- Information
- AI Chat
The World of Wrestling
University of Calicut
Preview text
A Critical Analysis of Roland Barthes’ “The World of Wrestling”
‘Structuralism denotes a wide range of discourses that study the structures of signification. Signification occurs wherever there is a meaningful event or in the practice of some meaningful action’ (Miluwi et al. 299). Structuralism and its science of signs (semiotics) flourished in France in the 1950s which was based on linguistic theories of Ferdinand de Saussure who considered language as a system of signs and signification, the elements of which are understandable only in relation to each other and to the system. ‘The sign is, for Saussure, the basic element of language (313). Saussure urged that the sign unites not a thing and a name but a concept (signified) and sound-image (signifier)’(307). ‘Structuralist critics analyzed material by examining underlying structures, such as characterization or plot, and attempted to show how these patterns were universal and could thus be used to develop general conclusions about both individual works and the systems from which they emerged’(“Structuralism”). French anthropologist Claude Levi-Strauss and Roland Barthes was important figures of this critical school of thought. Claude Levi-Strauss applied structural analysis to study mythology. According to them, ‘the essence of Structuralism is the belief that “things cannot be understood in isolation, they have to be seen in the context of larger structures they are part of”, The contexts of larger structures do not exist by themselves, but are formed by our way of perceiving the world’ (Mambrol). “The World of Wrestling” is an essay in Roland Barthes collection of essays titled Mythologies. Barthes was a ‘French literary theorist, essayist, philosopher, critic,
and semiotician. His work engaged in the analysis of a variety of sign systems, mainly derived from Western popular culture. His ideas explored a diverse range of fields and influenced the development of many schools of theory, including structuralism, anthropology, literary theory, and post-structuralism’ (Wikipedia contributors). According to him, wrestling is not a sport but a spectacle of excess. Just like theatrical art, the audience gets a clear understanding of what is being acted on through each element of wrestling- the physique, actions, gestures etc. The use of costume and masks separate wrestling from recognized sporting competitions and do represent a theatrical appeal. The loud cries of the defeated ones convey an idea to the audience that he is utterly defeated. In both of these we can find certain character types villains, heroes and undertaker, brock etc in theatre and wrestling respectively. The physique or body of each wrestler is like a sign of the entire wrestling. The actions itself is a sign from which we can deduce whether they are good or bad. From those actions we can deduce whether they are taking revenge upon the opponents earlier actions. For example, when they smile by looking at the audience, we can infer that he is taking revenge upon earlier actions. In wrestling and theatrical art, the audience must be able to understand even the internal trauma of the performers through different means. We can consider the wrestlers as the signifier and actions, gestures as a sign and the emotions they pass on to the audience as the signified. He compares wrestling with the sport of boxing in which the outcome or final result is predictable. Boxing is a sport which is gradual and passage of time is important in it. On the contrary, in wrestling each moment portrays different emotions to the audience which are not necessarily connected with the outcome. The audience
immoral ones. Just like how the flaw in a hero leads to his downfall, it will be a immoral behavior that causes the wrestler to suffer. This conveys the idea that if someone indulges in some kind of immoral or illegal activity at the end he will suffer or will be punished. In our judicial system, if a crime happens and when we file a complaint against it we will have to go behind it for several years and after all these efforts those culprits will be walking fearlessly and freely. There are a number of incidents which can be cited. One of them is the rape case of Sowmya, in which the convict is now roaming freely. But this is not the case with wrestling. In this spectacle of excess, injustice is immediately paid off which in turn makes the audience happy. Just like how peripeteia and anagnorisis makes people happy while watching a tragedy, the actions against injustices makes the spectators happy. Though the audience perceives each wrestling match as a fair play, there will be foul play also. The main signs of a fair play include politeness, ‘the contestants confront each other with zeal, not rage; they can remain in control of their passions, they do not punish their beaten opponents relentlessly, they stop fighting as soon as they are ordered to do so and congratulate each other at the end of a particularly arduous episode’ (Barthes 20). In contrast to this, the signs of foul play includes a big- kick to the beaten up opponent, refusing to shake hands before and after the fight, fouling the opponent while the referee is not looking etc. The audience will be angry or annoyed at this unfair treatment. Most often there are situations in which the audience might be moved by the actions and emotions passed on to them, and they
tries to engage in fight with the opponent by trespassing into the ring. Fair play is more like Judo and foul play will be a visual treat to the audience. According to Barthes, the character type of bastard is unstable because he obeys rules when it is in favor of him and disobeys it when nobody is watching. This inconsistency makes the audience angry. Barthes is of the opinion that a wrestler must be consistent and if he breaks the rule, he must be punished by the adversary. Here, it is the lack of punishment that makes the audience angry. The main aim of a wrestler is to maintain his image before the audience. When the audience meets a wrestler for the first time, some kind of image is created upon him. For example, if the audience expects that one particular wrestler is a bastard or villain, then that wrestler must do anything to conform it. Unlike literary text, wrestling has no hidden or symbolic meaning. Wrestling is a spectacle of excess which makes the audience experience vicarious pleasure. When we analyze wrestling in the light of semiotics, it is through the actions and gestures of the wrestlers that the emotions are conveyed to the audience. So we can infer that in wrestling, the sign is the action of the wrestler and the wrestler is the signifier and signifier is the emotions that it induces in the audience.
The World of Wrestling
University: University of Calicut
This is a preview
Access to all documents
Get Unlimited Downloads
Improve your grades
