Modern mythologies, an intellectual thread for the day

Soldato
Joined
29 Dec 2004
Posts
17,109
Location
Shepley
I've just finished reading Roland Barthes' Mythologies, which is a collection of short essays on myths in modern societies and is actually a very entertaining read. It is important to note that his modern myths aren't quite the same as a traditional myth: according to Barthes a myth is something in popular culture that comes to mean something beyond what that thing is itself. That sounds confusing but is really quite straightforward and is best explained by one of his examples, such as washing powder: he writes about how bleach-based washing powder comes to mean burning away dirt whereas detergent is equated with 'deep' cleansing of fabrics when both do exactly the same thing- clean clothes. It's a demonstration of the power of adverts that we are led to believe things that have little basis in fact and then agonise over a choice between them, with Barthes keen to point out that choice is often an illusion: in the case of washing powder, the two opposing brands he mentions are both Unilever products.

This got me thinking, since Mythologies is now just over 50 years old, what our contemporary myths are. Many of Barthes' originals are now outdated: for example, he writes about Greta Garbo as a modern goddess in the media, yet now we are more focused on debunking celebrity myths than creating them, with the rich and famous shown as more flawed than any of us. Myth is still very much alive today though in different forms: I would suggest Gordon Brown, who cultivates the myth that he is 'a safe pair of hands' in contrast to Blair's earlier myth of 'Cool Britannia'. Probably my favourite myth at the moment is the green movement- recycling does not just save the planet but you as a person, giving you a much higher horse than a non-recycler. Even sport has myths- in football, for example, a stocky defender is always a hard-man, whereas a skilful forward is seen as effeminate.

So, thoughts? What myths do you see in modern society?
 
Argh, bloody Roland Barthes! Had to study him at uni.

I was on the verge of chucking my textbook across the room at one point.
 
Even sport has myths- in football, for example, a stocky defender is always a hard-man, whereas a skilful forward is seen as effeminate.

You sure about that? I thought it was because they were pansies who fell over too much. ;)Hopefully people will understand I'm not being entirely serious here.

I don't know if this counts as a myth in the Barthes sense but when a female singer is newly on the scene she is frequently described as a "siren" or "pop princess" and then when the media begins to tire she becomes a "warbler" or similar even though nothing has changed aside from the fact the singer is no longer flavour of the month.
 
You sure about that? I thought it was because they were pansies who fell over too much. ;)Hopefully people will understand I'm not being entirely serious here.

I don't know if this counts as a myth in the Barthes sense but when a female singer is newly on the scene she is frequently described as a "siren" or "pop princess" and then when the media begins to tire she becomes a "warbler" or similar even though nothing has changed aside from the fact the singer is no longer flavour of the month.

That's a good one actually- the 'pop princess' tag never lasts long.
 
You think Barthes was bad? Try Louis Althussair. Love Althussair.

My understanding is it's basically semiotics applied to social situaitons. Items embued with more than anturaly occuring significance, entities layered with illogical layers of meaning, fetishism in its pure form.

Rememer folks, Sign + Signifier = Signified! :p
 
I... best explained by one of his examples, such as washing powder: he writes about how bleach-based washing powder comes to mean burning away dirt whereas detergent is equated with 'deep' cleansing of fabrics when both do exactly the same thing- clean clothes. It's a demonstration of the power of adverts that we are led to believe things that have little basis in fact and then agonise over a choice between them, with Barthes keen to point out that choice is often an illusion: in the case of washing powder, the two opposing brands he mentions are both Unilever products.

I am sorry but that makes zero sense to me.

Bleach = turns things white
Detergent = Clean dirt away.

With bleach, the dirt is still there, it's just now turned white where the detergent has washed it away.
 
I think Evangelion is "Cleanbluesky" by another name.

Interesting idea but the posting style doesn't seem all that similar, the views on immigration are rather different and I haven't seen any psychological experiments from him. That and cleanbluesky still posts here occasionally but I guess that doesn't prove too much in itself.
 
Cleanbluesky? :confused:

Mods, feel free to check my IP to confirm my bona fides. Was Cleanbluesky an Australian, like me?
 
Nope, he is/was English as far as I know, has a penchant for asking psychological questions to the members here (there was a running 'joke' of cleanbluesky's been on another course) and was rather opinionated in many debates - particularly on immigration. The main links are that you can both be rather verbose and he posts less now while you are posting more with a recent join date.
 
I was with you up untill the point you started giving examples. I don't think they were the best ones to use.

Do you have some more from the book?
 
I was with you up untill the point you started giving examples. I don't think they were the best ones to use.

Do you have some more from the book?

I've been trying to find some online but the book's quite recent so still under copyright, if I get time I can write some more up but I've got an essay due today so it'll be a little while.
 
Back
Top Bottom