The Importance of Being Funded: A Case Study of the Public Funding, Production, and Style of Pica Pica (1987)

(1)

The Importance of Being

Funded

A Case Study of the Public Funding, Production, and Style of

Pica Pica (1987)

Tove Appelqvist

Department of Media Studies Master Thesis 30 ECTS Credits Cinema Studies

Master Program 120 ECTS Credits Spring term 2020

Supervisor: Malin Wahlberg The Importance of Being Funded

(2)

The Importance of Being Funded

A Case Study of the Public Funding, Production, and Style of Pica Pica (1987)

Tove Appelqvist

Abstract

Given the 2017 discontinuation of the Swedish Film Agreement and the surrounding debate on the rationales of film policy, this thesis will conduct a historical study of a particular instance of Swedish film policy history, thus seeking to contribute to the understanding of the consequences of film policy for the outcome of film. Looking at the relationship between Swedish public broadcasting (SVT) and the Swedish Film Institute (SFI) during the mid-1980’s, this thesis aims to investigate the historical background of the funding and production process that enabled the creation of Pica Pica, a feature documentary film on magpies made by director Mikael Kristersson.

By applying Geir Vestheim’s theory of the four instrumental arguments for public support of the arts and through an idea analysis, the thesis will investigate what arguments could be said to be pivotal for the funding and production of Pica Pica. Analyzing policy documents concerning the SFI and SVT, as well as using interviews conducted with the people in decision-making positions at the time, the thesis investigates what rationales and circumstances might be said to have informed the funding and production of Pica Pica. Furthermore, Kristersson’s film will be analyzed in relation to concepts of ecocinema and in relation to its lineage in nature portrayal in Swedish film. Through its investigation of the role of the funding and production circumstances for the stylistic outcome of the film, the thesis seeks to contribute to the understanding of the importance and consequences of film policy and production organization for the outcome of film in current times withal.

Keywords

Pica Pica, SFI, SVT, The Swedish Film Agreement, Cultural Policy, Ecocinema, National Cinema,

(3)

Acknowledgements

I am deeply indebted to Mikael Kristersson, Lisbet Gabrielsson, Bengt Linné, Willmar Andersson, and Christina Olofson, who have shown me immense generosity and patience throughout. As my thesis has changed course during the process, I have conducted many interviews which are not included in the final work, but your contribution to my

understanding of the workings of Swedish film production have nonetheless been paramount.

Further, I wish to thank all who have read, discussed, and in other ways supported me throughout this lengthy thesis writing process. I could not have done it without you.

(4)

1. Introduction

1.1. Background and Research Aims

When the Swedish government in May 2015 announced that the Swedish Film Agreement was to be discontinued, and that Swedish film policy was to be placed under the Department of Culture, debates on the purpose of the Swedish film policy ensued.1 Should public funds support Swedish film production for the sake of a national industry, for the sake of the

struggling filmmakers, or simply because any art in itself has an intrinsic value? Questions of whether film is to be regarded as art, as a commercial mass-medium, or somewhere in

between have been at the core of the debate. When the Film Agreement was discontinued in 2017, one of the consequences was that SVT no longer had to contribute to the Swedish Film Institute’s funds. SVT executives have stated that it is only natural that public service

broadcasting now shall focus on what their license fee audience wants, rather than adhering to the limiting quality goals of the SFI.2 For a film scholar this raises questions of what might entail in terms of what kind of films will be funded and produced in the future. Thus, in this transitional time for the organization of public funding of audio-visual media, looking at the arguments for the public funding of film historically may contribute to an understanding of what changes have taken place, as well as imagining possible futures.

The political economy of film has been approached in various ways depending on the originating field of the researcher, and where film historians and cultural analysts traditionally “investigate particular political and economic aspects of the film phenomenon being studied in order to explain the impacts of government policy, the interaction of style and mode of production”.3 Quoting Bordwell et al., Tom O’Regan states that: “the way that films are conceived, planned, produced, funded and circulated ‘leave their marks upon the films – not only directly, in telltale details, but structurally as well’”.4 What this case study thus aims to

1_{The Swedish Film Agreement of 1963 was the first instance of a Swedish film policy proper, where the state}

and the film industry met an agreement on the creation of the SFI as well as terminating the Entertainment tax, further elaborated on in chapter 3.1.2.

