[HPforGrownups] Re: Metathinking

[Beth Loubet]

No: HPFGUIDX 47856

>    From: "Melody" <Malady579 at hotmail.com>
> Subject: Re: Terrorism, Meta-thinking, and MAGICAL D (Oh my.)
>
> Ohhh, my head hurts.
>
> Why?  Why, oh why, did I take on the uncertainty of meta-thinking?
> How is it that all the educated, well-read minds of HPfGU always
> manage to get tripped up on this word.  Probably because it doesn't exist.
>
> And that is where the problem lies.  If I look in my Webster's
> unabridged, I find metaphysics, metastable, even metastasis (which I
> cannot even pronounce) but not metathinking.  How incredibly
> frustrating...for both sides here.
>
> That is why CK I *cannot* give you the citation for my definition of
> metathinking as you requested.  It has none.  Only thing I can offer
> really is a breakdown of the word which really does not reveal much.

http://www.buildfreedom.com/content/metathinking_explained.shtml

This seems to be by someone claiming to have coined the term, though I
didn't read it thoroughly enough to be sure. It does seem to apply to our
discussion, though.

According to most of the articles I glanced at (plugging "metathinking" into
Google search), metathinking is simply "the study of thinking". Thinking
about thinking, in other words. "Meta-" is basically used to describe the
thought process of pulling back another level from a study of something to
study the study itself. (I.e., "anthropology" is the study of man.
"Meta-anthropology" would be the study of anthropology.)

This makes me wonder, in a way, if metathinking is exactly the term we want
here. Perhaps it is, because when we're looking at HP as a book, with all of
the external influences that implies, we're studying JKR's thought processes
when she writes. On the other hand, we're still studying her mental
processes, in a way, when we're observing her characters as "people" and
trying to discern the meanings behind their actions. Are studying the
characters from the inside and studying the books from the outside BOTH
metathinking?

Personally, I feel that when we deal with the books "from the outside",
we're dabbling in literary criticism. When we deal with them "from the
inside", we're still indulging in literary criticism (they're still books,
after all), but with a much more narrowed focus, employing psychology,
anthropology, sociology, and other hidden talents and interests we have to
examine motive, responsibility, and plot potential.

Having talked myself in a circle <grin>, I can now see in a way where the
"meta-" came in. The books are JKR's study of her characters and universe.
When we pull back a level, we're studying her study, hence the meta-. But
I'd still have to twitch at the use of "metathinking" here, for reasons
expressed above. I think we're rather "metapottering".

I can't decide whether I'm kidding with that last line or not... <grin>

bel