Reading Response 2 - Sept 16

1. The main points that Barthes is trying to make are; myth is a type of speech, a “system of communication”. Also, that myth is a metalanguage, something that is derived or based of other (or the original) language. Lastly, he points that myth is constituted by three things; a signifier (the physical form or how it is presented), the signified (the meaning or idea that is expressed), and the sign ( the total of the signified and the signifier). He makes it very clear that sign, even if it is indeed the sum of the first two terms, is still considered a third term and should be independent. Barthes illustrates many examples of myths, but he focuses on two particular ones. The first example is that of the magazine with a young Negro in a French uniform at its cover. The cover is a signifier, that France is a powerful, faithful Empire is the signified “France is a great Empire, that all her sons, without any color discrimination, faithfully serve under her flag”. The other example he illustrates is that of a Latin sentence; quia ego nominal Leo. The signifier is a sum of signs which come to be that his name is Leo. The signified is a grammatical example, and the sign is the relation between the signifier and the signified.

2. The paragraph that is most interesting to me is the fourth paragraph on page #2. It explains that semiology is the relationship between the physical form of a sign and the meaning that that physical form is trying to demonstrate. This paragraph first introduces the idea that there are three different terms in semiology; the signifier, the signified, and the sign. The text then presents the reader with two fascinating examples. These examples matched my attention because they made me understand what Barthes is trying to say in a way that is easy to imagine and put into our daily lives. He explains that if he uses many roses to signify passion, then the roses are not merely roses, and his passion is not only passion. The whole example is a composition that results in “passionified roses.” This example opened my eyes as I had never thought about something quite this way. A single thing, object, image, or signifier can take different meanings and overall be different things depending on what we make it signify. I find it interesting that we do this all the time in our day to day life, but I had never thought about it this way; I have never questioned it. It is something we do automatically. The second example he explains in this paragraph is that of a black pebble. It is just that, a black pebble, but it means different things depending on what we make it signify. It can be pebbles that kids use to play, or it can be something of much more importance like a death sentence (which is the example he gives). The signifier can not be changed; it is what it is, but the signified can change radically, and therefore the whole meaning of it changes, making it a sign. I find it both overwhelming and exciting how I had never thought of this before, but most importantly, how infinite is the amount of signs that are available for us to make and interpret.