The purpose of this study is to devise a theoretical system that can account for various understandings of myth. The term myth carries disparate meanings. Roland Barthes explains myth in terms of semiology (semiotics), but Mircea Eliade understands myth as a certain type of narrative, namely, a cosmological narrative. I propose a relationship between Barthes's understanding of myth as a sign and the idea that myth is based on narration.; To account for mythic diversity, four ways of reading or understanding myth are elaborated: mythic reading, cultural reading, extra-mythic reading, and mythological reading. Mythic reading accepts myth as "truth," as it explains a "reality." The manifestation of the sacred as elucidated by Eliade highlights the experience of myth in a mythic reading. Cultural reading understands myth according to cultural conventions. In a cultural reading, a myth is a cultural symbol or practice. Extra-mythic reading approaches myth from outside a particular cultural context. Lacking a sufficient context, this reading cannot make sense of myth. Mythological reading deciphers myth, as it understands myth through a theoretical system.; Because it aims to formulate a comprehensive theory of myth, this study draws from a diverse set of illustrations: classical, contemporary, religious, and popular examples are included. Illustrations are drawn from four narratives of homeland: the Old Testament, Virgil's Aeneid, Julia Alvarez's In the Time of the Butterflies, and Anchee Min's Red Azalea . The texts are disparate, originating from different historical periods and diverse cultures. The ancient is represented by the Old Testament and the Aeneid. The contemporary is represented by the American texts In the Time of the Butterflies and Red Azalea .
展开▼