Jon Lampe

Jaswinder Bolina
Poetry Forms
12/12/15

How Metamodernism Might Make Poetry Relevant Again

Postmodernism has long been considered the dominant cultural sensibility in America.
However, many prominent leading postmodern theorists agree that the sensibility has
passed. Linda Hutcheon, for example, says “The postmodern moment has passed, even
if some of its discursive strategies and most of its ideological critique continue to live
on” (11). One of the leading replacements for dominant cultural sensibility is
metamodernism, composed of postmodern parody and modern sincerity.
While metamodernism may be overtaking postmodernism in the culture at large,
poetry is slow to change (for reasons that will be explored later). However, as
metamodernism becomes the dominant trend, its dilution of postmodernism’s parody
of the past with modernism’s emotional sincerity will help reconnect the field to a larger
audience.

What is Metamodernism?

Metamodernism may seem like a neologism, due to its recent resurgence in academic
conversation, but it was coined by Mas’ud Zavarzadeh in 1975. Zavarzadeh introduced
the term:

For the great fictive novelists, life was all inclusion and confusion while art was all
discrimination and selection (based on the private metaphysics of the artist); life was only
raw material to be turned into the gold of art through the aesthetic alchemy wrought by
the imagination of the artist. The fusion of fact and fiction blurs the dichotomy between
life and art and indeed such a sharp division between the two does not exist in the
emerging aesthetics which I shall, for the lack of a better term, call ‘Metamodernist.’ (75)

I’m tracing the etymology of the term metamodernism because theorists have criticized
other theorists on the convenient selectivity of their definitions. “[M]eaning is instead
social and contingent” (Furlani 711), so I’m going trace from past to present usage. This
way, the reader’s knowledge of the term will be nuanced and devoid of “discrimination
and selection (based on the private metaphysics of the artist).”
In 2002, Furlani utilized linguistic prefixes to help differentiate metamodernism
from postmodernism:

The English prefix meta- relevantly denotes derivation, resemblance, succession, and
change. The Greek preposition from which it derives has an especially pertinent range of
meanings: with the accusative, meta means "after" or "next"; with the dative, "among,"
"besides," or "over and above"; with the genitive, "by means of" or "in common with." The
metamodernists develop an aesthetic after yet by means of modernism. Where post-
 suggests severance or repudiation, meta denotes the continuity apparent in the
metamodernists’ efforts to succeed the modernists. (713)

While Furlani’s definition helps to locate our movement temporally, the definition still
remains indistinct. After all, postmodernism could be said to come after, and because of
its penchant for parody, function by means of modernism.
Vermeulen & van den Akker, in their essay Notes on Metamodernism, attempt to
identify “a broad variety of trends and tendencies across current affairs and
contemporary aesthetics that are otherwise incomprehensible (at least by the
postmodern vernacular)” (2). Vermeulen & van den Akker focus mostly on architecture
and painting, but they explain the mechanism of action:

The can most appropriately be summarized, perhaps, by Jos de Mul’s distinction

between postmodern irony (encompassing nihilism, sarcasm, and the distrust and
deconstruction of grand narratives, the singular and the truth) and modern enthusiasm
(encompassing everything from utopism to the unconditional belief in Reason). (4)

Seth Abramson, the most recent theorist, only adds that metamodernism not only
incorporates oscillations not only between modern and postmodern, but between any
“opposing poles in a central space” (Metamoderna). Therefore, metamodernism
functions similar to a Hegelian dialectic or a Zen koan. It contains and attempts to
reconcile two opposites.

Why Does Metamodernism Matter?

In order to explain why this new aesthetic trend is so important for poetry, we need to
briefly cover the aftermath left by postmodernism. To qualify, the scope and length of
this paper restricts any in-depth exploration of postmodernism:

“It has become somewhat of a commonplace to begin a discussion of the postmodern by

stressing that there is no one such thing as “the” postmodern. After all, “the”
postmodern is merely the “catchphrase” for a multiplicity of contradictory tendencies,
the “buzzword” for a plurality of incoherent sensibilities.” (Vermeulen & van den Akker
4)

