A Cultural Canon: Bridging Heritage and Modernity
Yngve Kvistad from VG expresses skepticism about a recent cultural initiative, suggesting it might gather dust rather than resonate with the vibrant society it aims to reflect. His observations hint at a broader conversation about how Norwegian culture evolves within a global landscape. Meanwhile, right-wing politician Mattis Øgård Månum offers a more methodical approach, listing various works but ultimately falling back on the well-worn assertion that “culture is changing.”
Cultural Minister Lubna Jaffery has taken this discourse a step further, framing a potential cultural canon as a dichotomy between heritage and contemporary society. In her response to the proposal, she asserts that a cultural canon “would have looked different 100 years ago,” hinting at a fear of stagnation in a rapidly evolving cultural scene.
In a society where language can often feel layered in political correctness, the vagueness surrounding terms like “Norwegian culture” and “Norwegian values” is palpable. One could wonder if the minister’s approach to these descriptors is meant to keep us modest—cautioning us against over-identification with specific cultural markers. Yet this vagueness begs the question: who benefits from such ambiguity? Why does the Minister of Culture shy away from articulating a clearer vision of her own domain?
The government’s position is fraught with contradictions. In the forthcoming Total Preparedness message (St. meld. 9 (2024-2025)), both cultural heritage and identity are framed as crucial to national preparedness, especially in contexts of international conflict. Yet, the overarching lack of a unified agreement on these concepts undermines the government’s own assertions.
Addressing this evasiveness, I propose we delve deeper into the discussion surrounding Norwegian culture. It’s essential to recognize that calling something “Norwegian” does not equate to it being exclusively so; rather, it highlights the distinctive qualities that resonate with those living in this land.
While national romanticism is not unique to Norway, its expressions here have left an indelible mark on society. Notably, the character of Pesta is recognizably Norwegian, and the significance of the fiddle in Norway differs markedly from its counterparts in other cultures.
Rather than compiling a mere list of “typical Norwegian” elements, any cultural canon should be underpinned by empirical principles. Works such as musical compositions or literary translations that have merely found popularity should not be mistakenly considered as part of the national identity; canon inclusion must be based on deeper relevance and resonance within the cultural fabric.
As a provocative suggestion, I would argue against including Ludvig Holberg in our cultural canon. His literary roots lie more deeply in Danish tradition, and although he is celebrated here, attributing him as a foundational figure in Norwegian literature misguides our understanding of national literary identity.
The absence of Holberg does not imply we shouldn’t stage his plays, but it clarifies that Norway does not claim a direct lineage to the Enlightenment literature from which he emerged.
To refine the criteria for inclusion in a cultural canon, I propose four guiding principles:
-
Cultural Relevance: Has the work influenced Norwegian culture, and is it referenced in significant ways?
-
Historical Significance: Does it embody a pivotal moment or crucial representation of a specific era?
-
Political and Social Recognition: Has it found value in previous regimes, or been a part of educational curricula, perhaps even inspiring streets or institutions named after its creator?
-
Cultural Diversity: Does it reflect or enhance the understanding of the richness and diversity within Norwegian culture?
These principles can serve as a robust foundation for a richer, more informed discussion. It is perplexing that we hesitate to engage in what should be a celebratory dialogue about our cultural identity. What is urgently needed is momentum in exploring these themes and fostering critical conversations around them.