Postmodernism and Metanarity.
Alasdair Baxter
Britain and Ireland) conference at Swanwick, I heard some speakers use
two words about whose meaning I am not at all clear.
While listening to a lecture given by a sociologist, I was curious
about her use of the word "metanarity". It seemed to be associated
with another concept, post modernism.
Could someone please take the trouble to explain to an ignoramus (or
agnostic if you take the Greek derivation) what both terms mean?
Pete Broadbent
news:fb088u0slq99djvk7...@4ax.com...
> Having spent a very interesting week at the CTBI (Churches Together in
> Britain and Ireland) conference at Swanwick, I heard some speakers use
> two words about whose meaning I am not at all clear.
>
> While listening to a lecture given by a sociologist, I was curious
> about her use of the word "metanarity". It seemed to be associated
> with another concept, post modernism.
I suspect the first word is "metanarrative". It can roughly be defined as
"large scale theoretical explanation purportedly of universal application."
Any religion or philosophy that claims to be a world view (Christianity,
Islam, Humanism) would on this definition be (at least at first sight) a
metanarrative.
Postmodernism would require a book.
Here are some notes from talks I've done on postmodernism for beginners:
Modernity as the backdrop...
To be modern is to be * scientific - especially in realms of
discovery
* enlightened - especially in
terms of education
* rational - especially in
social organisation
Postmodernism as a challenge to Modernism - a state of mind, not a specific
programme.
"The typical postmodernist artefact is playful, self-ironising and even
schizoid.. it reacts to the austere autonomy of high modernism by impudently
embracing the language of commerce and the commodity. Its stance towards
cultural tradition is one of irreverent pastiche, and its contrived
depthlessness undermines all metaphysical solemnities, sometimes by a brutal
aesthetics of squalor and shock." (Terry Eagleton, Awakening from Modernity,
TLS 20.2.87). (Tee hee)
Postmodernism is marked by -
1. Distrust of metanarratives
2. Eclecticism
3. Favouring of diversity
4. Favouring of fragmented solutions to problems, with no attempt to search
for wholeness
5. No certainty - seen as a virtue
6. Desire for grass roots solutions
7. Pluralism
Suggested reading -
David Harvey, The Condition of Postmodernity (Blackwell)
Zygmunt Bauman, Postmodern Ethics (Blackwell)
David Lyon, Postmodernity (Open University) [simple introduction]
I suppose there is also a terminological distinction to be squeezed out. If
you understand postmodern to refer to the end of the modern, then
postmodernity tends to be the generic term for the concept that defines the
way in which the social is changing in C21 society; postmodernism refers to
the cultural change. However, there is so much cross-over between the social
and the cultural, you will find the edges blurred!
Alan Zanker
>Having spent a very interesting week at the CTBI (Churches Together in
>Britain and Ireland) conference at Swanwick, I heard some speakers use
>two words about whose meaning I am not at all clear.
>
>While listening to a lecture given by a sociologist, I was curious
>about her use of the word "metanarity". It seemed to be associated
>with another concept, post modernism.
I'd be curious as well - could it have been 'meta-narrative'?
>Could someone please take the trouble to explain to an ignoramus (or
>agnostic if you take the Greek derivation) what both terms mean?
Sorry - I plead incomprehension!
Alan
janet
<l...@london.com> writes
>
>While listening to a lecture given by a sociologist, I was curious
>about her use of the word "metanarity". It seemed to be associated
>with another concept, post modernism.
>
>Could someone please take the trouble to explain to an ignoramus (or
>agnostic if you take the Greek derivation) what both terms mean?
Grin - in some senses, it is impossible to define postmodernism, because
it rejects metanarratives...
Briefly, and very, very superficially, postmodernism is the rejection of
the optimism of modernism - the rejection of the idea that people could
solve all the problems of the world, and that science and "rational
thought" could lead the way. The body blow to that optimism was the
second world war.
This rejection led to a fragmentation of ideas.... I'd recommend
Introducing Postmodernism, Appignanesi and Garratt (I *like* the
Introducing series...). It's not a simple concept and very few agree on
just what it is.