2 _{Sverker Lenas, “SVT stärker greppet om svensk filmbransch,” Dagens Nyheter, Kultur, October 20, 2015.} 3 _{Tom O’Regan, “The Political Economy of Film,” The SAGE Handbook of Film Studies, eds James Donald,}

Michael Renov (London: Sage Publications, 2008), 245.

(6)

2

do, is to investigate how film policy may have impacted on the structure of the film Pica Pica. However, as the Swedish film scholars Lars Gustaf Andersson, John Sundholm, and Per Vesterlund states in the introduction to a 2013 theme issue on film and cultural policy, there is as of yet no established tradition of film policy research within the field of film studies.5 Furthermore, within the broader debates on cultural policy, film policy has been largely neglected. In the above-mentioned introduction, the authors explain that one of the reasons for the exclusion of film from ‘cultural policies proper’ is its connection to industrial production. Yet today, following the neo-liberal turn, other art forms now face similar cultural

implications, and might therefore have something to learn from cinema’s struggle for

legitimacy and its grounding in commercial structures.6 Indicating that cultural policy studies and film studies have not yet reached their full interdisciplinary potential, Andersson,

Sundholm, and Vesterlund call for more joint ventures in understanding the moving image as a phenomenon.7_{This thesis is thus in part a heeding to their call.}

On the larger scope of the history of Swedish film policy, important work has been carried out by Roger Blomgren, Olof Hedling, as well as Per Vesterlund.8_{Likewise, Tytti}

Solia has contributed with valuable insights to the understanding of the context and

development of Swedish film policy in her chapter on Sweden in the book Nordic National

Cinemas.9 However, these broader studies apart, less have been done in terms of more

detailed case studies.10 Cultural policy researcher Geir Vestheim has presented a theory where

5 _{Lars Gustaf Andersson, John Sundholm, Per Vesterlund, “Introduction,” in “Minitema om filmpolitik” The}

Nordic Journal of Cultural Policy 16, no 1 (2013): 6.

6 _{Andersson, Sundholm, and Vesterlund, 5f.} 7 _{Andersson, Sundholm, and Vesterlund, 8.}

8 _{See Roger Blomgren, Staten och filmen: Svensk filmpolitik 1909-1993 (Hedemora: Gidlunds förlag, 1998);}

Olof Hedling, “’An Unintended Effect of the Introduction of the Public Support Systems’ - Film policy, film support and the contemporary Scandinavian production landscape,” The Nordic Journal of Cultural Policy 16, no 1 (2013): 90-105; Olof Hedling, “Cinema in the Welfare State: Notes on Public Support, Regional Film Funds, and Swedish Film Policy,” in A Companion to Nordic Cinema eds Mette Hjort, Ursula Lindqvist (Walden and Oxford: Wiley Blackwell, 2016), 60-77; and Olof Hedling, Per Vesterlund, “’Why not make films for New York?’: the interaction between cultural, political and commercial perspectives in Swedish film policy 1963-2013,” International Journal of Cultural Policy 22, no 5 (2016), 743-757.

9_{See Tytti Soila, “Sweden”, in Nordic National Cinemas, eds. Tytti Soila, Astrid Söderbergh Widding, Gunnar}

Iversen (Oxon and New York: Routledge, 1998), 142-232.

10_{Though there are interesting exceptions such as Andersson and Sundholm's study on the Swedish film}

workshop and Maria Jansson’s study on film policy and gender equality 2006-2016. See Lars Gustaf Andersson, John Sundholm, “The cultural policies of minor cinema practices: The Swedish film workshop during its first years 1973-1976,” Studies in European Cinema 8, no 3 (2012), 183-194; and Maria Jansson, “Gender equality in Swedish film policy: Radical interpretations and ‘unruly’ women,” European Journal of Women’s Studies 24, no 4 (2017), 336-350.

