Jo Large, Teesside Centre for Realist Criminology
This post draws upon my research on the consumption of counterfeit fashion goods, with the aim of developing a more critical understanding of this work in relation to leisure, consumption and harm: outlining some ideas from my forthcoming paper “Negotiating Harm, Consumption and the (Counterfeit) Fashion Industry”. I’ve argued elsewhere (Large, 2011) that despite suggestions from anti-counterfeiting agencies that consumers view counterfeit fashion as a ‘victimless crime’, this belief reflects quite a simplistic view of victimisation and crime. Indeed, data I collected from qualitative interviews and focus groups with consumers (who identified both as counterfeit and non-counterfeit purchasers), suggested that most people recognise the counterfeit fashion industry as in some way bad. This begged an analysis that situated the consumption of counterfeit fashion goods and associated harms in the wider socio-economic and political context. Further, lending weight to Raymen and Smith’s call for criminology to ‘interrogate more closely the underlying drives, meanings and motivations at the heart of the quintessential consumer experience of shopping’ (2015:390).
Tom Raymen, Plymouth University
Throughout this blog and our conceptual development of ‘deviant leisure’ we have placed an emphasis on two core and interrelated issues. First is the issue of normalised harm within many areas of commodified leisure. The second is how many new, traditional and normalised forms of ‘deviance’ are arguably not ‘deviant’ at all in the sense that they contravene social and cultural values. Rather, as we and other scholars have been at pains to stress, in an era of ‘cool individualism’ in which it is culturally imperative to form a unique and individual identity that is distinct from ‘the herd’, to transgress or cultivate deviant identities is steadfastly conformist (Hall et al, 2008; Hayward and Schuilenberg, 2014; Smith, 2014). In this sense, what could under a more ethical social order be conceptualised as deviant behaviour is harnessed, pacified and repositioned as a very specific form of dynamism that serves to propel desire for symbolic objects and experiences – desires which are translated into demand within the circuits of consumption dominated by the leisure economy. Continue reading
Oliver Smith and Thomas Raymen
The broad area of deviant leisure has garnered increasing interest within criminology and the social sciences over the last several months. Robert Stebbins has very recently returned to issues of hedonism, incivility and the negative or ‘deviant’ side of leisure. Members of this research network, such as Steve Redhead, have begun to communicate deviant leisure perspectives to an increasingly global audience, whilst cultural criminology is beginning to expand its gaze beyond the limited constructs of crime and deviance to take interest in the relationship between consumer culture and normalised harm. Dedicated panels and streams at various international conferences serve to compound the suggestion that this is a perspective that is gaining traction within the social sciences.
Of course for us and to those who have been following this blog, such interest is entirely unsurprising. As evidenced by the wide array of topics covered here and beyond, deviant leisure is indeed a ‘broad church’ of exciting research areas. However in light of this spate of recent activity, we feel it is time for us to bring greater clarity to the deviant leisure project by explicitly outlining our understanding of deviant leisure as a theoretical concept. What follows below is an abridged version of a forthcoming journal article in which we begin to present the fundamental theoretical principles of a deviant leisure perspective. Continue reading
This week, Deviant Leisure has been the topic of discussion on the popular series of podcasts by Professor Tara Brabazon and Professor Steve Redhead of Flinders University, Australia. During the podcast Professor Redhead sketches out the core principles of deviant leisure and its expanded focused upon forms of normalised harm within culturally embedded forms of leisure, in addition to exploring its conceptual origins in ultra-realism and cultural criminology. Most importantly as interdisciplinary scholars, Professor Brabazon and Professor Redhead analyse deviant leisure’s capacity to cross disciplinary boundaries of critical criminology, leisure studies, geography, media studies, the sociology of sport and even the philosophy of harm itself; considering some of the potential trajectories for deviant leisure and a more critical and politicised academy.
By Victoria Silverwood
There are many forms of leisure, organised sports and even occupations where there are clear lines between deviant behaviour and that which is law-abiding, but that line can be blurred substantially when there exists a physical contest that is sanctioned. When violence is legitimised or permitted in any circumstance such as policing, security, the military or in sports, it could be argued that it ceases to be a matter of concern for criminologists, or those who study deviancy. However, there are many useful reasons for considering legitimate forms of violence as being deviant, or locating the discussion within the discipline of criminology. Indeed, the concept of legitimisation and the issues of power, money and law that surround it are integral to an understanding of the discipline itself and the study of violence that is not affected by criminocentric definitions of violence can be fruitful, as highlighted by Jackman:
Once we step away from the legal and moral imperatives that have shaped research on violence, we are confronted with the diverse and sometimes complex motivations that shade the variegated practice of violence in social life.
