Pt. 1 Metamodernism: Understanding the historical shifts

Part 1 of an essay on metamodernism, Christianity, and the church

Metamodernism attempts to respond to both the modernistic pursuit of hope and progress while maintaining postmodern subjectivity.

The concept of metamodernism has been around since the 1970s. It has risen to prominence as a handful of terms, such as post-postmodernism, focusing on conceptual and philosophical understandings of metamodernism (Komańda, 2016). While Freinacht (2019) coined metamodernism, defining metamodernism as a psychological and sociological political philosophy. Later, other concepts of metamodernism emerged. Vermeulen and van der Akker's (2010) understanding of metamodernism best address current shifts in Western culture. Vermeulen and van der Akker recognize metamodernism within the context of literature and culture as a structure of feeling within grand narratives, oscillating between modernistic hope and postmodern skepticism (Corsa, 2018). The movement away from postmodernism, according to Vermeulen and van der Akker, is a movement away from focusing on problems and skepticism and movement toward constructive effort and temporary hope. Temporary hope, for example, can be seen as a modernistic belief that humanity and society will improve while maintaining a postmodern skepticism that humanity and society will survive.

Building on Vermeulen and van der Akker’s (2010) theme of hope provides a landscape for perceiving recent cultural shifts. Corsa (2018) describes modernism as a historical culture progressing toward understanding a subject-object truth framework. Thus, modernistic hope tethers to the belief that lessening the gap between the subject and the object will result in greater knowledge and understanding. Postmodernism, according to Storm (2021), replaced the subject-object truth framework with relativism. Postmodernism rejects the concept of hope, asserting that there is no objective truth, only subjective reality. Gibbons (2021) describes postmodernism as overly focused on the present, neglecting the past and rejecting future possibilities. In the cultural shift from modernism to postmodernism, modernistic hope gave way to postmodern skepticism.

Metamodernism attempts to respond to both the modernistic pursuit of hope and progress while maintaining postmodern subjectivity. Modernistic hope is rooted in the belief in objective truth or meaning. According to Corsa (2018), metamodernism does not deny objective meaning (Corsa, 2018). However, Corsa builds on Gare (2001), suggesting that the epistemology of metamodernism builds on interconnected grand narratives rather than objective reality

(modernism) or subjective interpretation (postmodernism). Gare asserts that the grand narratives are polyphonic, embodying the voices and perspectives of many but do not assume anyone's voice or perspective is true.

Since the introduction of the concept of metamodernism in the 1970s, Western culture has experienced modernism giving way to postmodernism, the decline of postmodernism, and the rise of metamodernism. Metamodernism embodies the subjectivity of postmodernism while offering a constructive providing temporary hope. Futurist Leonard Sweet (2001) recognized the need for a theological response to postmodernism that neither embraced nor ignored the significant cultural shift from modernism to postmodernism. As the culture shifts again, it is imperative that Christians recognize and respond to metamodernism through a biblical worldview.