The Cultural Context of Leisure Practice

Abstract

The debate in the study of leisure about the proper context in which to locate leisure practice continues. In the postwar period there have been three moments, or phases, in which different competing claims have expressed themselves strongly. In the 1950s and 60s, as the study of leisure began to be established in the university system, and the professionalization of leisure services began to develop quite rapidly, the functionalist model was ascendant. This reflected the position in sociology where functionalist theories and propositions set the tone of the discussion. Functionalism in leisure studies began with the concept of the free individual, and attributed choice in leisure practice to individual determination. The arena of leisure policy was identified with the nation-state. Transnational and global relations were undertheorized. The object of policy was to maximize the freedom and choices available to individuals while maintaining social and political order in the nation-state. Governments and leisure planners saw leisure as the reward for work and a mechanism for increasing social integration. Funds were allocated to parks and recreation departments and public and voluntary cultural agencies, with the object of maintaing and, wherever possible, enhancing the quality of leisure.