The title. I never understood that expression… can someone help?
Edit: auto correct on ‘someone’
In: 1694
Meta means “of itself” but is often used to mean “self-referential”
So meta-gaming for example is looking at a game from outside and trying to abuse the mechanics, instead of just making organic decisions. You’re not playibg the game itself, you’re playing the systems behind it.
When used casually, it is like a recursive program, it calls itself. So, a book about a book would be ‘meta’.
Some people will refer to it for something like…some people will know who the bad guy is in art and film in the first 15 minutes. You ask, how do you know? They respond, “We have been introduced to X number of characters, we know for sure it can’t be these people, we haven’t been introduced to anyone else and doing so after this point would be a deus ex machina, therefore the bad guy has to be *this* character.” That would be meta, you are using more information to whittle down the bad guy than the characters get (the police can’t finger the murderer based on who we know at the end of Act I) but, you aren’t a character in the movie/book/tv show so you can do whatever you want.
“To be meta” is to “to be self referential”. Within writing, this might take the form of character being acknowledging they are in a story. Metadata is another example, being data about your data. If we have 15,000 records of sales information, the sales info is the data, and having 15,000 records is part of the data ABOUT the data.
Another example often used is “The meta of a game”, which refers to the game played outside and above the game itself. This can be things like what equipment is best to bring, or predicting what to expect from an upcoming game based on previous similar games.
This is a comment responding to your question about what “meta” is. It’s a bit obtuse and somewhat poorly worded. By talking about the post itself instead of speaking within it, it should be “meta”.
However, this comment was written in the hopes that the concept of meta narrative is better shown than explained. Whether that works or not is anyone’s guess. Especially not mine.
Expansion upon other comments:
Another example usage of “meta” is a scientific “meta-analysis”. An “analysis” is when you do some experiment and get a bunch of data and figure out some conclusions. A “meta-analysis” is when you look up all the analyses other people have already done, and you analyze all their analyses to find patterns that are too big for one single analysis to spot.
edit: you aren’t supposed to read this first
Think of it as “regarding the container rather than the content.”
Say a person has never played Fallout 4, but they’ve played Fallout 3 and Fallout New Vegas, they can use *meta* knowledge of the Fallout series to succeed at Fallout 4 despite it being a new game to them. If they were *just* taking inspiration from Fallout 4, they’d face a learning curve to acclimate to the controls.
Say a Reddit commenter uses a standard Reddit comment to get upvoted. Their comment was not inspired by the post but by the platform, they’re using meta knowledge of Reddit to get approval on their comment. If they were just referencing the comment, they would not receive as many upvotes.
So you see, it’s a reference to the container not the content.
Meta comes from Greek and means Beyond (or after). Beyond is it’s usual use today. So if something is meta it has to either be beyond the normal scope of something (like Metaphysics or the Metaverse) or have another level of meaning ‘beyond’ the obvious. Like the joke version of Douglas Hofstadter’s autobiography
I’m
So
Meta
Even
This
Autobiography
That’s the basis of most uses of the word currently.
It’s to analyze or reference something from outside of the subject.
You’re watching a horror movie. There’s a noise outside, and the lady gets up to check it out. You yell at the screen “hey dummy, you’re gonna get your head cut off!” Then you complain to your friend about how stupid people are in horror movies. Except the character on the screen has no reason to think she’s even in a horror movie. You are bringing your outside knowledge (your meta-knowledge) to the film. She has no way to know that a bunch of teenagers got chopped up at the nearby cabin by the lake. Normal people investigate noises all the time. Usually it really is just the wind, or just a cat.
You are playing a Pokemon game against your friend. You know which ones are good and which ones are bad. You know that water Pokemon are strong against fire, and that fire are strong against, umm, wood Pokemon? (I don’t play Pokemon, I’m not sure). This is not meta-knowledge. But you also know that your friend just *loves* water Pokemon. He talks about them all the time. So you pick electric Pokemon or something. That is meta-knowledge.
You are using information from outside the normal subject to help make decisions.
Some characters are “meta”, in that they break the fourth wall and talk to the audience. Or they know that they are in a movie/comic book/whatever, and comment on it.
https://www.google.com/search?q=men+in+tights+i%27m+not+supposed+to+lose&rlz=1C1GCEA_enUS785US785&oq=men+in+tights+i%27m+not+supposed+to+lose&aqs=chrome..69i57.7491j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8#fpstate=ive&vld=cid:0b04f26c,vid:Lzeqbws7FiE
The use of meta has some nuance.
It can mean: referential (often self referential). If John Oliver would make a show about the current state of late night shows. That would be meta. (A late night show that discusses late night shows)
Or If a Redditor comments on a post and cleverly works coconuts or broken arms into his comment some would consider that to be meta. A Reddit comment that humorously references another infamous Reddit comment.
It can mean: beyond the (intended) scope. Like analysing a book not only based on its story but on the socioeconomic era it was written in.
When a couple argues about who should do the dishes today, there could be a meta argument going on about who contributes more to the relationship. Maybe even without either one noticing.
It can be an ironic reference: imagine watching the Disney movie “sleeping beauty” and falling asleep yourself mid movie. That would be meta.
if someone tells you you’re “being meta” about something, it means they think you’re focusing to much on how the topic/question was framed or delivered then the question itself
Like if I ask you a question and then you babble on about how I worded the question or about a deeper meaning the question could have instead of talking about what I actually asked, I might tell you you’re being too meta about it
Latest Answers