The Swedish government’s recent foray into defining a cultural canon has sparked controversy, particularly regarding its treatment of film. Culture Minister Parisa Liljestrand’s critical remarks about the Swedish film industry, accusing filmmakers of being lazy and reliant on taxpayers, set a negative tone for the project. This was compounded by the composition of the committee responsible for selecting works for the canon, which notably lacks a dedicated film expert. While other art forms like literature, visual arts, music, and even ”knowledge and non-fiction” have designated representatives, film has been inexplicably bundled with performing arts, represented solely by a professor of theatre studies. This oversight not only diminishes the significance of film as a distinct art form but also raises concerns about the government’s understanding and appreciation of cinema’s contribution to Swedish culture.
The decision to conflate film and theatre, despite their divergent paths over the past century, reveals a deeply conservative and arguably outdated view of artistic expression. This reinforces the perception that the entire canon project is ill-conceived and lacks a nuanced understanding of the arts. The absence of a respected film scholar on the committee is a glaring omission, signaling a potential disregard for the rich and influential history of Swedish cinema. From the silent era’s global icon Greta Garbo to the auteurship of Ingmar Bergman, Bo Widerberg, and Mai Zetterling, and continuing through contemporary filmmakers like Roy Andersson, Suzanne Osten, and two-time Palme d’Or winner Ruben Östlund, Swedish cinema boasts a legacy of innovation and international acclaim. Ignoring this rich tapestry of cinematic achievement is not only a disservice to the art form but also a missed opportunity to showcase Sweden’s cultural contributions to the world.
The government’s approach stands in stark contrast to Denmark’s successful implementation of a cultural canon in 2005. The Danish model recognized film as a distinct category, with a dedicated committee comprised of film professionals, including renowned director Susanne Bier. This committee curated a diverse selection of films, representing both classic and contemporary Danish cinema, from the works of Carl Th. Dreyer to Lars von Trier. By acknowledging the unique qualities of film and entrusting its selection to experts in the field, Denmark demonstrated a sophisticated understanding of the art form and its cultural significance. Sweden’s current approach not only pales in comparison but also positions the country as a cinematic ”little brother” in the Nordic region, undermining its established reputation as a significant contributor to global film history.
The controversy surrounding the cultural canon highlights a broader concern about the government’s perceived lack of support for the film industry. Minister Liljestrand’s initial comments, coupled with the exclusion of film expertise from the selection committee, suggest a dismissive attitude towards the art form and its practitioners. This perceived lack of support is particularly troubling given the vital role film plays in cultural expression, economic growth, and international representation. A robust and thriving film industry not only contributes to a country’s cultural identity but also generates jobs, attracts investment, and promotes tourism. By failing to recognize and support the film industry, the Swedish government risks undermining its potential and diminishing its cultural influence.
The current approach to the cultural canon underscores the need for a more inclusive and informed understanding of the arts. Film, as a distinct and powerful medium, deserves to be recognized and celebrated for its unique contributions to Swedish culture. The government should reconsider its approach, incorporating film expertise into the selection process and ensuring that the canon reflects the breadth and depth of Swedish cinematic achievement. This would not only rectify the current oversight but also demonstrate a commitment to supporting and promoting a vital and influential art form. A revised approach would signal a renewed appreciation for the role of film in shaping cultural identity and contributing to Sweden’s global standing.
Ultimately, the debate surrounding the Swedish cultural canon serves as a reminder of the importance of informed cultural policy. Governments have a responsibility to support and promote the arts in all their forms, recognizing their intrinsic value and their contribution to society. By embracing a more inclusive and nuanced perspective, the Swedish government can ensure that its cultural canon truly reflects the richness and diversity of its artistic heritage, including the significant contributions of its vibrant and internationally acclaimed film industry. A well-crafted cultural canon can serve as a powerful tool for education, cultural exchange, and national pride, showcasing the best of a nation’s artistic achievements to its own citizens and the world.