With the qualification that no definition can be comprehensive, I’ll be working with an
admittedly abbreviated one.
Throughout her book The Poetics of Postmodernism, Linda Hutcheon returns to
one defining characteristic more often than any other: parody. “Parody is a perfect
postmodern form, in some senses, for it paradoxically both incorporates and challenges
that which it parodies” (11), and it “overtly eschew[s] modernist aestheticism” (23).
Most importantly, “it is a critical revisiting, an ironic dialogue with the past” (Hutcheon
4). Linda Hutcheon recognizes two important qualities of parody: one, it’s an
inherently mocking (or critical) portrayal, and two, it requires an understanding of the
past. The idea that parody requires a knowledge of the past is crucial to understanding
one critical problem created by postmodernism. Mainly, that when an art form
becomes self-reflexive and parodic, the literacy required to appreciate that art form
increases. That is to say, you can no longer encounter a poem and appreciate it. You
must have knowledge of poems that have come before those poems to understand the
parody.

Pierre Bourdieu’s 1984 essay The Market of Symbolic Goods explains what happens
when this extra level of required literacy is introduced, positing, “the field of restricted
production can only become a system objectively producing for producers by breaking
with the public of nonproducers” (5). Without an idea of existing conventions or an
understanding of past traditions, readers might find it difficult to appreciate
postmodern parodic poems. As the art-form becomes more self-reflexive, criticism
takes on the task of “providing a ‘creative’ interpretation for the benefit of the
‘creators.’” (5). So the required increased literacy isn’t only historical but also literary-
theoretical. To explore the aftermath of these changes in poetry, I’m going to restrict
my focus to narrative poems because narrative poems contain a semblance of
storytelling logic.
Lyn Hejinian’s The Beginner, begins, “This is a good place to begin. / From
something. / Something beginning in an event that beginning overrides” (332). The
repetition of the words “begin” and “something,” along with the line breaks, are
reminiscent of a syllogism, most commonly represented as, “All men are mortal.
Socrates is a man. Therefore, Socrates is mortal.” This is usually displayed in three
lines too. Through her line breaks and repetition, Hejinian creates the expectation of a
logical narrative. The reader suspects she is setting the table, so to speak, with
reasonable propositions before moving to a conclusion, only semantic meaning starts to
disintegrate at the end of the third line and continues to the fourth: “Doubt instruction
light safety fathom blind / In the doorway is the beginning thus and thus no denial”
(332). We receive no method or context through which to interpret the significance of
these signifiers.
Having destroyed morphemes by their temporal or contextual logic, Hejinian
continues by defining and redefining the term “the sun:” “The sun is perceived as a
bear, then a boat, then an instruction: see / The sun is a lily, then a whirlpool turning a
crowd” (332). One might assume, knowing Hejinian’s reputation as an Indeterminate
poet, that she is attempting destroy the meanings inherent in the words themselves.
Furthermore, the destruction of meaning while maintaining the paragraph form,
avoiding creative line breaks for disruption, attempts to signal a modernist’s
convention. Therefore, the lack of meaningful content inside a modern form attempts
to parody modern trends like revelation of truth and appeal to Reason.
E.E. Cummings’s poem r-p-o-p-h-e-s-s-a-g-r foils our expectations of semantic
logic in similar ways, however, instead of breaking signifier contexts or contents, he
breaks the signifiers themselves:
To illustrate, what does this mean to you, reader: “r-p-o-p-h-e-s-s-a-g-r.” Furthermore,
“PPEGORHRASS,” is another signifier meaning the same as “r-p-o-p-h-e-s-s-a-g-r.” They
both mean the same thing as the last line: “grasshopper.” Some words are split in half;
the fourth line ends in –“gath,” is interrupted by PPEGORHRASS, then continues –
“ering,” a split for the word “gathering.” Elsewhere, words interrupt one another (
“rea(be)rran(com)gi(e)ngly”). We can see the disruption of semantic meaning by a
disruption of the actual currency of communication, the words themselves are
destroyed rather than the context.
The hermeneutic value of r-p-o-p-h-e-s-s-a-g-r and The Beginner isn’t contained
within the poem, but rather, it’s found without, in the context of preexisting poetic and
linguistic conventions. Cummings and Hejinian attempt to critique existing
conventions by breaking them. However, if you don’t know or understand the
preexisting conventions, what are you supposed to make of these poems?
This extra layer of required historical literacy is one reason that poetry has
become isolated from the general public. In a 2006 study, Poetry in America, examined a
sample base of Americans who already read recreationally, including one small footnote:
“Compared to U.S. Census Bureau population estimates, men and people with less than
a college education are under-represented among general readers and among poetry
users” (Schwartz 1). In a report done by National Endowment of the Arts, poetry’s
readership in 2008 was 8.3% of Americans, a 31% drop from 2002’s 12.1% (NEA).
Metamodernism might fix this lack of engagement.

