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, businesses and advertisers use myths to allow individuals to live day to day without considering all the true consequences of their actions. They construct myths to provoke or appease emotions. Essentially, myths simplify problems, suppressing our critical thinking in order to exploit the desired feeling. In his work Mythologies, Roland Barthes speaks of the nature of myth as being entirely based on semiology. It examines the tendency of societies to create myths in order to implement social values, to appease or persuade people. Applying Barthesian understanding of myth allows for a critical examination of the semiotics, motivations, and distortions that lie behind a message. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get the original essay Barthes asserts that myth is only a type of discourse: “a system of communication” (Barthes 107). Myth is the way a culture or person uses spoken or visual language to signify and make sense of the world around them. There can be no limit to what a myth can be, for it “is not defined by the subject of its message, but by the manner in which it expresses that message” (107). The myth is made up of a system in two parts, an “object language” and a “metalanguage” (114). The first is solely a linguistic system used to define relationships with the object it represents, while the second is a “second language” that references and then builds upon the original language object (114). This “second language” adds a cultural and historical worldview, creating a “mythic system” (114). Barthes defines the basic 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 has no other meaning than its objective existence, a simple dictionary definition. The signified 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, via 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 the sign as "meaning" in order to establish clear distinctions according to level of language to which he refers (115). In the creation of the myth, the form (the sign of the language object) is stripped of its meaning since it now becomes the signifier of the second system, in which a revisionist or “distorted” meaning is created (120). This model is repeated and constructed as the semiological chain of the myth progresses. In the linguistic system, the relationship between signifier and signified is "arbitrary" (124), however, if this same relationship is examined in myth, it is seen to be motivated by specific cultural histories and "analogies" (124 ). Barthes argues that there cannot be a myth without this “motivated form” (125). Furthermore, the myth is built on “adhomination”: it addresses the emotions of a culture rather than logic and reason (123). In fact, although it responds to emotion, the myth seeks to be interpretedas a fact: it “suspends itself, turns away and takes on the appearance of a generality” (124). This suspension allows it to create an impression of authentication, and to “impose itself” as the nature of things (124). Barthes uses the following example from a cover of “Paris-Match” magazine to demonstrate examples of “mythical discourse” (114-115). He first describes the sign of language which has today become the form of the mythical system: “a black soldier gives the French salute” (115). The concept of the cover is "a deliberate mix of French and militarism", while the meaning is 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 so-called colonialism than…to see this Negro serving his so-called oppressors” (115). This simple image hides many truths about colonialism. This sterilizes imperialism and allows society to create a myth that imperialists help improve the lives of those living under colonial rule. It is obvious why this manipulation of experiences is advantageous, hence its ubiquitous implementation throughout history. However, this myth does not exist permanently in history, in fact it is simply temporary because “there are no eternal ones” (108). They derive from history converted into language and thus reflect the “type of discourse chosen by history,” and not “the nature of things” (108). In other words, myths exist in a persistent state of metamorphosis, reshaping themselves to adhere to the culture and history in which they exist. Examining a modern myth, Apple's "Think Different" campaign, reveals how myth is used to manage and arouse emotions. The form: Grainy black-and-white film footage of historic and iconic visionaries flashes across the screen while slow piano music plays in the background, narrator Steve Jobs reads: To those who are crazy. The marginals. The rebels. The troublemakers. Round pegs in 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 vilify them. The only thing you can't do is ignore them. Because they change things. They advance the human race. Although some may consider them crazy, we see genius. Because the people who are 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. 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 managed to turn the purchase of a personal computer into a character-defining proposition. Using one of the founding concepts of myth, adhomism, 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, that you are a game-changer, that you can and go challenge the status quo, that you are an innovator, and you don't care if "ordinary" people think you are crazy because you know you are destined for greatness. Apple defines itself as a visionary, analogous to the dreamers, thinkers and prophets depicted in advertising. Apple makes you believe that in association with its product, you are one with Apple. Due to the structure of the myth, what is not seen is the history and meaning of the first-order sign: it does not recognize the struggles and :>.