Just to expand on my point in the third paragraph: the more you truely pull away from your meta-truth, the shallower your work will be, and the more it will probably be a simularum of other people's meta-truths. I might have given the impression in my answer that this was difficult. It's actually really easy, what's difficult is pulling away from your meta-truth and still producing something of depth and quality. Not to say it's impossible though.
Very interesting essay mate! Would definitely love to read more of your essays.
In this, you made a lot of original and intriguing arguments. I completely side with the fact that fantasy and fiction generally have a lot of depth than people give them credit for. It's high time people realise the value of this medium, isn't it?
Great work. You have inspired me to explore this idea further. :)
Yeah the value of fiction and storytelling is something our ancestors had a great appreciation for, but that we’ve lost in modern western society. I think you can see the impact of that in how listless and bereft of meaning so many feel.
I’m currently working on an essay where I do a bit of a deeper dive into the concept of meta-truth, since I felt like I was trying to fit too much in this one.
That would be an amazing topic. Yeah, I feel like it'd help to explore every little nugget of an idea you have here, in its entirety, through separate essays. Looking forward to it mate.
I totally agree with you about the loss of meaning. Demeaning storytelling as something purely for leisure and entertainment has led to the loss of beauty and wonder in our daily lives. No wonder people would find modern society "factory-like" and depressing.
P.S. Maybe this construction of modern society explains the rise of nonfiction writing over fiction. Explains why the self-help industry has boomed like anything. Interestingly, I tried to explore this very dichotomy in a limited sense, in one of my essays "On Literature #2" in my publication. Do check it out if you can, maybe it'd resonate with you!
This is a thorough unpacking of your note from earlier about fantasy being the distillation of an authors worldview. You lay out a very convincing case and this is several steps ahead of where I want to go myself in answering this question. I commend you.
To add (and of course I know you know there’s more to talk through with this): I think there’s much to be said about the ways an author can deliberately try to shape the articulation of their worldview, or try to obscure it. Naturally their art will be shaped by their meta-truth, as you call it, most of all because it helps them define the “good” they strive for in their work. But the final product may be varying levels of articulating or not articulating that worldview based on their own awareness and effort to do one or the other.
Broadly: how do you think an author’s intentions and craft influence the communication of their meta-truth?
Thank you for taking the time to read it. This was my first attempt at writing an essay in a few years, so I know it was a little bit rough in places.
You're right that there is so much more to unpack with this. Before seeing your note I didn't have any plans on writing about meta-truth on Substack. If it had been more planned I'd probably have started with an entire essay exploring the concept of the meta-truth-which is somewhat analogous to what Joseph Campbell called the personal myth-more generally, without even going into the role it plays in the creation of fiction and fantasy. but of course that wouldn't have been an answer to your question.
Now for your question, which is a very good one, I think that deviating from an unconscious expression of meta-truth in your work requires an enormous amount of conscious effort. Partly because the degree to which you will try to shape or obscure the articulation of your world view will is also determined by your meta-truth. Even if, on the surface level, you're able to present something that is totally different from your inherent world view, I think you'd be very hard pressed to avoid have layers of meaning that arise from your meta-truth serving as the bedrock on which your work is built. And I think we see this in pretty much every great work of literature.
I'm not trying to advocate some sort of inescapable determinism, but I see it more as a feedback loop. Your meta-true understanding of the world determines your intentions and perceptions- by extension any attempt to hide your meta-truth is at some level going to arise from your meta-truth- but your perception and intention, and specifically where you direct and focus your attention, also determines the way in which your mind forms your meta-true understanding of the world.
Really enjoyed this essay. You were able to put into words a lot of the same thoughts I have had about the fantasy genre. I simply love it. Great work.
Holy cow this was the perfect essay, I must say that I love how you approached this both from a sociological and psychological analytical and historic point of view. At the same time that you remark upon the mythological archetypal nature of fantasy.
Kudos my friend, this was one of the most brilliant essays I've ever seen in all my life.
Thank you so much for your kind words, I really appreciate it.
To be honest I was kind of worried that I tried to fit too much in, and I was thinking I might do some more essays where I expand on some of the concepts I've touched on here.
Thank for reading, I'm really glad you enjoyed it.
Fascinating stuff, Maximilian. It’s hilarious how similar some of your stuff is to an essay I’ve been working on all week. If you haven’t, you need to read “The Child and the Shadow” an essay by Ursula K Le Guin. So many points mirror what you’re saying here. Though she goes a more Jungian direction with it.
Just to expand on my point in the third paragraph: the more you truely pull away from your meta-truth, the shallower your work will be, and the more it will probably be a simularum of other people's meta-truths. I might have given the impression in my answer that this was difficult. It's actually really easy, what's difficult is pulling away from your meta-truth and still producing something of depth and quality. Not to say it's impossible though.
