A Response to Victor Malm’s Critique of Streaming Culture
Nicholas Wennö, a film and TV critic, responds to Victor Malm’s column in which Malm critiques the role of streaming services in modern culture. Wennö addresses Malm’s assertion that watching series is "meaningless" and that streaming recommendations, like Wennö’s own in Dagens Nyheter (DN), are symptomatic of a fragmented and impoverished cultural landscape. Wennö playfully accepts responsibility for depressing Malm with his streaming suggestions, but challenges the core argument about the inherent meaninglessness of series viewing. He acknowledges the time-consuming nature of streaming and the existence of low-quality content, but defends the value of curated recommendations in navigating the vast sea of available options. Wennö highlights the potential for profound cultural experiences through streaming, citing examples like "Wolf Hall 2," "Severance 2," "The Break of Dawn at Sambre," and Hirokazu Kore-eda’s "Asura" as evidence of the artistic merit that can be found within the medium.
Wennö contends that Malm’s disinterest in the audiovisual sector, as the culture editor of a major newspaper, is a curious stance. He argues that dismissing an entire art form, especially one as influential as film and television, is akin to boasting about not reading books. He draws a parallel to the literary world, pointing out that "meaningless" works exist in all forms of media, not just streaming. Wennö emphasizes the importance of cultural journalism in guiding audiences through the overwhelming abundance of choices available on streaming platforms. He sees his recommendations as a contribution to fostering a shared cultural experience, a "bonfire" around which audiences can gather, in contrast to the fragmented, individualized consumption that Malm laments.
Wennö playfully chides Malm for his apparent aversion to the audiovisual realm, suggesting that he engage with the medium rather than simply dismissing it. He proposes that Malm start his own recommendation column, jokingly titled "Read with Malm," as a way to actively participate in the cultural conversation surrounding streaming. Wennö’s tone throughout the letter is lighthearted and teasing, yet he seriously defends the cultural value of film and television and the importance of critical engagement with the streaming landscape. He invites Malm to join him in exploring the depths of the streaming world, acknowledging the potential pitfalls while also highlighting the potential for enriching cultural experiences.
Wennö’s central argument revolves around the importance of curated guidance within the expansive and often overwhelming world of streaming services. He acknowledges the existence of "meaningless" content, the "plastic mountains" within the "streaming ocean," but posits that this very abundance necessitates the role of the cultural critic. The critic, in Wennö’s view, acts as a navigator, helping audiences discern valuable content from the vast sea of mediocrity. He sees his own recommendations not as contributing to cultural fragmentation, but rather as an attempt to create a shared cultural space, a metaphorical "bonfire" around which viewers can congregate. This directly counters Malm’s assertion that streaming contributes to a sense of privatized, fragmented cultural experience.
Furthermore, Wennö challenges Malm’s apparent dismissal of the entire audiovisual sector. He argues that such a dismissive stance, especially from a cultural editor, is akin to bragging about an aversion to reading. This comparison underscores Wennö’s belief in the inherent cultural value of film and television, placing it on par with literature and other established art forms. He implies that Malm’s apparent indifference to the medium prevents him from engaging with a significant and influential aspect of contemporary culture.
While acknowledging the potential for time-wasting and the abundance of low-quality content, Wennö emphasizes the potential for profound cultural experiences through streaming. His examples of noteworthy series, such as "Wolf Hall 2," "Severance 2," "The Break of Dawn at Sambre," and "Asura," serve as evidence of the artistic merit that can be found within the streaming landscape. These examples highlight the diversity and depth of available content, challenging the notion that all streaming content is inherently "meaningless."
In essence, Wennö’s response is a defense of the cultural value of streaming and a call for active engagement with the medium. He playfully challenges Malm to move beyond dismissive generalizations and to explore the rich and varied landscape of film and television available through streaming platforms. He advocates for the role of the cultural critic in navigating this complex landscape, providing guidance and fostering a sense of shared cultural experience in a world increasingly dominated by individualized consumption. He concludes with a lighthearted yet earnest invitation for Malm to join him in exploring the "underworld" of streaming, suggesting that such exploration can be both rewarding and culturally enriching.
