Algorithmic Automation of Leisure from a Sustainable …
29
the subject, we can observe the evolution of views and their radicalization, which
caused him to reject the ideas of the leisure society, treating them as utopian and
naive (Roberts 1978, p. 146). J. Dumazedier wrote that the transformations taking
place required broader and different visions than the previous ones. Thus he rejected
the notion of a “leisure society” in favor of the “possible arrival of a civilization
of leisure,” which is not a “golden age beginning tomorrow,” but “a collection of
new social and cultural problems that must be seriously considered today” (follow
Veal 2009, p. 39). Kelly (follow Veal 2009, pp. 60–61) pointed out the main reasons
why the “leisure time era” did not come, stressing: firstly, the decline in working
hours, which did not take into account the rising unemployment and the diversity of
working hours, especially in the growing services sector; secondly, that the indicators
of prophetic economic development did not work and the changes associated with
globalization exacerbated social inequalities; and thirdly, that most of the “gains” in
leisure time were absorbed by television and additional work, including domestic
work, increasingly involving childcare and consumption.
Concepts such as hunger for time, haste, striving, or time pressure characterize
the temporal situations of contemporary people as well as their culture, increasingly often referred to as the culture of high speed or civilization of haste (follow
Tarkowska 2001; Klein 2004; Szollos 2009). Godbey defines the lack of time as the
greatest deficiency of the postmodern world (Godbey 2008, p. 76). Robinson and
Goodbey, 1997, p. 25) point out that time has become the most valuable commodity
and the greatest deficit for millions of Americans. Since the 1960s, the percentage of
Americans who claim that they “still feel busy” has increased by more than half by
those who indicate that they “work hard all the time” and often “stay at work until
late.” In a 1996 study by the same authors, 40% of Americans indicated that lack of
time is a greater problem than lack of money (Robinson and Goodbey, 1997, p. 25).
Southerton and Tomlinson (2005) point out the problem of the dizzying pace
of life and the associated sense of “shrinking” time among the English, Welsh and
Scots. Researchers pointed to three phenomena that favor the experience of “shrinking” time, namely: actual overload, uncoordinated rhythms and temporal density
(Southeron and Tomlinson 2005, pp. 232–236). The first process concerned “the
time required to complete sets of tasks regarded as ‘necessary’, and refers to the
changing distribution of practices in time” (Southeron and Tomlinson 2005, p. 232).
It was related both to the increasing number of activities that we consider necessary today, and to the more time that individuals spend on some of them, such as
consumption. G. Godbey drew attention to the growing sense of “what is necessary” that triggers this mechanism of actual overload, which means that the idea
of leisure time spent on pleasures loses its raison d’être regardless of how many
hours that individuals actually have off from work (Godbey 2008, pp. 34, 43–47).
It is this growing sense of “what is necessary” that translates into additional activities for which individuals feel obliged to find time, which explains the paradoxical
situation in which—despite gaining extra free time—people today feel busier than
they did twenty or thirty years ago when they spent much more time at work on
average. The second process indicated by the authors (Southeron and Tomlinson
29
the subject, we can observe the evolution of views and their radicalization, which
caused him to reject the ideas of the leisure society, treating them as utopian and
naive (Roberts 1978, p. 146). J. Dumazedier wrote that the transformations taking
place required broader and different visions than the previous ones. Thus he rejected
the notion of a “leisure society” in favor of the “possible arrival of a civilization
of leisure,” which is not a “golden age beginning tomorrow,” but “a collection of
new social and cultural problems that must be seriously considered today” (follow
Veal 2009, p. 39). Kelly (follow Veal 2009, pp. 60–61) pointed out the main reasons
why the “leisure time era” did not come, stressing: firstly, the decline in working
hours, which did not take into account the rising unemployment and the diversity of
working hours, especially in the growing services sector; secondly, that the indicators
of prophetic economic development did not work and the changes associated with
globalization exacerbated social inequalities; and thirdly, that most of the “gains” in
leisure time were absorbed by television and additional work, including domestic
work, increasingly involving childcare and consumption.
Concepts such as hunger for time, haste, striving, or time pressure characterize
the temporal situations of contemporary people as well as their culture, increasingly often referred to as the culture of high speed or civilization of haste (follow
Tarkowska 2001; Klein 2004; Szollos 2009). Godbey defines the lack of time as the
greatest deficiency of the postmodern world (Godbey 2008, p. 76). Robinson and
Goodbey, 1997, p. 25) point out that time has become the most valuable commodity
and the greatest deficit for millions of Americans. Since the 1960s, the percentage of
Americans who claim that they “still feel busy” has increased by more than half by
those who indicate that they “work hard all the time” and often “stay at work until
late.” In a 1996 study by the same authors, 40% of Americans indicated that lack of
time is a greater problem than lack of money (Robinson and Goodbey, 1997, p. 25).
Southerton and Tomlinson (2005) point out the problem of the dizzying pace
of life and the associated sense of “shrinking” time among the English, Welsh and
Scots. Researchers pointed to three phenomena that favor the experience of “shrinking” time, namely: actual overload, uncoordinated rhythms and temporal density
(Southeron and Tomlinson 2005, pp. 232–236). The first process concerned “the
time required to complete sets of tasks regarded as ‘necessary’, and refers to the
changing distribution of practices in time” (Southeron and Tomlinson 2005, p. 232).
It was related both to the increasing number of activities that we consider necessary today, and to the more time that individuals spend on some of them, such as
consumption. G. Godbey drew attention to the growing sense of “what is necessary” that triggers this mechanism of actual overload, which means that the idea
of leisure time spent on pleasures loses its raison d’être regardless of how many
hours that individuals actually have off from work (Godbey 2008, pp. 34, 43–47).
It is this growing sense of “what is necessary” that translates into additional activities for which individuals feel obliged to find time, which explains the paradoxical
situation in which—despite gaining extra free time—people today feel busier than
they did twenty or thirty years ago when they spent much more time at work on
average. The second process indicated by the authors (Southeron and Tomlinson