Nonplaces and Leisure Zones
Burnt Friedman speaks to Mike Barnes (The Wire)
MB: Does the Leisure Zone concept tie-in with your theory of the 'Non-place'?
Yeah. Before something becomes a 'Leisure Zone', it used to be a 'Non-place'. It's economically not of any interest to anybody, but this is when it's important for those who use it. It's simply a grey area. It doesn't have any existence verbally; it's not described; no public spot; it's just in between buildings or on the outskirts. But then take hold of it, call it a leisure zone, cultivate it, and something that used to be a non-place is brought into existence. It does appear. It has to serve people's health, for instance.
MB: Would you play Leisure Zone music in a leisure zone?
(Laughs) No, it's because it's not recognisable; it's a paradox. I once was asked to make a musical installation in a museum. It was during an art opening. So I put a CD player somewhere into the building. I had the Leisure Zones sound CD going. The curator came back to me and asked me, 'Where is your music' and I said 'It's always there, all the time, that's part of the idea'. Do you see the analogy? It's as if they would take away the air that you breathe and put it in oxygen tanks that you have to pay for. (...) as long as the vocabulary is missing these procedures always continue to take away the substance, to make it more redundant. It's actually a process of higher redundancy that I'm working against.
_____
appeared in The Wire 266, April 2006