"Myth is neither a lie nor a confession: it is an inflexion"

Roland Barthes, in describing myth as “neither a lie nor a confession: it is an inflexion,” points to the subtle and complex nature of myth's operation in language and culture. Myth, in Barthes’ semiotic analysis, is not simply a falsehood to be discarded, nor is it a plain admission or direct representation of fact or feeling. Instead, myth is a mode of signification, a way of bending or modulating meaning without entirely transforming or obscuring the original sign.

A lie is a conscious distortion, an intent to deceive; a confession, on the opposite end, aims for transparency, laying bare truth or emotion. Myth occupies a middle territory, where meaning is redirected and nuanced. By referring to myth as an “inflexion", Barthes adopts a grammatical metaphor: just as the inflection of a word modifies its function or meaning (as from “run” to “runs” or “running”), myth modulates the meanings of the cultural signs it adopts. It takes an existing sign, something with its own straightforward denotation, and subtly overlays new connotations. The sign does not vanish but is tilted toward a different ideological or cultural function.

Such inflection is subtle and often goes unnoticed by those within the culture. Myth naturalizes meaning, making constructed ideas or values seem self-evident. An image, a phrase, or a gesture becomes more than itself; it carries with it a web of assumptions, values, and ideologies, gently bent into new directions by myth’s inflective process. Thus, myth departs from both fiction and confession: it neither wholly invents nor wholly reveals, but rather turns meaning along carefully directed paths so that even familiar objects or stories can serve broader cultural or ideological ends. Barthes’ insight captures myth’s unique power, not in outright fabrication or forthright revelation, but in the nuanced shifting and layering of cultural significance.