[iDC] Re: The Ethics of Leisure

Ryan Griffis ryan.griffis at gmail.com
Tue Jan 9 12:24:45 EST 2007

On Jan 9, 2007, at 11:02 AM, idc-request at bbs.thing.net wrote:

> Do you find this work/leisure still tenable or operative in our  
> current
> situation?
> When we apply the hacker ethic of passionate production, and there  
> is a
> merger of our 'work' with our life's purpose (however temporary),  
> then that
> work is what we want to do most of all; furthermore, as work  
> mergers with
> life, there is no more clear distinction (see also the hacker ethic  
> by Pekka
> Himanen) between both?

Hi Michael,
Rojek gets into this (the psycho-social blurring of work/leisure) and  
i think the concept of "serious leisure" addresses some of what you  
call a "merger of our 'work' with our life's purpose." Of course, no  
theory is absolute and without holes, and Rojek gives plenty of holes  
to fill.
But i think that the distinction between leisure and work, as a  
delineation of how we understand time, seems still valid. Having  
worked in many non-profit orgs (both as volunteer and staff), the  
burn out rate is really high - as people tend to throw their whole  
identity into it and have little time for much else, but it's all  
still seen as work.
i think artists (of many kinds) present an interesting problematic to  
this distinction, but many of the problems faced in the non-profit  
world can be found there as well.
i think the importance of Rojek's analysis is a critical  
understanding of internalized and externalized desire - where does  
the passion for the work come from and how does it materialize? Who  
benefits from that passion?

More information about the iDC mailing list