(7)

3

he argues that all cultural policy is instrumental.11 He identifies four ideal type arguments which this thesis will use as both theory and method while analyzing the policy arguments regarding SVT and the SFI. Looking at film policy, its implementation and the rationales behind it from the perspective of cultural policy arguments for support, this thesis seeks to shed light on a particular instance in Swedish film policy history. The aim of this thesis is to investigate the role of, and arguments for, the public funding of the production of the

documentary film Pica Pica (Mikael Kristersson, 1987). Initially intended as a short film for television, the film was picked up by the SFI in-house producer Lisbet Gabrielsson, making the film a joint venture for SVT Malmö (also referred to as Malmö-TV) and the SFI. As the film production shifted from film for television to film for theatrical distribution, did the arguments for supporting the film differ, and what consequences might be said to have ensued for the stylistic outcome of the film? By applying Vestheim’s theory of four ideal type

arguments for public support of the arts, this thesis will implement an idea analysis of the film policy at the SFI and of the steering documents for SVT at the time. In addition to analyzing the official documents, the thesis will make use of material gathered from interviews

conducted with people in the decision-making positions at the time. Accounting for the production circumstances and paying attention to the importance of institutional organization, all the while acknowledging the importance of individual efforts, the thesis will follow in the line of previous work carried out by Leif Furhammar as well as that of Malin Wahlberg and Tobias Janson.12 For its analysis of style, the thesis will draw on previous research by among others, film scholars Bill Nichols, Scott MacDonald, Erik Hedling and Maaret Koskinen.13 Through this case study of Pica Pica, its production, and its relation to film policy history, this thesis seeks to contribute to the understanding of the importance and consequences of film policy and production circumstances for the outcome of film. What this thesis will investigate is thus:

11_{Geir Vestheim, ”All kulturpolitikk er instrumentell,” in KulturSverige 2009: Problemanalys och statistik, eds.}

Svante Beckman, Sten Månsson (Linköping: Swedish Cultural Policy Research Observatory, 2008), 56-63.

12_{See Leif Furhammar, Med TV i verkligheten. Sveriges Television och de dokumentära genrerna (Stockholm:}

Stiftelsen Etermedierna, 1995); Tobias Janson and Malin Wahlberg, eds., TV-pionjärer och fria filmare. En bok om Lennart Ehrenborg (Stockholm: Statens Ljud- och bildarkiv, 2008).

13_{See Bill Nichols, Introduction to Documentary (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2017); Scott}

MacDonald, “Up Close and Political: Three Short Ruminations on Ideology in the Nature Film,” in The Documentary Film Reader: History, Theory, Criticism, ed. Jonathan Kahana (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016), 969-983; Erik Hedling, “The Welfare State Depicted: Post-Utopian Landscapes in Ingmar Bergman’s Films,” in Bergman Revisited. Performance, Cinema and the Arts ed. Maaret Koskinen (London and New York: Wallflower Press, 2008), 180-193; Maaret Koskinen, “Swedish Television Today: National and Aesthetic Patterns,” in Nordic Television. History, Politics, Aesthetics, eds. Francesco Bono and Ib Bondebjerg (Copenhagen: Sekvens, 1994), 219-240.

(8)

4

- What were the historical circumstances surrounding the production of Pica Pica?

- What arguments or instrumentality guided the film and television funding and support?

- How may the particular instrumental and organizational circumstances be said to have impacted the film’s artistic outcome?

Through this media historical and cultural policy-oriented field of interest, the thesis hopes to elucidate on the various implications of film policy and public funding for filmmaking in the Swedish context.

1.2. Pica Pica – Background and Film Summary

In 2015, I wrote my Bachelor thesis on Mikael Kristersson and the three films he had made for theatrical distribution. As always with research of this limited scope, there were lines of interest that had to be left out of the finished study. In the case of that Bachelor thesis it was the role of the SFI’s funding and the role of the SFI in-house producer Lisbet Gabrielsson. Writing a Master thesis, I thus seized the opportunity to further investigate the funding and production background of Kristersson’s first feature-length film Pica Pica.

Film summary

Pica Pica has the narrative structure of one year in the lives of the magpies in the Stockholm

suburb Vällingby Centrum. The film portrays the magpies nesting, mating, nestling and tending, all interspersed with imagery of human life in the suburb. There are neither voice-over commentary, fact texts, nor a music score, as the film ostensibly uses only diegetic sound. The film is ninety-seven minutes long and premiered at the Fontänen cinema theater in March 1987 and was aired for the first time on television on New Year’s Day in 1989.

