The Signification

*From Myth Today, a section of Roland Barthes' Mythologies

In the second order, the semiotic order, the signification (the joining together of the second order signifier and signified) qualifies as the myth. Myth holds two dimensions: form and concept. The form of the myth is based upon place and familiarity- holding a spatial dimension. The concept on the other hand, is less rooted to place and linked through associative relations.

The construction of myth is a construction based on deformation. The mythical signifier, also the linguistic sign, carries with it two aspects- its meaning and its form. History attaches itself to the meaning while the form in the secondary system remains empty. The concept distorts this history and transforms the signifier into a gesture- depriving it of memory but still keeping its existence.

Myth is a double system; its point of departure is constituted by the arrival of a meaning. A spatial metaphor shall say that the signification of the myth is constituted by a sort of constantly moving turnstile (Fig.1) which presents alternately the meaning of the signifier and its form.[1]

Myth Production at the mythological Myth Factory

or

Myth lurking for a sign to steal

According to Barthes, myth is speech stolen and restored. He uses this analogy about theft to remark on myth’s suspicious, or ‘out-of-place’ look. When something is stolen but then restored, it is put back in place but not its original “place”. It is this brief act of larceny, this moment taken for surreptitious faking, which gives mythical speech its benumbed look.[1]

“I saw Mr. jones today out walking his dog. Something about him seemed a bit different.”

Myth assumes a position and plays “the part”

---

---

[1] Roland Barthes, Mythologies (New York: Hill and Wang, 1957), 109.

Myth I

*Currently reading Roland Barthes' Mythologies. Barthes examines myth's presence among a wide range of topics in contemporary society. The first chapter gives a revealing and comical glimpse into the underlying mythology within the world of French pro-wrestling. The book is made up in two sections- the aforementioned chapters on random topics like French pro-wrestling and Myth Today, a discourse on what makes something a myth.

In Myth Today, in answering the question on what myth is- Barthes states “myth is a type of speech.”[1] He then goes on to make it clear that myth is a very particular type of speech- not any language can qualify- and that myth is a mode of signification, a form.

To understand what terms like signification or form referred to, a reading into Saussurean semiology was necessary. Saussure deconstructs language into its simplest module, the linguistic sign or the word. The word has a dyadic structure, meaning it is composed of two parts: the signified and the signifier. The signified refers to the concept or idea behind a word. The signifier then refers to the form that holds the signified.

For example, in reading this word:

D O G

In this case, the signifier is the letters D-O-G. Attached to these letters is the signified, which hopefully made you think of an image resembling a furry four-legged creature with a wagging tail. In making the word, or linguistic sign the signifier and signified come together through signification, giving meaning to the sign.

Fig. 1

It is interesting to note that signifiers have no value in themselves detached from their signifieds. Apart from the concept of a four-legged furry creature, the letters D-O-G have no value. These letters could very well be interchanged with the concept of a house, as Fig. 1 tries to explore- however, due to conventional attachment, this appears awkward at first glance. Progressive architecture has struggled with its own brand of semiology and especially throughout modernism has challenged architectural conventional signifiers (Fig. 2). This proves more difficult in the realm of building because architectural signifiers, unlike their linguistic counterparts, must be functional in the real. Though the concept of shelter can take on multitudinous varieties, it’s architectural signifier can only go so far.

Fig. 2

The creation of words demonstrates a first order language system. It is after the construction of this first order when myth can intervene. Once myth has acted upon the first order, it transforms the sign back into a signifier. Therefore, myth is composed of the first order language system and its own system (Fig. 3).

Barthes, Myhtologies, 115. Fig. 3

---

[1] Roland Barthes, Mythologies (New York: Hill and Wang, 1957), 109.