I've been thinking about why exactly did it make perfect sense: I said quite a few things about Recherche/z Modernism during the talk (somewhere in the second mp3 linked above, I think), but what I neglected to remember to mention was how Recherche/z Modernism - Postmodernism without the Irony (or what I also called PostIronic Metafiction) - may actually be a Pinoy strain of Postmodernism.
Not nationalist Pinoy but more the Pinoy Writer's irrepressible urge to find and cling to macronarratives even in the face of the macros' fragmentation into micros, ie, despite Jolography's and Dissonant Umbrellas's aggressive splintering/debasing of What Has Gone Before they are still primarily driven by macronarratives (history and language and nationalism for Jolography, history and language and art for Dissonant Umbrellas), by a making-sense-of-the-world spirit. So maybe, the truer taxonomical claim would be that the antho is a result/byproduct/exhibit G of what Pinoy Postmodern Literature is.
It could also be the country's general Romantic Catholic aesthetic rearing its big red head, the Modern Pinoy Writer's undying deference to the Sublime/Padrino/Matrona, to the Modern Pinoy Writer's undying worship of Artifice: so, instead of it being a departure in the way the Postmodern is in the West, maybe it's actually more a mutation of the Romantic Tradition, ie, the Old reregarded with rose- and sapphire-tinted spectacles. So maybe, the truer taxonomical claim would be that the antho is an exhibit of New New Romanticism.
It could also be because us editors Chingbee, Mark, and I are by and large fans of Western Modernist Literature and/or its many divergent schools of thought/thinking - from Stein to Eliot and Joyce to DADA and Bataille to the OuLiPo and the Situationist International and Pyschogeography to etc etc - so maybe, the truer taxonomical claim would be that the antho is an exhibit of what/how we understand new Philippine writing in English is/ought to be.
It could also be that to think of art history and tradition as history and tradition is narrowly bull-headed in the face of globalisation (or more accurately, glocalisation), so maybe, the search for a true taxonomical claim for the antho is also likewise narrowly bull-headed, and so the "new" here may actually merely mean "minted just this 2011" and nothing more.
I bet all of these things will be clearer (or chances are, murkier) in our intro for the antho, forthcoming this end of February 2011. For now, we'll have to settle for these efforts at inarticulation.