Editing Decadence (section)

===Postmodernist connection to decadence===
Nearly a century after the supposed end of the [[Decadent movement|decadent period]] itself, the spirit and drive of it continued in the next end of the century. Unknowingly following in the footsteps of the decadents before them, postmodernists have subscribed to many of the same habits. Both groups have found themselves simultaneously exhausted by all the new experiences of society while still putting all their efforts into experiencing it all. The [[Postmodernism|postmodernist]] is simultaneously aware of their desire for [[Modernism|modernist]] disintegration all while enjoying the products of their dying predecessor.<ref name=":1">{{Cite journal |last=Gare |first=Arran |date=2001 |title=Postmodernism as the Decadence of the Social Democratic State |url=https://philarchive.org/rec/GARPAT-15 |journal=Democracy and Nature |volume=7 |issue=1 |pages=77–99|doi=10.1080/10855660020028773 |hdl=1959.3/5030 |hdl-access=free }}</ref> This ravenous eye for the new is reflective of the lives of the practicing decadent, where they too enjoyed all the new experiences offered by their own time's modernity. Both events were deeply intertwined with expanding [[globalization]]. As seen in the lives of decadents in their literary and visual art pursuit and creation, so too has the postmodernist been given more global connection and experience.<ref name=":1" /> &nbsp;During the rise of postmodernism, there has been a clear concentration of power and wealth that supported globalization. This resurgence of power to apply has restructured the desires of the disintegration-loving postmodernist, indulging themselves in all the newness of globalized life.<ref name=":1" /> This renewed interest in a global view of the world brought along a renewed interest in different forms of artistic representation as well. 
[[File:One and Three Chair.jpg|thumb|''[[One and Three Chairs]]'' by [[Joseph Kosuth]], 1965]]
[[File:White Noise.jpg|thumb|''[[White Noise (novel)|White Noise]]'' by [[Don DeLillo]], 1985.]]
Modernism tends to belittle popular culture through its oppressive nature, which can be seen as elitist and controlling, as it privileges certain works of art above others. As a result, postmodern artists and writers developed a contempt for the canon, rejecting tradition and [[essentialism]]. This disdain for privilege extended to the fields of philosophy, science, and of course, politics. [[Pierre Bourdieu]] provides some insight into the attitudes of this new sub-class and its relation to post-modern theorists, embodied through students of bourgeois descent.<ref name=":1" /> They began to pursue their artistic interests at their schools after being shadowed academically. They are victims of verdicts which, like those of the school, appeal to reason and science to block off the paths leading (back) to power, and are quick to denounce science, power, the power of science, and above all perhaps a power which, like the triumphant technology of the moment, appeals to science to legitimate itself.<ref name=":1" /> This postmodern way of thought is guided by an anti-institutional temperament that flees competitions and hierarchies. These systems allow art to become confined by labels – postmodern work is difficult to define. In the name of the fight against [[Taboo|'taboos']] and the liquidation of 'complexes' they adopt the most external and most easily borrowed aspects of the intellectual life-style, liberated manners, cosmetic or sartorial outrages, emancipated poses and postures, and systematically apply the cultivated disposition to not-yet-legitimate culture (cinema, strip cartoons, the underground), to every-day life (street art), the personal sphere (sexuality, cosmetics, child-rearing, leisure) and the existential (the relation to nature, love, death).<ref name=":1" /> Their craft evolves into a way of being that directly criticizes modernist attitudes, and enables postmodern artists and writers with a newfound sense of freedom through rebellion.