Without myth, who would we be; what would we believe? Myths shape culture and history; they manipulate our beliefs, surround and transform our lives. Governments, leaders, companies, and advertisers use myths to allow individuals to live day to day without considering the full true consequences of their actions. They construct myths to provoke or calm emotions. In essence, myths simplify problems, depriving us of our critical thinking to exploit the desired feeling. In his work Mythologies, Roland Barthes speaks of the nature of myth as based entirely on semiology. Examines the tendency of societies to create myths to implement social values, appease or persuade people. Applying Barthes' understanding of myth allows for a critical examination of the semiology, motivations, and distortions behind a message. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essayBarthes claims that myth is simply a type of speech: “a system of communication” (Barthes 107). Myth is the way a culture, or a person, uses spoken or visual language to signify and give meaning to the world around them. There can be no limits to what a myth can be, since it “is not defined by the subject of its message, but by the way in which it utters this message” (107). The myth is made up of a two-part system, an “object-language” and a “metalanguage” (114). The former is exclusively a linguistic system used to define relationships with the object it represents, while the latter is a “second language” that references and then builds on the original object-language (114). This “second language” adds a cultural and historical worldview, thus creating a “mythic system” (114). Barthes defines the basic constituent elements of the linguistic system as the signifier, the signified and the sign, the sign being the “associative total” of the signifier and the signified (111). The signifier is given no meaning other than its objective existence, a simple dictionary definition. The meaning begins as an intangible concept until it merges with the signifier and a sign is formed. (111). But the linguistic system is only the first link in an infinite semiological chain. It is the linguistic fusion with the “metalanguage” that facilitates the myth (115). Barthes defines metalanguage, or second language, through the same ternary structure, with two exceptions. While the three components – signifier, signified and sign – retain their original definitions, Barthes now refers to the signifier as “form”, signified as “concept” and sign as “signification” to make clear distinctions at the level of language at which he makes reference (115). In the creation of the myth, the form (the sign of the language-object) is stripped of its meaning as it now becomes the signifier of the second system, in which a revisionist or “distorted” meaning is created (120). This pattern repeats and consolidates as the semiological chain of the myth progresses. In the linguistic system, the relationship between signifier and signified is “arbitrary” (124), however, if the same relationship is examined in myth, it is seen to be motivated by cultural histories and specific “analogies” (124). Barthes argues that myth cannot exist without this “motivated form” (125). Furthermore, the myth is built on “taming”: satisfying a culture's emotions, rather than logic and reason (123). In fact, despite addressing emotion, the myth tries to be interpreted as a fact: “it suspends itself, turns away and takes on the appearance of a generality” (124). This suspension allows him tocreating an impression of authentication and “establishing” itself as the nature of things (124). Barthes uses the following example of a “Paris-Match” magazine cover to demonstrate examples of “mythical speech” (114-115). He first describes the sign of the linguistic system, which has now become the form of the mythical system: “a black soldier gives the French salute” (115). The concept of the cover is “a purposeful mix of Frenchness and militarism,” while the meaning becomes that France is a nation of tolerance and inclusiveness, where even those living under colonial rule are patriotic. “There is no better response to the detractors of alleged colonialism than…with this Negro in the service of his so-called oppressors” (115). This simple image hides many truths of colonialism. Sterilize imperialism and let society create the myth of helping imperialists improve the lives of those living under colonial rule. It's obvious why this manipulation of experiences is beneficial, hence its ubiquitous implementation throughout history. However, this myth does not exist permanently in history, in fact it is merely temporary since “there are no eternals” (108). They derive from history being converted into language, and therefore reflect the “type of discourse chosen by history”, not “the nature of things” (108). In other words, myth exists in a persistent state of metamorphosis, reshaping itself to fit the culture and history in which it exists. An examination of a modern myth, Apple's “Think Different” campaign, reveals how myth is used to manage and evoke emotions. The form: Grainy black-and-white film images of historic and iconic visionaries scroll across the screen while slow piano music plays in the background, narrator Steve Jobs reading: Here's to the crazy ones. The misfits. The rebels. The troublemakers. The round pegs in the square holes. Those who see things differently. They don't like rules. And they have no respect for the status quo. You can quote them, disagree with them, glorify them, or denigrate them. The only thing you can't do is ignore them. Because things change. They push the human race forward. While some may see them as crazy, we see them as geniuses. Because the people crazy enough to think they can change the world are the ones who do (Jobs, Think Different). At the end of the video the words “Think Different” appear on the screen. The concept: the idea of ​​uniqueness, standing out from the common ones. The meaning: The ad is as simple as it is profound, proving to be a defining moment for what was then a beleaguered computer company, Apple successfully turning the purchase of a home computer into a character-defining proposition. Using one of the myth's core concepts, domination, Apple appeals to the emotions of its audience by defining what it means to own a Macintosh: it tells the world that you are bold, a game changer, you can and will challenge the status quo, you are an innovator, and you don't worry if "common" people think you're crazy because you know you're destined for greatness. Apple defines itself as a visionary, analogous to the dreamers, thinkers and prophets depicted in advertising. Apple makes you believe that by associating with their product you are one with Apple. As a consequence of the myth's structure, what you don't see is the history and meaning of the first-order sign: it fails to recognize the struggles and hard work that it took for these rebels, misfits, and troublemakers to achieve greatness. The myth empties their journey, “distorts,” and even embellishes their life story (120). This revisionist history communicates to the viewer that through the purchase of an Apple product you will become like those in the video; regardless of who you are. Therefore, Apple uses the fusion of a form and a concept:>.