The dominant approaches in the study and criticism of myths are often based on a kind of presupposition regarding the neutrality of the discourse. In the meantime, it is possible to provide a new understanding and reading of them by moving away from such views and by removing myths from suspension and then binding them to power structures. On this basis, first, in the present article, the myth of creation and its parallel mythologies are separated from the suspension and placed in the framework of a type of power structure; then the current logic in the process is explained, and finally, the function of such a matter is discussed. The results of receiving and describing some selected works in the Greek-Iranian tradition indicate that the function of these mythological narratives is aimed at the production and reproduction of essentialist ideas related to deterministic traditions, which have flowed from an ontological approach and function to an ideological organization for suppression and deprivation of agency from the subject. From this perspective, mythological systems based on the logic of essentialism have formed a center of power and conservatively suppressed the exposure of human subjects to these centers in various ways.Keywords: Myth, Essentialism, Power, Subject, Agency. IntroductionThe theories that have been proposed so far around mythology have generally considered myths to be impartial and neutral texts that mostly focus on one issue and are so-called signs of something. This is the traditional view that considers the text as a representative or a signifier for a signified, a truth, or a meaning that lacks any kind of agency; in other words, in this reading, the texts are often abstract patterns. By moving from such passive readings, the text, and specifically the myth, can be evaluated as having agency, action, and ultimately being the creator of a type of truth regime. On this basis, in this text, myths are not derived from collective desires, the narrator of a history, the source and holy origin, or things like that, but they originate from a power structure, and they show their special function by being placed in this formula. In this article, along with other readings about myth, another important chapter has been opened with the title Myth and Power. In this reading, it is possible to examine the meaningful and organized links between power and myth and take a look at the construction of myths by approaching the ideas of people like Foucault in different sociological-philosophical fields. According to Foucault, no text or conversation takes place outside of power relations; every system of power produces its own regime of truth, and cultural/literary texts are always either influenced by the regime and strengthen it or seek to weaken it (see Foucault: 2009). From this perspective, if Eliade believed that the most important function of myth is to ‘discover and illuminate the exemplary examples of all meaningful human rituals and activities’ (Eliade, 1983: 14), in the new reading, by considering such theories, it is possible to consider the myth as a text in the context of power relations, clarify other aspects of it, and uncover its other layers of meaning. Literature ReviewVarious viewpoints have been proposed regarding the function and role of myth, including the allegorical-symbolic viewpoint, based on the opinions of Friedrich Kruse; the romantic view, especially in the works of Johann Gottfried von Herder; a comparative perspective based on the works of Friedrich Max Müller and Spencer; the view of functionalism based on the opinions of such anthropologists as Malinowski; Dumézil's view and three-story construction; the view of structuralism, especially in the views of Levi Strauss; the psychoanalytic view based on the views of Freud and Jung; a phenomenological perspective based on the theories of Mircea Eliade; Cassirer and Paul Ricoeur's philosophical view; Winckler's point of view and the Babylonian school, the diffusion and dispersion theory, the school of transformation and evolutionism, Durkheim's sociological points of view, the paradigmatic point of view and the theory of Samuel Hook are the things that have been discussed. (See Esmailpour, 2008: 43-58). In this article, the relationship between one of the most famous and well-known myths and the institution of power has been investigated. Methodology The article is based on library sources and qualitative analysis. ResultsIn the present article, myths are basically not neutral propositions arising from memory and collective will, but based on their construction, they are texts full of motivation and direction and specifically aimed at power. These myths, which, in the first human readings with a kind of tolerance, had the function of giving meaning to existence and human relationships, in later periods, have become far more powerful tools than before to control and have a hold over the subjects and have a complete command of their existence. On the other hand, the texts that reflect such narratives of myths have intentionally or unintentionally attempted to produce, reproduce, and expand essentialist ideas on a large scale; the legend of creation according to the Bible, the myth of Prometheus, the myth of Icarus, the myth of Pygmalion, the myth of Jamshid and Kavus were investigated as selected myths. Every force that has proposed such myths has believed that these characters should be placed in a specific and usual path and process, and if they deviate from the specific frameworks and established criteria, it is natural, accepted, and normal to inflict maximum anger and violence on them. In fact, in a respect, the ideological mission of such foundations has been more than anything in the direction of making liberating thoughts sterile, and this is what has been called essentialism. All the characters discussed in this article have somehow sought to break this impenetrable framework and build and formulate a new nature, and all of them have been suppressed and marginalized in different ways due to the crime of agency and seeking freedom.