Very interesting essay mate! Would definitely love to read more of your essays.
In this, you made a lot of original and intriguing arguments. I completely side with the fact that fantasy and fiction generally have a lot of depth than people give them credit for. It's high time people realise the value of this medium, isn't it?
Great work. You have inspired me to explore this idea further. :)
Thank you for reading, I really appreciate it.
Yeah the value of fiction and storytelling is something our ancestors had a great appreciation for, but that we’ve lost in modern western society. I think you can see the impact of that in how listless and bereft of meaning so many feel.
I’m currently working on an essay where I do a bit of a deeper dive into the concept of meta-truth, since I felt like I was trying to fit too much in this one.
That would be an amazing topic. Yeah, I feel like it'd help to explore every little nugget of an idea you have here, in its entirety, through separate essays. Looking forward to it mate.
I totally agree with you about the loss of meaning. Demeaning storytelling as something purely for leisure and entertainment has led to the loss of beauty and wonder in our daily lives. No wonder people would find modern society "factory-like" and depressing.
P.S. Maybe this construction of modern society explains the rise of nonfiction writing over fiction. Explains why the self-help industry has boomed like anything. Interestingly, I tried to explore this very dichotomy in a limited sense, in one of my essays "On Literature #2" in my publication. Do check it out if you can, maybe it'd resonate with you!
Sounds really interesting, I'll be sure to check it out.
This is a thorough unpacking of your note from earlier about fantasy being the distillation of an authors worldview. You lay out a very convincing case and this is several steps ahead of where I want to go myself in answering this question. I commend you.
To add (and of course I know you know there’s more to talk through with this): I think there’s much to be said about the ways an author can deliberately try to shape the articulation of their worldview, or try to obscure it. Naturally their art will be shaped by their meta-truth, as you call it, most of all because it helps them define the “good” they strive for in their work. But the final product may be varying levels of articulating or not articulating that worldview based on their own awareness and effort to do one or the other.
Broadly: how do you think an author’s intentions and craft influence the communication of their meta-truth?
Thank you for taking the time to read it. This was my first attempt at writing an essay in a few years, so I know it was a little bit rough in places.
You're right that there is so much more to unpack with this. Before seeing your note I didn't have any plans on writing about meta-truth on Substack. If it had been more planned I'd probably have started with an entire essay exploring the concept of the meta-truth-which is somewhat analogous to what Joseph Campbell called the personal myth-more generally, without even going into the role it plays in the creation of fiction and fantasy. but of course that wouldn't have been an answer to your question.
Now for your question, which is a very good one, I think that deviating from an unconscious expression of meta-truth in your work requires an enormous amount of conscious effort. Partly because the degree to which you will try to shape or obscure the articulation of your world view will is also determined by your meta-truth. Even if, on the surface level, you're able to present something that is totally different from your inherent world view, I think you'd be very hard pressed to avoid have layers of meaning that arise from your meta-truth serving as the bedrock on which your work is built. And I think we see this in pretty much every great work of literature.
I'm not trying to advocate some sort of inescapable determinism, but I see it more as a feedback loop. Your meta-true understanding of the world determines your intentions and perceptions- by extension any attempt to hide your meta-truth is at some level going to arise from your meta-truth- but your perception and intention, and specifically where you direct and focus your attention, also determines the way in which your mind forms your meta-true understanding of the world.
Really enjoyed this essay. You were able to put into words a lot of the same thoughts I have had about the fantasy genre. I simply love it. Great work.
Thank you for reading. I'm really glad you enjoyed it.
Holy cow this was the perfect essay, I must say that I love how you approached this both from a sociological and psychological analytical and historic point of view. At the same time that you remark upon the mythological archetypal nature of fantasy.
Kudos my friend, this was one of the most brilliant essays I've ever seen in all my life.
Thank you so much for your kind words, I really appreciate it.
To be honest I was kind of worried that I tried to fit too much in, and I was thinking I might do some more essays where I expand on some of the concepts I've touched on here.
Thank for reading, I'm really glad you enjoyed it.
You did no such thing as cramming too much as there’s no such thing as too much where fantasy is concerned ;)
Fascinating stuff, Maximilian. It’s hilarious how similar some of your stuff is to an essay I’ve been working on all week. If you haven’t, you need to read “The Child and the Shadow” an essay by Ursula K Le Guin. So many points mirror what you’re saying here. Though she goes a more Jungian direction with it.
I haven't read The Child and the Shadow, I'll definitely have to check it out though. Thank you for the recommendation.