Classic shortcomings of a public broadcasting series



History is always the result of the choices we make. More correctly on history-writing: history is always the result of the choices historians makes somewhere down the road. A book on history is still just a book and as the process of writing it takes form; it is impossible to write a history every person can enjoy and feel like it can be part of their story. Perhaps that is also why general history oversights, such as a history of world societies, will always fall short. If we dig deep enough we can always find that case that does not fit into the larger picture.

For the past year or so Swedish historians have been rather curious about a new project by Swedish public broadcasting company, SVT which have made a large oversight called Swedens history. The goal of the show has been to create a fact-based story of the country from the stone age until today. And in so many regards, they have been quite successful. For instance, they highlight the inter-cultural contacts between people living in Sweden during the bronze age and other parts of Europe. It is also a history that focus on classical historical impacts such as iron, religion and politics. But one problem remains, namely the diversity of Swedish history and the compact of sourrinding societies. 

The inhabitans of this part of Europe probably never identified themselves as Swedes, but rather as members of local tribes under a chief. As time went on some of these tribes were more sucessful than others and managed to gain control over larger amounts of lands, thus being able to form early kingdoms. However, the process of creating kingdoms in the north were not a phenomena that started in Sweden. Instead the earliest kingdoms can be found sourrunding the coast of Norway which then spread towards Sweden. It is also clear that the idea of a centralized government did not emerge within today's Sweden since the vikings had close contacts with both modern day France and the UK. By not highlighting these aspects the show instead creates a picture were a society based around a centralized government will become the natural way to organize social life, and that this is something that is a driving form in peoples life. If the show instead would highlight the anglosaxon and french influence on viking culture, we perhaps may end up with a different way of thinking. By including these ways of thinking it would also be possible to give a perspective were "swedish" political culture were influenced by the global context, thus creating a history writing that would be more inclusive. 

Another example of the traps that the show falls into is it's strong emphasis on the region of Mälardalen, close to the powercenter of Stockholm. However, this part of Sweden were not alone in creating large settlements governed by a central power. During the bronze-age Uppåkra were one of Swedens largest settlements and a place of cult. Instead a large emphasis is placed on Uppsala, close to Swedens today capital Stockholm. By doing this, SVT is once again reducing history to the locality of Mälardalen. Another example is yesterday’s storytelling on local cults deriving from saints. Throughout Sweden there exists a large amount of local saints and many of them are female. In my local area Sankt Magnhild of fulltofta is one such example. Instead the story is mostly revolving around Sankta Helena of Skövde, which is of course the result of SVT having to choose one saint. But by not highlighting the diversity of local saints. the show becomes overly simplistic and not illustrating the richness of Swedens history. 

So, what can one make of the story told by SVT? I personally think it is a well produced and well executed documentary that in many ways deals with the history subjects short-comings. Women are represented, disabled people are represented and the story told is quite interesting. However, it still overly focus on classical powercenters (i.e. Stockholm) and fails to place Sweden in a global context. Trade routs are interesting, but perhaps it was their role as suppliers of goods that were main point, but rather as an area of idea exchanges. 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The use of history and why historians should mind the gap

Image
 Around two decades ago we can to some extent see how a paradigm hit Swedish history science in full force. This paradigm consisted of studies on how history was used in society and often came with a theoretical luggage from the German and English tradition. After having supervised student theseses on this area I still remain somewhat doubtful as too how students, and historians, often uses these theories. Perhaps this is also due to my PhD-thesis containing a similar approach when it comes to putting the past into neat little boxes. My criticism towards this paradigm is that it have come to be utilised as a way to only package uses of history, rather than what these packages contains. Let us for instance take the form of studying uses of history as narratives or if one so wishes, tropes. The idea here is to study how certain forms are expressed as stories of trauma, grief or “from darkness to light”. What this actually is about in the more theoretical work is to study how history ...
Read more

Contemporary Sexual Politics: Efforts to Silence Sexuality in Politics

Image
Following up on last week’s post, we can ask ourselves where questions of sexuality are being challenged in politics. From a contemporary perspective, I would argue that we are currently witnessing global attempts—particularly from conservative actors—to banish issues of sexuality from public discourse. In Foucauldian theory, we can speak of several forms of the exercise of power. Foucault uses the concept of biopower to analyze social views on sex, capitalism, and power. One of the central aspects of biopower is that it often operates through the individual, who is expected to internalize social norms rather than be externally forced to accept them. Yet, in the case of sexuality, we have over the past decades witnessed rather forceful attempts to silence it, thereby making people unaware of important aspects of their own sexuality. In such cases, the effort seems to lie in banishing "unwanted" expressions from public discourse, thereby limiting the individual’s scope for a...
Read more

Contemporary Sexual Politics: a Background

Image
This is the first part in a series of three posts in which I aim to discuss contemporary sexual politics from a more theoretical and research-based perspective than in my other posts. It forms part of a broader discussion on how sexuality can—and perhaps should—be understood as constituted by a multitude of actors. Therefore, we might not be able to speak of a single contemporary politics of sexuality, but rather of a range of political positions. During the 20th century, numerous philosophers and researchers attempted to write “the history of sexuality,” but the one who has influenced me the most is the French philosopher Michel Foucault. I have actually read all three of his original works on sexuality, but I believe the first book covers the essential foundations for discussing and understanding sexuality. Broadly, this can be said to consist of two levels of particular interest to this series of posts: a) the repressive hypothesis b) the discussion on power/knowledge and the multi...
Read more