Thoughts on Readings 4/1/09

Mythologies by Roland Barthes

In "Mythologies", Roland Barthes examines the creation of modern myths by modern society through the use of a commonly accepted social value system. Barthes lays out the fundamental principles of semiotics by using a series of "mythologies" (presented in individual essays) that cover a wide range of cultural practices, events, and objects that are given meaning by a system of social signs that are widely accepted by all. These "Myths" are conveyed through a form of discourse, that is they are not defined by the object of their message, but by the method in which the message is conveyed. This discourse is not confined to oral speech, as Barthes describes it:

"It can consist of modes of writing or of representations; not only written discourse, but also photography, cinema, reporting, sport, shows, publicity, all these can serve as a support to mythical speech. Myth can be defined neither by its object nor by its material, for any material can be arbitrarily endowed with meaning...". (p. 110)

I think that these concepts are illustrated in the best way in Barthes essay on the phenomenon of wrestling entitled "The World of Wrestling". In it, Barthes distinguishes between judo or boxing (which Barthes categorizes as a sport with rules and systems of fair behavior) and wrestling (which Barthes would describe as falling into the realm of theatre). Barthes explains the emotional "story" of the wrestling match which dictates clearly how the audience should feel. The protagonist is typically fighting a salaud (French term for "Bastard"), and his looks betray his role in the fight. He is unquestionably ugly, and to quote Barthes:

"Not only is ugliness used here to signify baseness, but in addition ugliness is wholly gathered into a particularly repulsive quality of matter....so that the passionate condemnation of the crowd no longer stems from his judgement, but instead from the very depth of its humours". (p. 17)

Barthes seems to think that the role of the semiotician is to recognize these myths and to expose or point out to us the carefully constructed nature of the images to which we attribute meaning. I kept thinking of the cultural differences at play in his writings and also the way in which the evolution of social behavior over time has changed the examples that Barthes uses to illustrate his points.

For example, in the essay on stripping called "Striptease", Barthes contends that the act of removing clothing is the erotic part of the entire process. He states that when the stripper becomes totally naked, the eroticism is immediately removed and we are looking at something non-erotic. Barthes states:

"The end of the striptease is then no longer to drag into the light a hidden depth, but to signify, through the shedding of an incongruous and artificial clothing, nakedness as a natural vesture of woman, which amounts in the end to regaining a perfectly chaste state of the flesh". (p. 85)

I kept thinking about how the "accoutrements" of stripping have changed so much since the late 1950's when Barthes was writing this essay. Back then, the striptease was an art form, with eloaborate costumes designed to transport the men to places of fantasy while they admired the female form. Now, stripping is much more about the naked bodies of the dancers (aside from tiny underwear and/or high heel shoes), not about creating a theatrical fantasy through a dance which slowly exposed the dancer.

I am reminded of the legendary Bettie Page, who passed away a few months back. She was a model who became the undisputed pin-up queen of the 1950's and 1960's, taking thousands of photographs and making many short films in different costumes that were elaborate creations of imaginative fantasy. She possessed an innocence that I think embodies what Barthes is referring to as the myth of eroticism. R.I.P., Bettie Page.

Here is Bettie at her best: