Myth, Ideology and Lies

Take a look around. The world is glowing with messages. Messages that more often than not tend to address us, influence us, command or persuade us to act. The nature of the act can be very broad, but this does not change the fact that people are under the influence of the Message 24/7.


1. What Is Ideology? The term ‘ideology’ was first used by German movement called ‘the Enlightenment’, in the end of the eighteenth century, and meant ‘the study of systems of ideas’, because suffix ‘-ology’ means ‘study of’. But Karl Marx together with Friedrich Engels changed the meaning of the word, in their theory of class struggle. According to that theory, the ruling class favors best those ideas which preserve best its own property and power by persuading everybody else that things are just fine as they are and that the ideas, values and frame of mind which suit them so well, suit everybody else at the same time. The ideology which Marx saw at the heart of capitalism was the form of political and moral valuation summarized earlier in liberalism. In other words, according to Marx, ideology encourages us to buy and work unquestioningly, creating a false consciousness, as if putting ideas in our heads, persuading us to do something. This was the birth of ideology as we see it nowadays [3].


         In other words ideology can be found almost in every aspect of our everyday life: watching television, going shopping, reading a newspaper or even looking at advertisements in the street, it is the influence of a medium, a very strong force in the right hands. All these activities can influence a person’s mind in one way or another, and not always in a positive way. The one person, who was particularly critical of ideology, was Theodor W. Adorno of the Frankfurt school. He used the terms ‘mass culture’ and ‘culture industry’ in his works, thus emphasizing the high level of influence one (in our case – the advertiser) may have. Adorno argued that if someone possessed this kind of power, he will try to dominate other people’s minds in order to gain even more power, and not to liberate the society.


         Adorno argued that under capitalism all production is for the market; goods are produced not in order to meet human needs, but for the sake of profit, for the sake of acquiring further capital [1].


         As was mentioned before, ideology is present almost in every aspect of our life, including the media. According to Adorno and Horkheimer, the culture, and media in particular is under monopoly nowadays, which is not concealed, but open and powerful. Their point of view is that movies, radio, music are no longer art, but just business made into ideology in order to justify the rubbish they deliberately produce. They also argue that the step from telephone to radio eliminated all individuality, for radio subjects all listeners to programs which are exactly the same or it would be correct to say, to one program.


         Adorno and Horkheimer see the media industry as a factory, which manufactures a product, making money. In order to make their product successful, media companies classify and organize the consumers into groups, targeting them with different products, depending on what the groups needs are. Consumers are even divided by income groups, according to what kind of product they will be interested in and would be able to afford. Adorno’s view on the subject is extremely negative; he refers to movie stars, producers, technology used in creation of a film and even to the introduction of psychological formulas as parts of a mechanism, a machine that delivers entertainment to consumers. People are called ‘helpless victims’ to what is offered to them, and ideology is what enslaves them. According to Adorno and Horkheimer, the producers would not even consider shooting a film if the script is not based on a best seller novel.


         Adorno and Horkheimer question every possibility of existence of individuality in the media industry. In the culture industry the individual is an illusion not merely because of standardization of the means of production. He is tolerated only so long as his complete identification with the generality is unquestioned. Pseudo individuality is rife: from the standardized jazz improvisation to the exceptional film star, whose hair curls over her eye to demonstrate her originality. What is individual is no more than the generality’s power to stamp the accidental detail so firmly that it is accepted as such. The defiant reverse of elegant appearance of the individual on show is mass-produced like Yale locks whose difference can be measured in fractions of millimeters. The peculiarity of is a monopoly commodity determined by society; it is falsely represented as natural. [4] This is the way in which Adorno and Horkheimer saw ideology to function in the media industry.


         2. What Is Mythology? Myth, as Roland Barthes, a French semiologist and one of the most prominent figures in the studying of signs, sees it is a figure of speech; it is a system of communication, or simply a message. Myth is a form of signification. Barthes argues that anything can be myth, because it is not defined by the object of its message, but by the way in which it utters it. In other words, something becomes myth only when we want it to become myth, when we give meaning to it. If we use a word giving it a meaning for a long period of time, myth becomes historical. It is even safe to say, that all myths have historical foundation, because humanity has a long history, and no one except humans can create myth, turn something in to myth. History can also suppress myths if they are not useful anymore. Barthes argues that…


… one can conceive of very ancient historical myths, but there are no eternal ones; for it is human history which converts reality into speech, and it alone rules the life and death of mythical language. Ancient or not, mythology can only have an historical foundation, for myth is a type of speech chosen by history: it cannot possibly evolve from the nature of things. (p. 110, Barthes, 1974)


Another important moment is that a figure of speech is not necessarily speech, words and sentences. Different actions can be seen as figures of speech and become myths. For example, in 17-18^th centuries in Russia people used to throw a glove on the floor in front of another person, or hit his face with it thus calling him on a duel. This can also be seen as a figure of speech. Even objects can become speech as long as they mean something to us. This also has historic basis: long before the invention of actual writing people used pictures as speech, as a mode of communication.


