The reality of metanarratives is one of those simple concepts that has far-reaching implications - especially when we are told that the metanarrative is "no more - it is dead" as proclaimed by Lyotard. That makes me a bit sad because I think he may be on to something very profound and, if he's correct in that observation, then these next few decades are going to be quite a trip as we, as a culture, adjust to the death of "our" metanarrative. Additonally, Lyotard's view that life in this decade and culture is comprised of little pieces that have been assembled together (bricolage) makes a lot of sense to me and is part of the conflict some may be experiencing - they are waiting for society to be "whole" again (i.e., the good ol' days)! Sorry, folks - that's not going to happen. We are increasingly becoming reflective shards of the whole.
The metanarrative is a "set of narratives that a culture uses as an over-arching framework to make meaning." (Dr. Rog, class lecture) Since a total metanarrative is said to provide you with the way to live your life, does that mean that each of us is living a life of chaos? If you remain secluded from society with your only source of information being the media, then you are probably feeling confused, alarmed, and stressed. The reason is pretty simple: Walter Cronkite retired years ago (he told us "like it was" reflecting the metanarrative of our nation.) Now, it's a free-for-all: watching "the experts" battle it out in their 10 second sound bites is too much for any human being to process or embrace! Shockingly, there are those who are glued to that media for their information and opinions; pretty much they all have the deer-in-the-headlight look about them or are mean-spirited and rude. The political, the scientific, and the religious communities are in a constant state of tension (an understatement, to be sure)and now, to find out, that our framework has died, what ARE we to do?! (sarcasm) So what is this metanarrative that has died in our society?
I believe there is one metanarrative, in particular, that is waiting for its headstone and memorial service: the Judeo-Christian framework. The majority of our society embraced, and promoted, Judeo-Christian values from the early years of our country through the early-to-mid 1900's, or so. That value system is still there superficially, but it no longer represents our core "national/societal" values; furthermore, it increasingly is having to share the stage with other world religions, such as Islam and Hinduism. A judgment as to whether this is positive or negative is not the point - I wish to focus on the reality shift that we're all having to deal with in these times. However, anyone who has studied that faith knows that it is a personal faith - not one of institutions and political systems! So, what have we lost? In a sense, it's possible those who truly share that faith will have more clarity in the coming decades than ever before. As for our society, the death of that metanarrative will (has) created a vaccuum that will eventually be filled by another metanarrative - even if it is the metanarrative of non-conformity and individualism. Interestingly, it's been said that it's the "disunity that unifies us" and that very well may be the new course for our society. Will it become a metanarrative? In the strict definition, no. Will it give us a framework from which we can draw to live our lives? Very possibly, yes. In some respects, that's been the American spirit/way all along if not by the majority, then by those behind the scenes. Quite frankly, those in the majority have been grossly opportunistic (again, an understatement) and have made a mockery of the metanarrative under which this country has lived for centuries. Maybe it is indeed time to give disunity a chance. I'd throw in one qualifier, though - respect. There. I think respecting the disunity (individualism) of each one of us may work!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Mike Of Modernity (or post?) -
I had a bit different reaction to Lyotard's presumption that the "metanarrative" is dead. I feel it is a rather short-sighted and hasty thing to proclaim, primarily because of the still viable number of people who ascribe to the Judeo-Christian metanarrative. And for that matter the many other pseudo metanarratives that have replaced the older ones, i.e. the Star Trek Culture, the Lord of the Rings and Star Wars "cults" All essentially the same metanarrative as Judeo-Christianity is anyway. But I digress. Though organized religions numbers are dwindling, they remain an influential and organized force, with common goals and beliefs. The nature of Judeo-Christianity as an "overarching framework to make meaning" is still intact and alive for those who ascribe to it.
For all of its lost memebership it is still going strong.
Meanwhile our Western culture seems to have spawned an endless number of "embryonic" metanarratives. I was reminded of one as I passed through the kitchen on Sunday and my eye met a slogan at the top of a WinnDixie add. "Homemade..." it started proudly "Is better at Winn-Dixie." I had to think about it too, at first. We are so conditioned to believe that we can buy, consume and process just about anything - tailor it to our exact needs, simulate it and simulate it until it ceases to exist. (I had just reread Baudrillaird).I didn't think about it being out of place at first. "Oh it tastes homemade", i rationalized. But, NO! They say "Homemade! Not "Homemade taste" or Homemade style" or even "Homeadeish". Yet that heading is the product of millions of dollars and countless man-hours spent studying demographics and psychology to find juuuuuust the right tag for an advertisement. It must work on somebody. Here you have the seeds of a metanarrative -to-be sprouting. One that might read something like this "This metanarrative is bought to you by: Winn-Dixie - Getting Better all The Time." (The Beatles must be so proud.)
Post a Comment