(Jackman 2002:400) Continue reading
By Alistair Fraser, University of Glasgow
The following extract is excerpted from chapter six of the book ‘Urban Legends: Gang Identity in the Post-Industrial City’ (Oxford: Oxford University Press). The chapter, titled ‘Learning to Leisure’ (pp. 139-164) traces the leisure lives of a group of young men from Langview, a deindustrialised working-class community in Glasgow. The boys – aged 14-16 during the period of fieldwork – demonstrated a clear desire for traditional forms of work and leisure, but found opportunities for both thin on the ground. As a result, their leisure lives often resulted in friction with the ‘new Glasgow’, which privileges privatised, commercialised and delocalised leisure. Continue reading
By Theo Kindynis (University of Greenwich)
Under London, an urban explorer is dwarfed by the massive Lee Tunnel “super sewer” construction, the deepest and largest tunnel ever built under the city. Photo: Theo Kindynis.
Recreational trespass, or as it has become known in recent years, “urban exploration” (often abbreviated as UrbEx or UE) is the practice of illicitly gaining access to forbidden, forgotten or otherwise off-limits places, ‘simply for the joy of doing so’ and / or in order to document them photographically (Garrett, 2013: 21). Such places typically include: derelict industrial sites, closed hospitals or asylums, abandoned military installations, construction sites and cranes, sewer and storm drain networks, subterranean utility tunnels and rapid transit (metro) systems – the list goes on. In the past two decades, and particularly since the mid-2000s, an emergent global subculture has coalesced around this activity, facilitated by the Internet and online discussion forums such as 28 Days Later (taking its name from the 2002 British post-apocalyptic horror film). A small but growing research literature has accompanied the practice’s proliferation (see, for example, Bennett, 2011; Garrett, 2013; Mott and Roberts, 2014). During the past three years, I have conducted autoethnographic research into urban exploration, participating in over a hundred trespass events, and illicitly accessing sites including, but not limited to: many of London’s most notable highrise construction developments; under-construction Crossrail tunnels and stations; the under-construction Lee Tunnel “super sewer”; the under-redevelopment Battersea Power Station; the London Olympic Stadium, and other locations perhaps best not mentioned here. I’ll leave discussions of the ethics of illegal research for another blog post, but suffice to say that Jeff Ferrell and Craig Ancrum have both tackled the subject eloquently. Continue reading
Oliver Smith and Tom Raymen recently presented a paper on Deviant Leisure at the European Society for Criminology in Porto. We used this opportunity to try and build on some of the ideas that have been raised within this blog and elsewhere. Within the paper, entitled ‘Deviant Leisure, Rethinking Leisure and Harm’ we called for a more critically engaged exploration of leisure activities, which place direct and indirect harms at the centre of defining deviant leisure. Somewhat fortuitously from our perspective, we followed a presentation by Stuart Taylor (LJMU), which provided analysis of some of the preliminary qualitative findings from an evaluation of a sexual offense prevention campaign. The paper contained data that encapsulated the embedded and to some extent culturally tolerated forms of sexual violence that occur within the night time economy, and hinted at a rather bleak social landscape which highlighted the futility of poster campaigns at the site of consumption (in clubs, bars and pubs). These poster campaigns, however well intentioned are destined to wilt in the powerful glare of the massed energy and seemingly limitless influence of the branding and marketing associated with the alcohol and broader leisure industries.
There is to be a dedicated stream at the upcoming BSC conference in Plymouth focusing on Deviant Leisure. This represents an excellent opportunity to bring together some of the exciting work being done in this field, and the call for abstracts is open until May 25th, so there is still time to get involved if you have not already registered!
By Oliver Smith (Plymouth University) and Thomas Raymen (Durham University)
This blog post first appeared in Discover Society
The widespread importation of the US shopping phenomenon known as Black Friday onto the UK highstreet in November 2014 represents an intriguing conundrum for the social scientist. Retailers and superstores across the country opened either at midnight or provided extended opening hours, offering ‘doorbuster’ deals and alluring discounts on a range of consumer goods. The chaotic scenes of pushing, shoving, trampling and fighting which have become a familiar, even defining characteristic of Black Friday in the United States emerged during the Black Friday sales across several cities in the UK. Police were called to stores in London, Manchester, Cardiff, Newcastle, Dundee and Glasgow among others to try to control proceedings. Continue reading