How Might Metamodernism Open Poetry to a Larger Audience?

For lay readers, postmodern poems might seem like listening to one side of a phone
conversation. They react to preexisting modernist conventions, sometimes thirty years
outdated. However, metamodernism taps into both sides of the conversation. By
including the modern and the postmodern in the same poem, it removes the historical
literacy required to understand the poem’s context.
Metamodern poems will “oscillate between a modern enthusiasm and a
postmodern irony, between hope and melancholy, between naïveté and knowingness,
empathy and apathy, unity and plurality, totality and fragmentation, purity and
ambiguity” (Vermeulen & van den Akker 6), or it will adhere to or rebel against Cole
Swensen’s metrics of conventional poetry: “coherence, linearity, formal clarity,
narrative, firm closure, symbolic resonance, and stable voice” (xxi).
To illustrate this oscillation, let’s examine a few metamodern poets. M. Loncar’s
poem “peoria” illustrates a metamodern narrative logic. “peoria” opens with the lines,
“we were drinking coffee (of course) when in walks / these two punk rockers” (12).
The expectation for narrative cohesion is created by a setting of an ordinary scene,
however, the logic is disrupted: “the one with the nails also has / a dog collar around
his neck and hands the leash to angelina / who flattered starts leading him all around
the place.” The ordinary becomes extraordinary. Characters seemingly have no
motivation for their actions. Angelina is introduced without an introduction. However,
the most obvious involution of logic comes just after this:

…then the one smoking the pipe

(it musta been about 200 degrees) comes up to me and says
listen here kid

we’re worried about you

we love you and we
don’t want anything to happen to you
everything will be all right
it’ll be ok

kisses me (12)

Previously, the reader considered the punk rockers as separate from the narrator. They
arrived separately, but after the Angelina non-introduction, the reader wonders if the
punk rockers are known and require no introduction. Is this familiarity a dream-like
affair or a conversation between friends? The oddness of the scene was beginning to
seem like a caricature, a heartless romp, an apathetic absurdity, but Loncar gives the
reader this modernist’s oasis. The confession is both hopeful and melancholic, naïve
and knowing. The moment contains a postmodern inability to understand context or
truth about what’s actually happening and a modern conveyance of sincere emotional
content.
Loncar makes one last move in the poem. The two punk rockers leave, and our
narrator says in the last two lines: “jesus tim sometimes I have no idea / what the hell
is going on” (12). Again, we have two competing impulses contained in one moment:
the first is that Loncar comments on the poem itself through his narrator, a breaking of
the fourth wall, a self-reflexivity prominent in the postmodern, but the second is
empathy and commiseration of the narrator and author with the reader, identifying
their confusion and expressing it for them.
Zachary Schomburg is a haunting example of another metamodern poet. “If
Great Lakes” functions well in our examination of metamodern narrative logic:

I would become, say, Lake Michigan, and she, Ontario. Huron was scoffed at. Any lake
but Huron, she said. As we threw it around a bit, I changed my answer. Lake Michigan
was clearly the wrong choice for me. It’s a bit too urban, I said, perhaps too likely a choice.

A little later she described our dialogue about Great Lakes as futile and a bit nauseating.
She became upset, knowing we’d probably never become Great Lakes. She was right,
but weeks later I did become a forest somewhere near Saginaw and she became a lovely
washer-dryer combination. (82)

Schomburg sets up a dialogue between a man and a woman, a discussion about which
of the Great Lakes they would become. The reader’s initial assumption after the first
paragraph is that it’s a slightly kitsch display of flirting, a playful yet empty
conversation. However, the second paragraph begins to foil our expectations. The
empty conversation becomes a point of contention, “futile and a bit nauseating.” Then,
Schomburg shows the reader that the original interpretation of the conversation was
wrong: “She became upset, knowing we’d probably never become Great Lakes” (82),
communicating the becoming the Great Lakes was an actual option. Later he’s
transformed into “a forest somewhere near Saginaw and she became a lovely washer-
dryer combination” (82).
The choice to use Romantic objects such as natural objects like Greate Lakes and
forests clashes greatly with the last choice, the punchline, a washer-dryer combination.
Chastising Romantic poetic convention is a purely postmodern position, however,
Schomburg maintains a modernist’s conveyance of truth and emotion. Even if the
reader doesn’t understand Romantic poetic tradition, the emotional message is clear:
the first paragraph displays a couple with aspirations to be near one another, to be
similar to one another, and the second paragraph displays the couple in a fashion where
they couldn’t be any more separate or different.