1.3. Literature Review

My media historical research on the production circumstances will follow in the tradition of previous research in television and cinema history as carried out by Tobias Jansson and Malin Wahlberg, Leif Furhammar, Maaret Koskinen, and Tytti Soila among others. For my analysis of style, I will rely on concepts from ecocinema scholars such as Scott MacDonald, Scott MacKenzie, and Pietari Kääpä. Further, I will discuss the film stylistically in relation to concepts of national cinema and national television aesthetics as carried out by previous film

(9)

5

and television scholars such as Maaret Koskinen, Tytti Soila, and Erik Hedling. As the focus of this thesis is not the national versus the transnational aspects of cinema, I will not delve into the rich field of Transnational Cinema Studies, although the subject will be broached as I engage with Andrew Higson’s text on the limiting imagination of national cinema. And thirdly, my policy analysis will be informed by previous research from Cultural Policy

Studies by applying Geir Vestheim’s theory of instrumentalist arguments in combination with idea analysis.

2. Methodological and Theoretical

Framework

The historian’s interest with the past stems directly or indirectly from the belief that an understanding of the past is useful in understanding the present.14

In their chapter on economic film history, Robert C. Allen and Douglas Gomery states that the movie business has always included the three sectors: production, distribution, and

exhibition.15 To this one could arguably add the sector of pre-production, seeing that a history of films that at one point got funding but nonetheless never went in to production would be a highly interesting read. Even though the circumstances surrounding the production,

distribution, and exhibition of Pica Pica clearly differs greatly from the movie business that Allen and Gomery refers to, I fully agree with them that no film is created outside an economic context. So, according to Allen and Gomery, the questions we must ask ourselves when studying economic film history are: how, when, where and why were films produced, distributed, and exhibited.16_{By looking at the funding, production, and distribution of Pica}

Pica, this thesis aims to answer these very questions. However, as Allen and Gomery asserts,

our information about the past is always partial and inevitably mediated, thus the historian can never know the past ‘as it really was’, only as it might have been.17 This thesis is not exempt

14_{Robert C. Allen, Douglas Gomery, Film History: Theory and Practice (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1985), 6.} 15_{Allen, Gomery, 131.}

16_{Allen, Gomery, 132.} 17_{Allen, Gomery, 8.}

(10)

6

from these concerns; neither from the lacunas of the archives, nor from the mediated aspect of historical accounts. Nonetheless, while acknowledging the inherent incompleteness of

historical accounts, I am a firm adherent to the belief that the past may teach us about the present. The thesis is a media historically informed interdisciplinary case study focusing on the institutional circumstances and policy direction. For my investigation of the production circumstances I have conducted semi-structured, open-ended interviews with the director Mikael Kristersson; Bengt Linné, head of Malmö-TV and producer of the film; Lisbet

Gabrielsson, head of the Short- and Children’s Film section at the Swedish Film Institute and producer of the film; Willmar Andersson, in-house distributor at the SFI; and Christina Olofson, film director and producer, and at the time member of one of the committees distributing funds through the B-Foundation at the SFI. I will use transcriptions of the interviews, as well as published materials pertaining to the production. In terms of style, the film Pica Pica will be analyzed in relation to previous research on Ecocinema and National Cinema Studies, applying concepts therefrom. Further, I will analyze steering and policy documents such as the two government bills on SVT and the SFI respectively. I will also include aspects from the Film Agreement between the SFI, the film industry, and the state, as well as include the license agreement between the state and Sveriges Radio, and the Film Agreement in the appendix.

2.1. Production, Distribution, and Funding

2.1.1. Qualitative Interviews

Where quantitative research hope to maximize the standardization of interviews and generate answers that can be coded and processed quickly, in qualitative interviewing the interest lies to a greater degree in the interviewees point of view.18_{The flexibility of an open-ended,}

semi-structured interview gives the interviewees room to elaborate and give rich, detailed answers – which was essential for this thesis as its concern lies with the rationales guiding the funding and production processes. For this purpose, an interview questionnaire was prepared in advance, functioning as a guide while still allowing for follow-up questions. The interviews have been recorded for my own benefit and thereafter transcribed. The interview

questionnaires are included in the appendix. The five interviewees are, as mentioned above,

(11)

7

connected to Pica Pica’s production and institutional circumstances. There are inherent validity risks with relying on the fleeting and changeable memory of individuals. However, as my study hopes to shed light on the workings of film policy in practice from a historical angle, I argue that the viewpoints of those involved are highly relevant regardless of their hindsight character. Furthermore, retrospect perception of a state of affairs might even be beneficial for delineating specificities of a given period, granted that all involved have been working during several policy regimes and organizational circumstances since the ones in question.

