I am onto something with this.
Check out this as a thesis statement for an essay:
"The crisis in contemporary culture is the death of the meta-narrative." - Bill Donovan
Meta-narratives are what give meaning to everyones' life, without meta-narratives moments in our life have no meaning.
Meta-narratives do two things:
1. They provide meaning to our lives
2. They give us identities, and convictions
When you examine art history in the context of meta-narratives rather then other catagories, you may be surprised that very little conective tissue exists that can strap art history to current struggles with meta-narratives, but instead are stuck in exhausted worn bins. Rennaisance art is commonly catagorized by region, religion, and indivual artist. (There is a section in the Metropolitan Museum of Art for Islamic art books. Chinese art has its own section.) Modern art is catagorized in movements, for example: Cubism, Fauvism, Futurism, Expressionism, Surrealism, and Dada.
Contemporary art has broader catagories, but largely people refuse to identify specific movements, and artists deny any affiliation. The only time this rule is broken is for "art groups" who collaborate together. This denial may be a symptom of something more endemic.
Religion, to me, has something distintcly naive about it, it is just highly improbable that any one religion explains the world completely, and the fact that different religions exist whenever a communication barrier existed means that one true story is even more unlikely. But I do see a purpose for religion, outside of its implausibility, it gives meaning to peoples' lives.
Other meta-narratives that are failing at this time include the benevolent nature of government. The USA is having a hard time swallowing the bitter pill that the last eight years have been. I have some authority here having served in Afghanistan. (Click here to see some photos)
The only two meta-narratives we have remaining are:
1. History
2. Some new religion, largely catagorized as Myth in contemporary art.
I heard someone say that history is just philosophy set to a story, it was a professor, and I think they were quoting someone else. History is one way we can experience and construct an identity.
Myths and new religions are ways to give meaning and identity too, but they require a catalyst. A catalyst in the form of someone, or a group of people, who have made a willful jump from something that occured to them in abstract sense, an idea, to actions that they perform with conviction. No one really believes in a new religion, and you shouldn't blame someone who starts one, but people need new religions because they give meaning and purpose to their lives and they are willing to suspend there disbelief with the aid of a catalyst. There is a lot of art being made that is feeling around the edges of new religion, largely dealing with connections to the natural world, or referencing evocative symbols in similar ways to alchemists - magical symbols.
Anyways that is the idea that is floating around in my head!