A metanarrative is a whole explanation - something that seeks to explain
everything under its umbrella. Christianity is a metanarrative, if you
like - we think, believe that everything we encounter or could encounter
can be encompassed within our belief system, and (I believe, anyway)
that if I fully understood the belief system (as God does) that nothing
would lack explanation.
Postmodernism rejects such explanations (though I don't mean to say that
one can not be a postmodern Christian.... one could not, however, be a
postmodern scholastic).
That's a very, very, very sketchy intro to both terms - does it help at
all?
--
janet
Kennedy Fraser
Can't remember where you are located but if you are in Scotland then the new
series on BBC2 Scotland may be of help.
Every Monday at 7:30pm - 'The Whole Shebang' - how we make meaning and the
stories we tell each other.
See earlier posts which give some blurb.
Kennedy
Pam Seeker
news:a61rou$arf$1...@helle.btinternet.com...
> Postmodernism would require a book.
Pete:
Apropos of a different thread and admittedly being a bit flippant,
I think:
Postmodernism is *NFP and
Modernism is *STJ
Where * may = either E or I
Blessings,
Pam
--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG
Paul A Dean
"Metanarity" is a made up word (at least it's not in any of my
dictionaries), and so the speaker was quite amiss if she didn't define
it for you.
"Meta-" means something a level above. For example, metaphysics means
something above the scope of physics; metalanguage means a language
that can be used to describe other languages.
If "metanarity" was linked to "post modernism", then I'd guess that
metanarity means the general principle behind meta-things. It means,
as in post modernism, "let's look a level above that we have in the
past" or "let's abstract our thoughts another level".
--
Paul.
"Life in a teacup; but is it art?"
http://www.redeemed.org.uk/
Paul A Dean
> "The typical postmodernist artefact is playful, self-ironising and
> even schizoid.. it reacts to the austere autonomy of high modernism
> by impudently embracing the language of commerce and the
> commodity. Its stance towards cultural tradition is one of
> irreverent pastiche, and its contrived depthlessness undermines all
> metaphysical solemnities, sometimes by a brutal aesthetics of
> squalor and shock." (Terry Eagleton, Awakening from Modernity, TLS
> 20.2.87). (Tee hee)
I'm intrigued by the "Tee hee"! What's up?
> Postmodernism is marked by -
> 1. Distrust of metanarratives
> 2. Eclecticism
> 3. Favouring of diversity
> 4. Favouring of fragmented solutions to problems, with no attempt to search
> for wholeness
> 5. No certainty - seen as a virtue
> 6. Desire for grass roots solutions
> 7. Pluralism
I'm surprised by number 1. You give the definition of metanarrative
as "large scale theoretical explanation purportedly of universal
application." I would have thought that the principles of
postmodernism are themselves trying to be a metanarrative. In that
sense I can see how postmodernism might distrust *other*
metanarratives.
I'm also surprised by number 4, but I feel that's probably because of
differences in usage of the words 'fragmented' and 'wholeness'.
Richard Emblem
<pete.br...@btinternet.com> writes:
<snip>
>I suspect the first word is "metanarrative". It can roughly be defined as
>"large scale theoretical explanation purportedly of universal application."
>Here are some notes from talks I've done on postmodernism for beginners:
Thanks. As a former colleague used to say:
"I'm none the wiser, but better informed."
--
Richard Emblem
How good and pleasant it is
when God's people live in unity.
(Psalm 133:1)
_______________________
Gareth McCaughan
> While listening to a lecture given by a sociologist, I was curious
> about her use of the word "metanarity". It seemed to be associated
> with another concept, post modernism.
>
> Could someone please take the trouble to explain to an ignoramus (or
> agnostic if you take the Greek derivation) what both terms mean?
A little addendum to the explanations of "metanarrative" you've already
had:
"Narrative" is just a pretentious word for "story". The "story of your
life" is a narrative; so are all the little stories that make it up;
so is "the story of England", and so are all the little stories that
make *it* up; and so on.
"Meta" generally (at least in philosophical rather than chemical
circles) has a meaning along the lines of "beyond", or "one level
further up". So a meta-narrative is a narrative about narratives,
or something deeper that explains and gives meaning to narratives.