Conclusion

Metamodernism is already more firmly situated in other aesthetic trends (see

Vermeulen & van den Akker), but poetry is still dominantly postmodern. Not all
aesthetic trends don’t spread at equal speeds through all art forms. The less democratic
and more institutionalized an art form, the slower its speed of change. Departments in
higher education change at glacial speeds. Tenure ensures the old guard retains
institutional power for decades beyond their aesthetics’ primacy. Because so few
nonproducers engage with poetry and the publication market is small – I know some
would argue more books are being published now than ever before, but that argument
doesn’t account for distribution – poetry mostly exists within the institution of higher
education. This means that it’s mostly the university that creates and affirms poetic
audience and aesthetic. Therefore, acceptable aesthetic trends change much slower than
anywhere else. Bourdieu puts it best when he says:

“By defending cultural orthodoxy or the sphere of legitimate culture against competing,
schismatic or heretical messages, which may provoke radical demands and heterodox
practices among various publics, the system of conservation and cultural consecration
fulfills a function homologous to the Church which, according to Max Weber, should
‘systematically establish and delimit the new victorious doctrine or defend the old one
against prophetic attacks, determine what has and does not have sacred value, and make
it part of the laity’s faith.” (Bourdieu 13)

As metamodern poetry gains traction, moving away from solely parody and critique of
past forms and instead parodying moves within the selfsame poem, Weber’s “laity” or
Bourdieu’s “nonproducers” will begin to reengage with poetry.
Bibliography

Abramson, Seth. "Situating Zavarzadean Metamodernism, #4: What Zavarzadean

Metamodernism Is and Is Not." Metamoderna. N.p., 24 July 2015. Web. 12 Dec. 2015.

Bourdieu, Pierre. "The Market of Symbolic Goods." Poetics 14.1-2 (1985): 13-44. Web.

Cummings, EE. "r-p-o-p-h-e-s-s-g-r." Poets.org. Academy of American Poets, n.d. Web.

12 Dec. 2015.

Furlani, Andre. “Postmodern and After: Guy Davenport”. Contemporary Litearature 43.4
(2002): 709-735. Web.

Hejinian, Lyn. 2002. Postmodern American Poetry: A Norton Anthology. Ed. Paul
Hoover. 2nd ed. New York & London: W. W. Norton, 2013. 332-35. Print.

Hutcheon, Linda. A Poetics of Postmodernism: History, Theory, Fiction. 1st ed. Cambridge:
U Printing House, 1988. Print.

Hutcheon, Linda. "Postmodern Afterthoughts." Wascana Review (n.d.): 1-11. Web.

<https://tspace.library.utoronto.ca/bitstream/1807/9479/1/TSpace0030.pdf>.

Loncar, M. 66 Galaxie: Poems. Hanover, NH: U of New England, 1998. Print.

"Reading on the Rise." National Endowment for the Arts (n.d.): n. pag. National
Endowments for the Arts. Web.

Schomburg, Zachary. The Man Suit. 1st ed. Boston: Black Ocean, 2007. Print.
Schwarz, Lisa K., Lisbeth Goble, Ned English, and Robert F. Bailey. "Poetry in American
Review of the Findings." (n.d.): n. pag. Poetry Foundation. The Poetry Foundation &
National Organization of Research at University of Chicago, Jan. 2006. Web. 12 Dec.
2015.

Swensen, Cole, and David St. John. Introduction. American Hybrid: A Norton Anthology of
New Poetry. 1st ed. New York & London: W. W. Norton, 2009. Xvii-xviii. Print.

Vermeulen, Timotheus, and Robin Van Den Akker. "Notes on Metamodernism."

Aesthetics & Culture 2 (2010): 1-14. Web.

Zavarzadeh, Mas'ud. “The Apocalyptic Fact and the Eclipse of Fiction in Recent
American Prose Narratives”. Journal of American Studies 9.1 (1975): 69–83. Web.