Myth is one of the forms of cultural expression that has long been an object of study in Anthropology. In many traditional and modern societies, myth is not only understood as a story about the past or a tale about supernatural beings, but also as a symbolic system that represents how societies understand the world. The structural approach to myth developed primarily through the ideas of Claude Lévi-Strauss, who sought to explain that myths possess particular structural patterns that can be analyzed scientifically. As stated by Claude Lévi-Strauss (1963: 206–210), myth is not merely a story passed down from generation to generation, but a form of language that conveys meaning through the structure of relationships among its elements. Therefore, myth can be understood as a system of communication that contains a certain logic in the way its narratives are constructed.
Within the framework of Structuralism, Claude Lévi-Strauss viewed culture as a system composed of various interconnected elements. This approach was inspired by the ideas of Ferdinand de Saussure in the field of Linguistics, who emphasized that language is a system of signs that operates through relationships among its elements. As explained by Ferdinand de Saussure (1916: 114–117), the meaning of a sign does not emerge independently but is formed through its difference from other signs within the language system. This principle was later applied by Lévi-Strauss in his analysis of myth. He argued that myth also possesses a structure similar to language, in which the elements of the story acquire meaning through their relationships with other elements.
According to Claude Lévi-Strauss, in order to understand myths more deeply, researchers cannot simply read the narrative in a linear manner. Instead, myths must be analyzed by identifying the basic units that form the structure of the story. According to Claude Lévi-Strauss (1963: 211–213), these basic units are called mythemes, which are the smallest units of meaning within myths and function similarly to phonemes in language. Each mytheme is related to other mythemes, forming a broader network of meaning. By identifying the relationships among these units, researchers can understand the structural patterns underlying a myth.
One of the most important concepts in Lévi-Strauss’s analysis of myth is binary opposition. He argued that many myths across different cultures are constructed through pairs of opposing concepts. As explained by Claude Lévi-Strauss (1963: 224–226), the human mind tends to organize experience through contrasting categories such as nature and culture, life and death, or male and female. These oppositions then become the basis for narrative structures within myths. In other words, conflicts in mythological stories often reflect tensions between two opposing concepts.
In many myths, the opposition between nature and culture becomes a particularly important theme. Nature is often depicted as something wild, chaotic, and beyond human control, whereas culture symbolizes order created by humans through norms and social rules. According to Claude Lévi-Strauss (1966: 89–92), myths frequently function as symbolic tools for mediating the contradiction between nature and culture. Through mythological narratives, societies attempt to explain how humans transition from a natural state to a life governed by cultural systems.
Examples of Lévi-Strauss’s analysis of myth can be found in his studies of various folktales from South America. He discovered that although these stories originated from different societies, many of them shared similar narrative structures. As explained by Claude Lévi-Strauss (1970: 32–35), these structural similarities suggest that myths do not merely reflect the social conditions of particular communities but also reveal universal patterns of human thought. Therefore, structural analysis allows researchers to discover relationships among myths from different cultures.
Besides functioning as symbolic systems, myths also play an important role in maintaining social balance. In many traditional societies, myths are used to explain the origin of the world, the origin of human beings, and the origin of certain social institutions. According to Claude Lévi-Strauss (1963: 229–231), the main function of myth is to help societies understand contradictions that arise within their social lives. Myths do not always provide rational answers, but they offer symbolic frameworks that allow communities to accept and comprehend those contradictions.
The structural approach to myth also demonstrates that mythological stories often undergo transformations when they move from one society to another. However, even though details of the stories may change, their basic structures often remain the same. As explained by Claude Lévi-Strauss (1970: 40–43), myth transformations can be understood as variations of the same underlying structure. This shows that myths function in a way similar to language, which operates according to certain rules in its construction.
In the development of modern cultural studies, myth analysis is not only applied to traditional stories but also to various forms of popular media such as films and comics. Many modern narratives still employ the same oppositional structures found in classical myths. According to Marcel Danesi (2004: 67–70), narrative patterns originating from myths continue to influence how humans construct stories within popular culture. This demonstrates that myths remain relevant for understanding the structures of contemporary culture.
Although Lévi-Strauss’s approach has been highly influential in anthropological studies, several thinkers have later criticized it. One important critique came from the French philosopher Jacques Derrida, who developed the approach known as Deconstruction. According to Jacques Derrida (1978: 278–281), structural approaches tend to assume that structures of meaning are stable, whereas meaning in language and culture is always open to new interpretations. This critique suggests that myth analysis cannot be separated from the dynamics of changing meanings within society.
Nevertheless, Lévi-Strauss’s contribution to the analysis of myth is still considered highly significant in the development of modern anthropology. His approach helped demonstrate that myths possess an internal logic that can be studied systematically. As stated by Claude Lévi-Strauss (1963: 213), the structure of myth reflects the way the human mind organizes experience and understands social reality. Therefore, the analysis of myth not only helps explain traditional stories but also provides insights into the general structure of human thought.
Overall, Lévi-Strauss’s analysis of myth shows that myth is a symbolic system with a particular structure. Through the concepts of mytheme and binary opposition, he explained that mythological narratives are constructed through relationships among elements that form specific patterns of meaning. This approach demonstrates that myths are not merely fictional stories but also reflections of how humans understand the world and deal with various contradictions within their social lives.
References
Barker, C. (2004). The Sage Dictionary of Cultural Studies. London: Sage Publications.
Danesi, M. (2004). Messages, Signs, and Meanings: A Basic Textbook in Semiotics and Communication. Toronto: Canadian Scholars Press.
Derrida, J. (1978). Writing and Difference. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Lévi-Strauss, C. (1963). Structural Anthropology. New York: Basic Books.
Lévi-Strauss, C. (1966). The Raw and the Cooked. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Lévi-Strauss, C. (1970). The Structural Study of Myth. New York: Basic Books.
Saussure, F. de. (1916). Course in General Linguistics. New York: McGraw-Hill.