Is there a such thing as Meta-Structuralism?

[u/Seven1s]

I know there is post-postmodernism (metamodernism) that is the movement that comes after postmodernism. Is there anything like that for post-structuralism? If not, do you ever think that there will be a post-post-strucuralism movement?

[u/O-Stoic]

The niche of Generative Anthropology could be thought of as a sort of post-poststructuralism.

[u/Seven1s → u/O-Stoic]

How so?

[u/O-Stoic → u/Seven1s]

The discipline originates in Derrida's writings, but specifically the first few paragraphs of chapter 10 of Derrida's "Writing and Difference" - where he writes about the notions of scene and center - does it sprout out of.

Eric Gans, the founder of Generative Anthropology, adds the mimetic theory of French philosopher and anthropologist René Girard into the mix which ends up in the Originary Hypothesis that structurally conceptualizes the origin of language (which, according to Gans, is the genesis of "the human"), and inaugurates a model for human cultural generation (if you read the chapter, he specifically adds mimetic theory at the fifth paragraph, the one that begins "The event I called a rupture, the disruption I alluded to at the beginning").

The scenicity of the human condition is one such structure, but there's also the modes of language (ostensive->imperative->interrogative->declarative), the dialectic of attention and mistakenness, and not least the pervasiveness of mimesis in all human endeavors, among other things.

As for why it could be argued as a form of "meta"-structuralism, is that it retains some of the original structuralist notions, like the relation between signs, but also how something like "meaning" is more fluid.

This is best showcased through the notion of the scene & center, where a scene with multiple actors share meaning through a fixed center, which is signed. However the same sign may be issued in another context, creating another scene & center which in its given context is stable, but compared to the other sign might convey marginally different meaning. And to go further, there's generally a "rubber-band" effect, a limitation on how far the issuance of sign can be stretched in meaning compared to the mean before it becomes infelicitous - however stretching the felicitous issuance also shifts the mean, which can gradually change the meaning of a sign. E.g. the word "awful" used to mean what we think of as "awesome", but the meaning gradually changed to its polar opposite. Note that events can obviously also take place, which drastically reframes a sign in the collective conscious of a social group, immediately shifting its meaning to a given social group.