A way of making sense of the world, or of some significant part of
the world.
So I've understood it, anyway. I don't read a lot of this sort of
thing, so I could be wrong.
--
Gareth McCaughan Gareth.M...@pobox.com
.sig under construc
kevin donnelly
<Gareth.M...@pobox.com> writes
turning pages in a forgettable book The Sociology of Meaning. There
being no glossary I stopped at that point.
KD
--
kevin donnelly
David Anderson
The David Anderson take on the words (and I am a narrative theorist and
a philosopher but they're not my exact field):
Metanarrative is an overarching explanation of human action and
history. The two metanarratives that everyone cites are Augustinian
history as in the City of God (all human history takes place within the
context of creation, fall, the covenants of God, the incarnation and
crucifixion, and the preaching of the Gospel, until the Second Coming)
and the Marxist analysis of society (in which society progresses through
feudal and capitalist modes of production before issuing in a socialist
perfect society). Another is Whig history: mankind[1] grows up under
despotism and superstition but then discovers Science and Protestantism
and so throws off the shackles of supernaturalism and discovers liberty
under the Free Market Economy.
Postmodernism according to a widely accepted definition is what happens
when you stop believing in any of the above narratives, or in any
substitute. I define it slightly differently. Whig history - and
certain similar versions - celebrates the rise of the social structures
that social scientists now call modernity: the free market, the nation
state, separation of public and private, with religion relegated to the
private, the individual as primary social unit and bearer of rights, and
empiricist philosophy. Also included, although it's a partial reaction
to some elements of modernity, is Romantic art: the artist as solitary
individual expressing his[1] emotions. Around the turn of the twentieth
century, a number of artists and philosophers started to find that this
collection of facts which had been taken as common sense were cultural
constructs. (Examples: Nietzsche, Wittgenstein, Heidegger, Freud,
Eliot, Joyce, Proust, Picasso, Klee, Stravinsky, Schoenberg, etc.)
Confusingly, in the arts, this movement is called modernism.
Postmodernism in the arts is after modernism; otherwise it's after
modernity.
David Anderson (just passing through)
[1] Sic
David Anderson
> Postmodernism rejects such explanations (though I don't mean to say that
> one can not be a postmodern Christian.... one could not, however, be a
> postmodern scholastic).
The Milbank tendency[1] seem to be having a good go at trying.
David Anderson
[1] My term for the Radical Orthodox.
Paul A Dean
> David Anderson (just passing through)
Who was that masked man? Quick! Someone block the door, his leaving
again would lower all sorts of averages. Stick around!
Robert Pearce
<ja...@allestree.demon.co.uk> enlightened us thusly :
>
>Briefly, and very, very superficially, postmodernism is the rejection
>of the optimism of modernism - the rejection of the idea that people
>could solve all the problems of the world, and that science and
>"rational thought" could lead the way. The body blow to that optimism
>was the second world war.
Interesting. Last night I went to see a production of "Candide"....
--
Rob Pearce http://www.bdt-home.demon.co.uk
If you must reply by | With searching comes loss
e-mail please use | and the presence of absence:
"news_reply" at | "My Novel" not found.
bdt-home dot demon etc. |
Tim Rowe
news:87ofi3x...@redeemed.org.uk...
> Pete Broadbent posted:
<snip>
> > Postmodernism is marked by -
> > 1. Distrust of metanarratives
> > 2. Eclecticism
> > 3. Favouring of diversity
> > 4. Favouring of fragmented solutions to problems, with no attempt to
search
> > for wholeness
> > 5. No certainty - seen as a virtue
> > 6. Desire for grass roots solutions
> > 7. Pluralism
>
> I'm surprised by number 1. You give the definition of metanarrative
> as "large scale theoretical explanation purportedly of universal
> application." I would have thought that the principles of
> postmodernism are themselves trying to be a metanarrative.
No, they're not. They may pick and choose bits /from/ various
metanarratives, but those fragments don't get joined up into a new
narrative. This fits in with 4, and "works" because of 5 and 6.
Tim Rowe