2.1.2. Documents

For my investigation of the production process behind Pica Pica, I will rely on the annual reports from the SFI, qualitative interviews with those involved in the process, and the production/publicity folder distributed by the SFI in their capacity of

funder/producer/distributor. Unfortunately, in the case of SVT the official and internal documents available to research on this level are restricted, and I have been unsuccessful in my attempts to gain access to production details from their side of the production and funding. I will thus mainly rely on the accounts given by my interviewees.

2.2. Style

2.2.1. Ecocinema/Biocentric Cinema

As Pica Pica ostensibly is a magpie documentary, questions of which analytical framework to use immediately arises. The supposed objectivity of films about animals and their habitats have by some been seen as too scientific for the films to be included in the ranks of the documentary genre; objectivity being cited as a hindrance because it is regarded as crucial to the documentary film to have ‘a voice of its own’.19 Although not limited to films explicitly dealing with nature, one important way to address their history has been through ecocriticism

19_{Scott MacDonald, “Up Close and Political: Three Short Ruminations on Ideology in the Nature Film,” Film}

(12)

8

and the emergent field of Ecocinema Studies. In their introduction to Ecocinema Theory and

Practice, editors Stephen Rust and Salma Monani state:

From an ecocritical perspective, environment is not just the organic world [...] it is the whole habitat which encircles us, the physical world entangled with the cultural. It is an ecology of connections that we negotiate to make our meanings and our livings. In this habitat, cinema is a form of negotiation, a mediation that is itself ecologically placed as it consumes the entangled world around it, and in turn, is itself consumed.20

While the field of Ecocinema Studies hosts a variety of viewpoints and diverging interests, Rust and Monani state that most eco-film critics hold some key ideas in common. Firstly, that all cinema is culturally and materially embedded. Secondly, that the consumeristic state of affairs is troublesome to the human as well as the nonhuman world. And thirdly, that all films can present a productive ecocritical exploration.21_{Somewhat diverging from this view, Scott}

MacDonald in his article “Toward an Eco-Cinema” specifically states that he sees “the fundamental job of an ecocinema as a retraining of perception, as a way of offering an alternative to conventional media-spectatorship”.22 Scott MacDonald highlights avant garde-films that in different manners may retrain our perception, for example through the use of long takes, unusual montage techniques, through the use of unusual or natural sound, and through lifting into focus what usually serves as background. MacDonald argues that through this, films can create an ‘Edenic’ garden and a respite from our consumerist society.23

Although no books have been written about the work of Mikael Kristersson, his films have gained an increased interest from international scholars. In their chapter “Eco-therapy in Central Park: Documenting Urban Birdwatching” in Ecocinema and the City, Robin Murray and Joseph Heumann mentions Kristersson’s film Kestrel’s Eye (Falkens öga, 1998) as one example of birdwatching documentaries.24 However, seeing as they point towards how such films rarely showcase an urban environment, presumably the authors are unaware of the director’s previous film. Another American scholar who has written about Mikael Kristersson is Christopher Oscarson. In his highly interesting article “Cinematic Landscapes of the

Anthropocene: Scandinavian Documentary Film at the Turn of the Twenty-first Century”,

20_{Stephen Rust and Salma Monani, “Introduction: Cuts to Dissolves - Defining and Situating Ecocinema}

Studies,” in Ecocinema Theory and Practice, eds. Stephen Rust, Salma Monani, and Sean Cubitt (New York and London: Routledge, 2013), 1.

21_{Rust and Monani (2013), 3.}

22_{Scott MacDonald, “Toward an Eco-Cinema,” Interdisciplinary Studies in Literature and Environment, 11, 2}

(Summer 2004): 109.

23_{Scott MacDonald (2004), 109.}

(13)

9

Oscarson discuss all three of Kristersson’s films released for theatrical distribution in relationship to how they manipulate anthropocentric perspectives.25 In his analysis of Kristersson’s oeuvre, Oscarson use the term “biocentric” to describe the films’ vision of the human as simply one actor among many in the landscape, and how this refocusing of the spectator’s attention in the case of Pica Pica makes us see both magpies and ourselves in a new light.26

In my analysis of Kristersson’s work, I will be guided by ecocriticism’s insistence on viewing the cultural and the natural world as entangled and make use of MacDonald’s concept of a “retraining of perception” in relation to the concept of a biocentric cinema.

