In Mythologies, Roland Barthes continually plays on the notion of Nature/Culture as a manifestation of the distinction between Universal/Historical. All mythologies portray the ideological face of universality (naturalness) when they in fact promote a historical/particular set of ideas. Mythologies erect a "universal wisdom, which is in fact nothing but their own brand of wisdom" (43).

One of Barthes' 'readings' which stood out to me in this respect was "Dominici, or the Triumph of Literature." In it he describes what appears to have been a trial of considerable publicity in its day. The 'proletarian' accused was sent to the guillotine through such a universalizing maneuver on the part of the prosecution. Barthes claims, "The Law is always prepared to lend you a spare brain in order to condemn you without remorse. . . . [I]t depicts you as you should be, and not as you are" (44): "Man exists in their eyes only through the 'character traits' which label him for society" (45).

What immediately came to mind when reading this selection was the analogous yet inverse nature of our most famous trial of ill repute. But in the O.J. trial this universalizing, synchronizing, anti-historical approach was taken up by the defense rather than the prosecution. They played on the notion of archetypal blackness. To be black was a universal characteristic regardless of historical period or particular personal circumstances. The trial was not about the event of someone's murder. The "extraordinary story-tell(ing)," the "undeniable wit" and "dazzling verve" of the defense turned the trial toward universal categories of Justice, Good, Evil, of the "Suffering, Defeat, and Justice" (19) of the universal black man. It was turned into a "spectacle." But rather than being written on/with the body as in wrestling, the spectacle was played out through the literary skills (or lack thereof) of the defense and prosecution. The trial was not about the particular historical events of a crime (for which the prosecution based its case), but about universalizing literary prowess. The prosecution never really tried to play the universal game of Justice—for its truth lay in bare historical facts which would logically and necessarily outweigh any literary universalizing. Little did they realize that the entire foundation of the "Justice" system was based on such a universalizing premise.

In regard to wrestling, Barthes makes the important observation that "what the public wants is the image of passion, not passion itself" (18). The desire for the spectacle, for the image, for the archetype, pervades the mentality of the viewing public. We want the image of violence in the movies but not violence itself. We want the imaginary passion of Johnny Cochran, not the real passion of the families who lost their loved ones. "(T)he spectator does not wish for the actual suffering of the contestant; he only enjoys the perfection of the iconography" (20). The defense played the "race card"—the universal iconography of Justice, Justice for the universal black man. It was only in this way that the trial became "intelligible" to the audience. They did not understand the particulars of DNA, only the universality of archetypes and Justice. The defense understood the rhetorical situation in a way that the prosecution couldn't see.