Abstract

Books and articles about the acceleration of daily life are themselves accelerating. A theoretical basis for expecting the inevitability of these trends has been traced in the writings of major sociologists including Durkheim, Marx, Weber and Sorkin. As deTocqueville observed more than 150 years ago, “The American is always in a hurry.” Economists have also weighed in on these issues of time compression, perhaps starting with Linder’s insightful treatise The Harried Leisure Class, predicting the frantic pace of modern life and leisure. As specialized work led to higher rates of productivity, accelerated consumption led to an acceleration of the pace of life and a harried leisure class. Much of what Linder discussed in regard to time scarcity was perceived scarcity. Interestingly, his conclusions were not that people would work longer, but rather that they would attempt to increase the yield on a unit of time in all areas of life—minimizing activities such as singing or political debate, which could not easily have their yield on time spent increased. The value of efficiency and increased productivity, carried to extremes, he argued, produced a kind of decadence in which the goal of economic growth is never questioned. More recently, economists have played down the seriousness of concerns over a speeded up lifestyle, characterizing it in large part as “Yuppie Kvetch.” Not that higher income couples are making irrational decisions, they are simply facing the inevitable constraints on their ability to enjoy their wealth. This article reviews various of these philosophical issues in the context of US national survey data concerning trends in the time pressures and stress in the activities of Americans over the last 30+ years. It focuses both on the measurable amounts of free time Americans have and on the specific activities done in that free time. It also reviews survey data on Americans’ perceptions of and attitudes toward time and stress. It brings together data from different survey sources that often show conflicting trends and conclusions