2.2.2. Nature in Swedish Film

One way of approaching Pica Pica is thus to contend its uniqueness through concepts of ecocinema. Another point of departure is to trail its lineage within Swedish film’s tradition of placing emphasis on nature; for instance as done by Maaret Koskinen when she in the book

Nordic Television argues that Pica Pica displays an intensely Swedish or Nordic sensibility in

its portrayal of nature in our midst.27 Sweden has a longstanding tradition of lyrical nature documentary and MacDonald at length discusses Sucksdorff’s short A Divided World as an important contribution to nature filmmaking, stating that much of the film’s impact comes from how Sucksdorff shows the inter-relatedness and simultaneity of ‘civilization’ and ‘nature’.28_{Sucksdorff is interesting as an example of the tradition that Kristersson may be}

seen to adhere to, as Kristersson repeatedly has stressed the importance of Sucksdorff’s films for his own filmmaking. In the chapter “Arctic Expressionism and the Poetic Documentary: The Northern Films of Arne Sucksdorff”, Scott MacKenzie states that Sucksdorff’s films “[reconfigure] the relationships between humans and nature by placing the former as a constituent part of the latter”.29 This, I will argue, is also a key aspect of Kristersson’s work. Another Swedish filmmaker portraying nature and who have gained international renomé is

25_{Christopher Oscarson, “Cinematic Landscapes of the Anthropocene: Scandinavian Documentary Film at the}

Turn of the Twenty-first Century,” Journal of Scandinavian Cinema 7, no. 3 (2017): 217-223.

26_{Oscarson (2017), 221.}

27_{Maaret Koskinen, “Swedish Television Today: National and Aesthetic Patterns,” in Nordic Television.}

History, Politics, Aesthetics, eds., Francesco Bono and Ib Bondebjerg (Copenhagen: Sekvens, 1994), 222.

28_{MacDonald (2006), 13.}

29_{Scott MacKenzie, “Arctic Expressionism and the Poetic Documentary: The Nortern Films of Arne}

Sucksdorff,” in Arctic Cinemas and the Documentary Ethos, eds., Lilya Kaganovsky, Scott MacKenzie and Anna Westerstahl Stenport (Bloomington, Indiana: Indiana University Press, 2019), 99.

(14)

10

Bengt Berg, who according to Leif Furhammar introduced an exclusive form of “the subjective camera” in his innovative “aerokinotechnical” film The Saga of the Last Eagles (Sagan om de sista örnarna, 1923).30 Berg has, however, held a problematic position in Scandinavian film history on account of his ties with Nazism, as Kim Khavar Fahlstedt points out in his article “The Cinematic Fauna of Bengt Berg”.31 So, although a film might adhere to the ecocinematic mode of offering an alternative to the conventional anthropocentric

viewpoint, it clearly does not guarantee an ideological stance in favor of all beings’ inherent value.

2.2.3. Post-Utopian Landscapes and Possible Futures

Although the importance of nature in Swedish and Nordic cinema is renowned, from the earliest years up to the present, what it represents has, as is made apparent above, not always remained the same. As nature is not simply seen as a backdrop but rather functions as a character in its own right, what that character portrays has differed. In Ingmar Bergman

Revisited, Erik Hedling describes how Swedish films from the 1910’s and onward became

famous for its highly expressive use of landscape and how during the 1930’s, the landscape became a metaphor for the high values of Swedish-ness and an integrated part of a decisively chauvinist cinematic rhetoric which celebrated modernity and social change along with heritage and tradition.32 Hedling also quotes film scholar Per Olov Qvist, who in a study concludes that the celebration of the Swedish landscape was an integral part of more than a third of all films made between 1940 and 1959, and that this tradition was encoded in Swedish cinema more than in most other national cinemas.33 In the 1960’s the anti-chauvinist trend in Swedish art cinema turned towards portraying the landscape as post-utopian, barren and sordid. I would argue that Pica Pica in relationship to this may be seen as not only emerging from the cinematic tradition of letting the Swedish landscape take center stage in a lyrical manner, but also engaging with the construction of Swedish modernity and as dealing with the demarcations of the ‘imagined community’, as formulated by Benedict Anderson, and with

30_{Leif Furhammar, Filmen i Sverige: En historia i tio kapitel (Stockholm: Bra Böcker, 1998), 72–73.} 31_{Kim Khavar Fahlstedt, “The Cinematic Fauna of Bengt Berg,” Journal of Scandinavian Cinema 7, no. 3}

(2017): 243.

