There is a close relationship between metanarrative and worldview: Metanarrative deals with form, process, a story-grounding, and is diachronic; worldview deals with function, product, a story-grid, and is synchronic. Metanarrative is the story one lives in; worldview is the grid through which one interprets.
The relationship between the two can be diagrammed like this (note: the Metanarrative is formed by the many, many small stories/experiences of life)
Worldview
(Product, Function,
Synchronic, Story-Grid)
ßsssssssssssssssssssssssssssMetanarrativessssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssxsssssssssssssssssssssssssssà
(Process, Form, Diachronic, Story-Grounding)
If the above is true, the implications are significant: Worldview change does not occur without metanarrative
change, and the order is critical. Worldview change calls first for conviction of need and understanding of implications of a “better” metanarrative.
Likewise, the interpretation of life (and texts) is impacted most powerfully by
the interpreter’s awareness of metanarratival concerns and personal change at
that level.
