Barthes – Left Wing Myth vs. Right Wing Myth
Mythologies – Propaganda, Distortion of History, Political Influence
Sep 29, 2009
Myth as a political agency is one of the most important themes realized by Roland Barthes' notion of myth as a language-object (whether that language is oral, written, visual, aural, or perhaps even tactile). Mythical language is perfect for usage by politicians and political actors – while the mythical form may be depoliticized, the end product surely is not.
The presense of pre-valued signifiers and emptied forms is perfect for moulding a compelling alternate cultural narrative.
Right Wing Myth, Dominant Culture, Protection of Status Quo by Bourgeois Interests
Barthes' dedicates the latter portion of his book, Mythologies, to discussing the usage of myth by practitioners both on the left wing and the right wing – discussing the motivations for participating in this cultural permutation of ideas and concepts for entirely partisan ends.
In Mythologies, Barthes writes, “Statistically, myth is on the right. There, it is essential; well-fed, sleek, expansive, garrulous, it invents itself ceaselessly. It takes hold of everything, all aspects of law, of morality, of aesthetics, of diplomacy, of household equipment, of Literature, of entertainment. The bourgeoisie wants to keep reality without keeping the appearances … the oppressed is nothing, he has only one language, that of his emancipation; the oppressor is everything, his language is rich, multiform, supple … The oppressed makes the world, he has only an active, transitive (political) language; the oppressor conserves it, his language is plenary, intransitive, gestural, theatrical: it is Myth.”
Barthes illuminates the strength of language, particularly mythical language, in maintaining power over the oppressed. Myth can, and commonly is, used to manufacture demand for a litany of unnecessary consumer products.
Myth is used to denigrate and marginalize political opponents – images and advertisements portraying recreational drug users and the homeless as hardened, dangerous “criminals” whom are a drain on society, to provide an example.
Myth Removes History to Arms Length, Views it as Influential Arsenal
Myth is used, according to Barthes, in whatever fashion it must be used by the right wing to protect the interests of the upper class by whatever means necessary – though the use of a nuanced art such as mythical language is more insidious and subtle than more physical methods.
Myth, because it is adept at the impoverishment of history, becomes a privatized tool in the hands of the bourgeois myth-maker. In the form of the myth, a propagandist is able to rewrite history to suit his political end.
Barthes says that, “Myth deprives the object of which it speaks of all History. In it, history evaporates. It is a kind of ideal servant: it prepares all things, brings them, lays them out, the master arrives, it silently disappears: all that is left for one to do is to enjoy this beautiful object without wondering where it comes from. Or even better: it can only come from eternity: since the beginning of time, it has been made for bourgeois man, the Spain of the Blue Guide has been made for the tourist, and 'primitives' have prepared their dances with a view to an exotic festivity.
"We can see all the disturbing things which this felicitous figure removes from sight: both determinism and freedom. Nothing is produced, nothing is chosen: all one has to do is possess these new objects from which all soiling trace of origin or choice has been removed. This miraculous evaporation of history is another form of a concept common to most bourgeois myths: the irresponsibility of man.”
“Myth” on the Left, Contesting the Status Quo, Revolution and Rebellion
For Barthes, Myth does not truly exist on the far left. The struggle between the right and left, ideologically speaking, becomes a Marxist struggle between establishment and individuals, bourgeois interests versus the emancipation of the oppressed producers, myth and manufacture versus revolution and bare speech.
With regards to the struggle between the marginalized, revolutionary segments of society at conflict with the hegemony of the bourgoisie, Barthes draws the line at the distinction of honesty, as he writes, “The bourgeoisie hides the fact that it is the bourgeoisie and thereby produces myth; revolution announces itself openly as revolution and thereby abolishes myth.”
This is not to say that Barthes denies that the Left wing uses mythical language whatsoever. For him, the left uses myth in instances as a tactic, as a vehicle for delivering a pointed political message or to shed light on acts of hypocrisy or logical fallacy.
Since the dominant culture is a capitalist one, and because the investor and business class continues to define normative culture by maintaining an iron grasp on the status quo, left wing myth is not an overarching structure of imposed morals and codes of behaviour so much as a commentary and rejection of these structures.
Barthes says, “Yes, myth exists on the Left, but it does not at all have there the same qualities of bourgeois myth. Left-wing myth is inessential. To start with, the objects which it takes hold of are rare – only a few political notions – unless it has itself recourse to the whole repertoire of bourgeois myths … there are no 'Left-wing' myths concerning marriage, cooking, the home, the theatre, the law, morality, etc. Then, it is an incidental myth, its use is not part of of a strategy, as is the case with bourgeois myth, but only of a tactic, or at the worst, of a deviation; if it occurs, it is as a myth suited to a convenience, not to a necessity.”
More on Roland Barthes Mythologies and the Notion of Mythical Language
Readers may also enjoy a discussion what exactly constitutes a myth or mythic language and an examination of the three types of engagement with myth, and how myth is disseminated.
Source: Barthes, Roland. Mythologies. Vintage Classics, 2009.
 |