32_{Erik Hedling, “The Welfare State Depicted: Post-Utopian Landscapes in Ingmar Bergman’s Films,” in Ingmar}

Bergman Revisited. Performance, Cinema and the Arts (London and New York: Wallflower Press, 2008), 181-182.

(15)

11

notions of Swedish-ness.34 In Pica Pica, Kristersson uses emblematic surroundings: a role model suburb of folkhemmet, once considered as the height of the success of the welfare state and later criticized and portrayed as troubled suburbs in the post-utopian 1960’s and 70’s. But rather than succumbing to the dichotomy of glorifying or condemning, Kristersson engages the viewer in an intimate appreciation of an underestimated milieu and previously ignored or belittled individuals in the Swedish landscape, while at the same time subtly raising questions about our self-indulgent and consumerist society. Thus, as I will argue, the film may be seen as being both ecocritical, biocentric and anti-chauvinist.

2.3. Policy

In Grundbok i idéanalys Ludvig Beckman states that the term ‘idea analysis’ is deployed as an umbrella term for different sets and combinations of purposes, research questions, and analysis techniques that may be used in the study of political messages.35 Beckman continues to state that when choosing theoretical and analytical tools it is befitting to find inspiration from formulations previously used by researchers asking similar questions.36 This thesis has sought its methodological inspiration from two previous scholarly works: “Kulturpolitik som instrument: En idéanalys av propositionen Tid för kultur”, and “Den kreativa kulturen: En studie i svensk kulturpolitiks internationalisering”.37_{Both theses’ deploy Geir Vestheim’s}

theory of instrumentality in combination with idea analysis to analyze cultural policy documents, aiming to lay bare by what kind of instrumentality the policy documents are guided. Following in their tradition, this thesis will draw closely on their outline, here applying it to film policy documents as well as policy documents guiding Swedish Public Service Television. The thesis will do a qualitative text analysis of the policy documents that guided on the one hand SVT, and on the other the SFI, using four ideal type arguments

34_{See Andrew Higson, “The Limiting Imagination of National Cinema,” in Cinema and Nation, eds. Mette Hjort}

and Scott MacKenzie (London and New York: Routledge, 2000), 63-74.

35_{Ludvig Beckman, Grundbok i idéanalys: Det kritiska studiet av politiska texter och idéer (Stockholm:}

Santérus Förlag, 2005), 11. My translation.

36_{Beckman, 23.}

37_{See Mette Agborg and Malin Bolander, ”Kulturpolitik som instrument: En idéanalys av propositionen Tid för}

kultur” (Master Thesis, Department for Library- and Information Science, Högskolan i Borås, 2010); and Mattias Desac, ”Den kreativa kulturen: En studie i svensk kulturpolitiks internationalisering” (Bachelor Thesis,

(16)

12

presented by Vestheim. Ludvig Beckman describes ideal types as serving as “a thought construction aiming to capture the essential qualities of a position”.38

2.3.1. Instrumental Arguments for Supporting the Arts

In the chapter “All kulturpolitikk er instrumentell” in the book KulturSverige 2009:

Problemanalys och statistik, Geir Vestheim argues that the notion of a non-instrumental

cultural policy is irrational.39 Rather, when analyzing the rationales behind public funding of the arts one should rather look for what type of instrumentality instructs the support. Vestheim identifies three core questions and presents a schema to delineate:

-what type of arguments are used?

-towards whom is the argument directed?

-what kind of instrumentality does the argument express?

Type of argument Target group for argument Type of instrumentality

Support of the ‘qualitative’ art for its ‘intrinsic value’

The individual as a personal being

Aesthetic and educational instrumentality

Support for art and culture in order to generate economic development

The individual as an economic being

Economic instrumentality

Support for art and culture in order to generate social development and integration

The individual as a social being Social instrumentality

Support for art and culture in order to contribute to

enlightenment and civic participation

The individual as a citizen Politically mobilizing instrumentality

Table 1. Geir Vestheim’s theory of all cultural policy being instrumental, author’s own translation.40

In the following the four arguments will be presented.

