I've always defined "meta fiction" as fiction that breaks that fourth wall. (Of course, I come from a strict literary and theater tradition and I still remember my third grade teacher, Nancy Brooms, pointing out to my reading group while we were reading The Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe that C.S. Lewis steps in occasionally as Author to speak directly to the Reader.) It's in terms of the reader that the text is defined because, frankly, authorial intent means crap unless the reader is able to understand it. And often authorial intent and what's there are two different things (I hardly think all those slash writers really mean to be misogynistic, for example).
Meta-based fiction is another story entirely. (Uh, no pun intended.) I think it's more fiction (for the sake of fandom) that realises there's a wider world than "the bubble" the characters exist in and attempts to address it. It's self-conscious, in that the reader can connect to a world outside of the head of a character. I'm explaining it badly, saeva's definition is better.
It's not so much that there are issues dealt with, as you plebe example suggests, but more that the reader is aware of a government, of a history, of a political struggle, of social status, etc. Everything that a real person is aware of. Meta-based fiction goes one step further than creation, but serves to address those outside issues in a context that can be linked back to the world outside of the fiction. (Published writers seem to be both good and bad about this. I continually want to smack JKR for her lack of consistency.)
In the end, I think the problem with both defining and writing meta fiction is that far too often it ceases to fiction and quickly becomes STATEMENT. ("I am using this to make a STATEMENT on the toleration of female mutilation in Africa!") Fiction, at it's heart, is still a story. That's why I don't write meta or meta-based fiction (as I define it). Because I'm far more concerned with the narrative than I am with the readers knowing my opinion of the price of food in China.
no subject
Meta-based fiction is another story entirely. (Uh, no pun intended.) I think it's more fiction (for the sake of fandom) that realises there's a wider world than "the bubble" the characters exist in and attempts to address it. It's self-conscious, in that the reader can connect to a world outside of the head of a character. I'm explaining it badly,
It's not so much that there are issues dealt with, as you plebe example suggests, but more that the reader is aware of a government, of a history, of a political struggle, of social status, etc. Everything that a real person is aware of. Meta-based fiction goes one step further than creation, but serves to address those outside issues in a context that can be linked back to the world outside of the fiction. (Published writers seem to be both good and bad about this. I continually want to smack JKR for her lack of consistency.)
In the end, I think the problem with both defining and writing meta fiction is that far too often it ceases to fiction and quickly becomes STATEMENT. ("I am using this to make a STATEMENT on the toleration of female mutilation in Africa!") Fiction, at it's heart, is still a story. That's why I don't write meta or meta-based fiction (as I define it). Because I'm far more concerned with the narrative than I am with the readers knowing my opinion of the price of food in China.