak for myself) mixtures of disgust, reverence, confusion?? As I look at the images below I wonder, how, and why?!?!