Barthes also argues that myth is a delusion, a lie which should be exposed. Myth can be read in two ways: it can be denoted, when the actual meaning is seen, and it can be connoted, when deeper cultural meaning is understood.


         Myth takes semiotics to the next level, becoming a second-order semiological system. In myth there is a signifier (acoustic image), a signified (which is the actual object), but in myth the signifier is language, which already consists of signifier and signified. The signifier in myth is at the same time a meaning and a form. As meaning, signifier already has a denotation, but as form it also needs a deeper understanding, richness as Barthes calls it. 


         3. Case Study. Let’s turn to a particular example in order to analyze and understand how mythology and ideology work, how these theories help us read media texts. The Absolut Russia advertising for Absolut vodka is particularly interesting in terms of mythology and ideology. The prints (see Figure 1) are taken from Russian weekly magazine Itogi, which is a business magazine. What first comes to mind is Adorno’s concept of labeling and dividing consumers in groups. Itogi, being a business magazine, is targeted at businessmen and upper-class people, and Absolut vodka advertisement fits in because Absolut is rather expensive vodka and considered a posh drink in Russia, so the advertisement is targeted at people who can appreciate and afford the product.


         The advertisement shows bottle-shaped objects in traditional Russian settings, like Vasiliy Blazhenniy cathedral in Moscow, Neva River in St. Petersburg, or frozen plains of the northern Russia, which are associated with traditional Russian way of life, with beauty and grace of the country, with how different it can be. Myth is anything that tells a story, and in this case, the campaign tells us about how great and beautiful, deep and graceful Russia is. What we see on the pictures is just panorama shots of cities and places in Russia, but on the level of myth it has a deeper narrative. It is always pleasing for a Russian person to see and hear such things, for most of the Russians are very fond of their country, and this is another ‘hook’ of the campaign.


         The advertisements don’t show the bottle itself, only a reminder of how it looks, so that the product is not associated with drunkenness and the consumer does not realize what is being advertised straightaway, but only in a couple of seconds, already looking down at the caption he realizes what is being advertised. So, the person looking at the images sees the symbols of graceful Russia, which was always associated with vodka, and only after that he realizes that Absolut vodka is what actually is being advertised.


 


         Another element of the campaign is that it is connected to certain places in Russia, like cities and regions (Yekaterinburg, St. Petersburg, etc), and people from these cities may be attracted to the product not because they like it, but because their home town was mentioned in the advertisement, which is a quite strong tool in the campaign. I, myself being from Yekaterinburg felt rather affected by this move, although I did not realize it straightaway. The caption ‘Absolut St. Petersburg’ is trying to trick the consumer into believing that the product is made especially for his city. So the advertisement impersonates with people from different parts of Russia, thus making them believe it is made especially for them. It is Adorno’s theory of Pseudo individuality that is at work here.


         The phrase ‘Absolut Russia’ can also be seen as myth, for at first sight it just has the name of the product and its origin in it, but if we apply mythology it is apparent that it suggests that Russia is absolute, a leader in production of vodka, which again will work for Russian people better than the others because we are very fond on our culture and traditions. Including traditions in making vodka.


         Shaping different objects in a form of a bottle can also be read mythologically. At first glance it is just a move to attract attention, but if we apply mythology, it suggests that there is more to Absolut vodka than just drinking. It is about living an interesting life, life full of splendor. It may also suggest that the person who drinks Absolut vodka is a sophisticated and intelligent person, not just a regular vodka-drinker. He seeks enjoyment and quality when he is choosing his drink. A simple bottle-shaped object can tell so much, and people often do not even realize that they were tricked, for according to Barthes, myth is a lie.


         Thus, there are several mythological and ideological features in the Absolut Russia campaign, which can be seen to function quite effectively. The campaign tricks us, the consumers into believing and thinking something, that is actually not true, which is the main feature of ideology. Adorno and Horkheimer were very critical of these methods of affecting people’s minds, but I must admit that they are very effective if used by a skilled person or group of people. Mythologically reading the campaign we can see that myth is really a lie, as Barthes put it, and that it tricks us in a sense that there is more to the image that meets the eye. More than half of the advertisement’s success lies within the borders of ideological and mythological features, which work very well together, giving the advertiser a very powerful tool to manipulate consumers indirectly.


References
[1] Adorno, Theodor W., The Culture Industry: Selected Essays on Mass Culture, Routledge, 1991
[2] Barthes, R., Mythologies, Jonathan Cape, 1974
[3] Inglis, F., Media Theory: An Introduction, Blackwell Publishers, 1990
[4] Halaws, Joanne et al (eds.), The Film Studies Reader, London: Arnold, 2000
(http://www.absolutad.org/russia/).

Kuznetsov Alexander ,
25.02.2009. Views: 3191

COMMENTS