Conceptions of Complex Leisure

  • Lise Kjølsrød
Part of the Leisure Studies in a Global Era book series (LSGE)


This chapter compares the term specialized play with three related conceptions, and concludes that choice of term makes a difference to the general understanding of modern actors. The terms are different, partly because they rely on different analogies. Serious leisure borrows much from work; nothing is laidback about it. Specialized play shares this perspective, and emphasizes specialization processes, but is also inspired by expressive communication through art. Edgework is a type of risk-taking associated with an inborn tendency in the person, enhanced by cultural influences in modernity. Consumption within a fantasy enclave stems from commercial enterprises, among them luxury hotels, and settings in Las Vegas and Disneyland where fantasy offers a richer quality of experience and stimulates consumer desires. The presentation of these terms illustrates at the same time a variety of game-like activities.


  1. Abbott, A. Methods of Discovery: Heuristics for the Social Sciences. New York and London: W.W. Norton, 2004.Google Scholar
  2. Ainslie, G. Picoeconomics: The Strategic Interaction of Successive Motivational States within the Person. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992.Google Scholar
  3. Bauman, Z. Society Under Siege. Cambridge: Polity Press, 2002.Google Scholar
  4. Belk, R. W. Collecting in a Consumer Society. London and New York: Routledge, 1995.Google Scholar
  5. Belk, R. W., and J. A. Costa. “The Mountain Man Myth: A Contemporary Consuming Fantasy.” The Journal of Consumer Research 25, no. 3 (1998): 218–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Benjamin, W. Illuminations. New York: Schocken Books, 1988 [1955].Google Scholar
  7. Collins, R. Interaction Ritual Chains. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Critchley, S. Infinitely Demanding: Ethics of Commitment, Politics and Resistance. London and New York: Verso, 2007.Google Scholar
  9. Ferrell, J. “The Only Possible Adventure: Edgework and Anarchy.” In Edgework, edited by S. Lyng, 75–88. New York and London: Routledge, 2005.Google Scholar
  10. Goffman, E. “Where the Action is.” In Interaction Ritual: Essays on Face-to-Face Behavior, edited by E. Goffman, 149–270. New York: Pantheon Books, 1967.Google Scholar
  11. Goffman, E. Frame Analysis: An Essay in the Organization of Experience. Boston: Northeastern University Press, 1986 [1974].Google Scholar
  12. Haworth, J. T. Work, Leisure and Well-being. London and New York: Routledge, 1997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Huizinga, J. Homo Ludens. A Study of the Play Element in Culture. Boston: The Beacon Press, 1955 [1938].Google Scholar
  14. Kjølsrød, L. “Adventure Revisited: On Structure and Metaphor in Specialized Play.” Sociology 37, no. 3 (2003): 459–476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kjølsrød, L. “How Innocent is Our Scientific Vocabulary? Rethinking Recent Sociological Conceptualizations of Complex Leisure.” Sociology 43, no. 2 (2009): 371–387.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kjølsrød, L. “Mediated Activism: Contingent Democracy in Leisure Worlds.” Sociology 47, no. 6 (2013): 1207–1223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Klethagen, P. Kunsten å være heldig. En sosiologisk studie av aktive nettpokeramatører (The Art of Being Lucky: A Sociological Study of Active Pokerplayers on the Net). Master’s Thesis, Institutt for sosiologi og samfunnsgeografi, University of Oslo, 2007.Google Scholar
  18. Lyng, S. “Edgework: A Social Psychological Analysis of Voluntary Risk Taking.” American Journal of Sociology 95, no. 4 (1990): 851–886.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lyng, S. “Introduction.” In Edgework, edited by S. Lyng, 3–16. New York and London: Routledge, 2005.Google Scholar
  20. Sennett, R. The Fall of Public Man. New York and London: W.W. Norton & Company, 1974.Google Scholar
  21. Simmel, G. “The Adventurer.” Translated by David Kettler. In George Simmel, On Individuality and Social Forms, edited by Donald Levine, 187–198. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1971 [1911].Google Scholar
  22. Stebbins, R. A. “Serious Leisure: A Conceptual Statement.” Pacific Sociological Review 25, no. 2 (1982): 251–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Stebbins, R. A. Amateurs, Professionals and Serious Leisure. Montreal and Kingston: McGill-Queen’s University Press, 1992.Google Scholar
  24. Stebbins, R. A. “Serious Leisure and Well-being.” In Work, Leisure and Well-being, edited by J. T. Haworth. London and New York: Routledge, 1997.Google Scholar
  25. Sutton-Smith, B. The Ambiguity of Play. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2001 [1997].Google Scholar
  26. Taylor, C. The Ethics of Authenticity. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1991.Google Scholar
  27. Thompson, H. S. Hell’s Angels: A Strange and Terrible Saga. New York: Ballantine, 1967.Google Scholar
  28. Veblen, T. The Theory of the Leisure Class. New York: The Modern Library, 2001 [1899].Google Scholar
  29. Wertsch, J. V. Mind as Action. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998.Google Scholar
  30. Wilensky, H. L. “Work, Careers and Social Integration.” International Science Journal 12, no. 4 (1960): 32–56.Google Scholar
  31. Wolfe, A. “Introduction.” In The Theory of the Leisure Class, edited by T. Veblen, xi–xvi. New York: The Modern Library, 2001.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lise Kjølsrød
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Sociology and Human GeographyUniversity of OsloOsloNorway

Personalised recommendations