So the way I see it, in the simplest terms possible, modernism is strong and bold and it has a very distinct point to get across- modernists were/are essentially rebelling against realism. Postmodernists were/are in turn rebelling against the idea of any movement at all, against patterns, predictability, and coherent timelines as we know them (think Ragtime, skipping from early 20th century fiction to 1970s reality and back again). The idea is artistic chaos, deconstruction, and so on. Metamodernism is nothing more than a combination of the two movements preceding it, which is why I find the idea itself so absurd. Okay, so some postmodernists are blending their style with that of modernism. Great. If we absolutely must acknowledge this subtle combination, let’s call it what it is- yet another tributary of postmodernism. I mean isn’t one of the biggest concepts in postmodernism the whole idea of deconstruction+reconstruction, of blending styles, etc..? But I digress- what I really want to do is find examples of this supposed metamodernism in our culture, examples so unique and utterly striking that they can actually convince me that this isn’t just a strain of postmodernists who got bored and decided to pretend they made a new movement entirely.
I wish I hadn't just said all that because I can only think of one example of this so-called metamodernist culture, and it appears in politics via the Occupy Wall Street campaign. Unlike a traditional political campaign designed to get some person in office and then close up shop, this is not a movement with a traditional narrative arc (I’d bring up you-know-which-narratives if I wasn’t so sick of prefacing terms with “meta”).
 |
| The symbol of the protests, the fragile yet brave and daring ballerina on top of the iron bull, definitely proves a new kind of political agent in itself. |
As the product of the decentralized networked-era culture, Occupy is less about victory than sustainability. It is not about one-pointedness, but inclusion and groping toward consensus. It is not like a book; it is like the Internet. Occupy Wall Street is meant more as a way of life that spreads through contagion, creates as many questions as it answers, aims to force a reconsideration of the way the nation does business and offers hope to those of us who previously felt alone in our belief that the current economic system is broken. I feel comfortable labeling this phenomenon as metamodernist, and here’s why. Modernists rebel against conformity. These people are certainly rebelling against huge powers at be, no argument there. But they’re organizing it via text messages, on Facebook and on Twitter. That’s a very postmodern idea, to utilize technology to transform the average -the 99%- from a single-voiced mob to a loosely connected group of independent and unique thinkers (think YouTube). So Occupy Wall Street is both modern and postmodern, hence, metamodern.
I wish I could think of more, but honestly I am just really confused (and tired). If anyone reads this I'd be interested to know what you think of the whole metamodern thing. The Wikipedia article cites familiar names such as BIG architects and CocoRosie as metamodernists- I have trouble seeing why, but maybe I still have no clue what's going on here (that's probably it). And if you want to decide for yourself, the breakthrough metamodernism article -- written by Timotheus Vermeulen and Robin van den Akker and published in the Journal of Aesthetics -- can be viewed on Google Docs here. Happy reading.
