[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
.Threatened with disappearance ifmeaning and the form, and consequently the distortion which theit yields to either of the first two types of focusing, it gets out ofone imposes on the other, I undo the signification of the myth, andthis tight spot thanks to a compromise-it is this compromise.I receive the latter as an imposture: the saluting Negro becomes theEntrusted with 'glossing over' an intentional concept, mythalibi of French imperiality.This type of focusing is that of theencounters nothing but betrayal in language, for language can onlymythologist: he deciphers the myth, he understands a distortion.obliterate the concept if it hides it, or unmask it if it formulates it.The elaboration of a second-order semiological system will enable3.Finally, if I focus on the mythical signifier as on an inextricablemyth to escape this dilemma: driven to having either to unveil or towhole made of meaning and form, I receive an ambiguousliquidate the concept, it will naturalize it.signification: I respond to the constituting mechanism of myth, toits own dynamics, I become a reader of myths.The saluting NegroWe reach here the very principle of myth: it transforms history intois no longer an example or a symbol, still less an alibi: he is thenature.We now understand why, in the eyes of the myth-consumer,very presence of French imperiality.the intention, the adhomination of the concept can remain manifestwithout however appearing to have an interest in the matter: whatThe first two types of focusing are static, analytical; they destroycauses mythical speech to be uttered is perfectly explicit, but it isthe myth, either by making its intention obvious, or by unmaskingimmediately frozen into something natural; it is not read as ait: the former is cynical, the latter demystifying.The third type ofmotive, but as a reason.If I read the Negro-saluting as symbol purefocusing is dynamic, it consumes the myth according to the veryand simple of imperiality, I must renounce the reality of theends built into its structure: the reader lives the myth as a story atpicture, it discredits itself in my eyes when it becomes anonce true and unreal.127 128 instrument.Conversely, if I decipher the Negro's salute as an alibi is enough.A more attentive reading of the myth will in no wayof coloniality, I shatter the myth even more surely by the increase its power or its ineffectiveness: a myth is at the same timeobviousness of its motivation.But for the myth-reader, the imperfectible and unquestionable; time or knowledge will notoutcome is quite different: everything happens as if the picture make it better or worse.naturally conjured up the concept, as if the signifier gave afoundation to the signified: the myth exists from the precise Secondly, the naturalization of the concept, which I have justmoment when French imperiality achieves the natural state: myth identified as the essential function of myth, is here exemplary.In ais speech justified in excess.first (exclusively linguistic) system, causality would be, literally,natural: fruit and vegetable prices fall because they are in season.Here is a new example which will help understand clearly how the In the second (mythical) system, causality is artificial, false; but itmyth-reader is led to rationalize the signified by means of the creeps, so to speak, through the back door of Nature.This is whysignifier.We are in the month of July, I read a big headline in myth is experienced as innocent speech: not because its intentionsFrance-Soir: THE FALL IN PRICES: FIRST INDICATIONS.are hidden - if they were hidden, they could not be efficacious - butVEGETABLES: PRICE DROP BEGINS.Let us quickly sketch because they are naturalized.the semiological schema: the example being a sentence, the firstsystem is purely linguistic
[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
