21 Comments
Aug 4, 2022Liked by Samuel Lopez-Barrantes

Sooo much great information in this piece. I want to read it again and again. This first time was with coffee, and the second will be with whiskey. It’s an exhilarating feeling to find ourselves in a new, definable time in history, to be able to see the response to the past occurring before our eyes. And yes understanding the origins is, I think, step one. Can’t wait to read the exchange between you and Elle. x

Expand full comment
Aug 4, 2022Liked by Samuel Lopez-Barrantes

I have always struggled with understanding the differences between all of these "isms." Samuel's essay is a simple but brilliant explanation and discussion, and left me wanting more. I would have loved to have him as a professor in college.

Expand full comment
Aug 4, 2022Liked by Samuel Lopez-Barrantes

This was so beautiful.

I actually am existentialist in that I believe there is no meaning, and so it is up to us to create meaning. But the existentialist writers apply apply an angst to that where I apply an idealism. Which maybe, to your point, is because I am of the metamodernist age-I’m very much with that Rick and Morty clip!

Still, this philosophy only extends as far as the individual person. “I can make my own life meaningful, can you?” Or possibly to an individual’s group or nation. “We live meaningful lives, do you?”

Following your progression of things, I can only hope the next age applies that same optimism to a global community, rather than to an individual person! How can we make life meaningful not just for us (“let’s go watch TV”) but for all of us (“we all have TVs?” Ok, the metaphor is lost....)

Expand full comment

Thank you Samuel, for putting this together. And, nice to meet you!

I’ve read Integral Theory and Spiral Dynamics for a number of years, but never mapped it so clearly onto the arts. So thank you.

Would you say there’s been any exemplary (and well-known) novel that shows us ‘the era has landed’?

Expand full comment

That would be my choice!

Expand full comment

Thank you for this thoughtful look at literary history! I can still never remember terms like postmodernism, post-structuralism, et al... I guess I just don't have the capacity. Or maybe it's just one of my quirks. Following you and Elle's discussion, I'm most interested in why the books nowadays that are critically praised tend to uniformly fall into a "dark" and "depressing" vein, as Elle wrote about, for the moment ignoring what literary umbrella they fall under. E.g. if you look at the 10 Best Fiction Books by the NYT (2021 edition), I'm not sure how many even fit your more hopeful metamodern definition--some seem like downright throwbacks. And if the NYT is too elitist, many if not most recognizable indie presses like Red Hen & Black Lawrence are likewise following this trend in devastating, trauma-reckoning, apocalyptic literature.

Literature is not produced in a vacuum and literary movements don't just crystalize in medias res; one year's perspective gives you fresh eyes for your own writing; ten year's perspective is enough to critically analyze literature of its time. We're in the midst of political and social upheaval, as your footnote points out, and if you're lucky enough to have time to write these days, chances are some of that upheaval is in the back of your mind.

I know we think of certain work as timeless but it's the works' specificity and reliance on the material of its time which actually makes it relatable. For example, Balzac's and Zola's descriptions of place, social status, dress, how much things cost, etc. is one of the most grounding features in their work and is easily understood by a modern reader, whereas certain political movements, archbishops, kings, famous courtesans, outdated technologies still require explanatory notes in the back of your Oxford World's Classics.

Some writers are called to write about their times, some write about our times more as a reflex action, but unless you're totally disengaged from the world around you it's hard for no historical/cultural context to seep in.

I'd love to read more upbeat, less traumatic, maybe even funnier fiction (I'd settle for more ironic fiction that isn't bogged down in miserabilism--a word that almost seems invented for some of our current literature)... but I don't think this kind of work will find a foothold while we have raging power-mongers and open racists vying for political office (on the one hand) and progressive critics arguing that books themselves are racist by "omission" and you should only write from your own "cultural" perspective (on the other).

I've been naive enough to say that I believe literature is for everyone, but that's what I believe. And if metamodernism has room for comedy I'm for it.

Expand full comment
founding
Aug 10, 2022Liked by Samuel Lopez-Barrantes

I finally..sitting on a plane, had a chance to read your paper. Samuel! Brilliant. Absolutely brilliant & I too am thrilled to find a “new”enclave of like minds. Thank you all for your reflections! I have/never had any doubt that the child who wrote at 7: « the man in the black hat is not kind, because he does not have peace on his mind » would be the metamodernist you have become & so deftly explained. I passed this on to Nor & she will be writing you. Bravo!

Expand full comment
Aug 10, 2022Liked by Samuel Lopez-Barrantes

This is wonderful, Samuel, and instructive. I've always been torn between all these urges from nihilism to existentialism to modernism and postmodernism, sort of like being drawn to all forms of music from folks to classical to punk, etc. This essay is a wonderful invitation and an affirmation to those of us who want to synthesize and oscillate - and yes, we all must! You laid it all out beautifully. I will share it!

Expand full comment
Feb 22, 2023Liked by Samuel Lopez-Barrantes

Fascinating

Expand full comment

Excellent essay!! Thank you!

Expand full comment
Oct 8, 2023Liked by Samuel Lopez-Barrantes

Maybe the west is finally catching up to ideas Buddhism has been juggling for a long long time.

Expand full comment