The Perfectionist Argument

The perfectionist argument holds the view that the state should support ‘qualitative’ art for its objective and intrinsic value, a value of an ontological character that only can be held by art

38_{Beckman, 28.} 39_{Vestheim, 56.} 40_{Vestheim, 57.}

(17)

13

of high standard. The value lies in the artwork itself and appeals to the individual. An individual who can appreciate the artwork will thus by consequence lead a richer and more fulfilling life. The perfectionist argument argues that there are objective values. Therefore, if individuals for socio-economic or other reasons does not appreciate or feel included by ‘high art’, it is simply a question of making them ‘come around’ to the correctly held view. It is the state’s role to support professional art and social groups able to make the right distinctions. The perfectionist argument may therefore be seen as elitist. The perfectionist argument has its roots in the aristocratic societies but has since been adopted by the bourgeois elites, as well as by Nordic states striving for national integration across the classes. The Nordic states softened the perfectionist approach by also supporting folk culture such as arts and crafts movements, thus attaining democratic legitimacy without challenging the hegemonic status of ‘high art’.

The Economic Argument

The economic argument for public funding of art and culture is that they contribute to the social and economic growth in society. In times of industrial and agricultural decline, cultural production and distribution can generate business opportunities. According to this argument, culture not only contributes through its impact as a ‘creative industry’, but also indirectly by enhancing the overall creativity in all citizens. Stemming from neo-liberal economic theory, the arts are here seen as a part of the global market economy. In countries with a weak governmental regulation of the economy, the market economy decides what art deserves to survive on the market, thus making distinctions between ‘high’ and ‘low’ culture redundant. Here, cultural production and distribution becomes ‘commercialized’ and the economy becomes ‘culturalized’. In the Nordic countries, the economic-social argument has been applied, but in a more moderate form. The preferred model is that the state offers support to the business sector rather than performing the tasks themselves, this viewpoint is also held in regard to the cultural production. Not only on a national level but also regionally. An

increased cooperation between the business economy and the cultural production within a traditionally public domain is seen as a reinvigorating force. The empirical truths of the economically regenerative effect of the creative industries have however been contested. Researchers point out that one should rather see culture as one among many factors that make a region attractive. However, the neo-liberal ideological stance emerging among politicians from the 1980’s and 1990’s made economic efficiency the overriding goal. On the regional level, cultural activity is primarily seen as a motor for economic development, but also as

(18)

14

contributing to a sense of well-being and belonging for the inhabitants. The economical instrumentality in the field of cultural policy is seen as one aspect of the overall

commodification of public policy, where a shift has taken place in conceptions of use-value to that of exchange-value. As the cultural policy field in many countries is relatively weak and non-influential, it has been an easier target for the economical instrumentality.

The Argument for Social Development and Integration

The third argument for public funding of culture and the arts are the expected social impacts on society. Social impacts here relate to a higher degree of well-being amongst the citizens; a more varied and meaningful life; a greater sense of belonging to a city, region or nation; a decrease in criminality and isolation; and an increased integration of citizens from diverse ethnic and cultural backgrounds. Integration is here a key concept, and for societies

characterized by ethnic and cultural plurality the question of the rapport between minority and majority cultures has a great impact. Here a nation’s cultural policy overlaps with other policy areas. Regarding culture as a way to create social integration is nothing new and has been utilized by nation states since the nineteenth century. For social democratic governments the integration was during the interwar period related to the integration of the working class, whereas following the Second World War the idea of integration was related to the political philosophy of the welfare state. The concept of integration is linked to a homogeneous culture defined by the nation state. Also present is the idea that arts and culture will be beneficial to citizens’ health. However, whether arts and culture actually contribute to integration is a complicated question and may be difficult to prove. Apart from difficulties of validating claims of arts and culture’s effect on social inclusion, researchers have pointed to the potential dangers of the argument. If the arts do not prove to be a cost-effective way to enhance social inclusion, they might lose their funds to other areas of public policy, leading to further weakening of an already weak policy sector.

The Democratic Argument

The fourth argument makes the case that arts and culture serve to strengthen the democratic society by enlightening, educating, and training its citizens in critical reflection, thus

enhancing their abilities to actively participate in democratic processes. The core of this argument lies in the instrumental value of art for a democratic self-rule rather than a claim that a life with art is intrinsically superior to other forms of life. Public funding of the arts is

(19)

15

here justified by arts ability to create politically and morally responsible citizens, under the condition that the society in question is a democratic one. In the Nordic countries, the democratic argument has had a strong tradition in the national liberal political thought from the nineteenth century onward, the peasant culture initially being the focal point of inclusion in the national cultural capital. The argument was later embraced by the working-class movement. Although they managed to widen the concept of culture to include a wider range of activities, they never fully replaced the bourgeois culture by a proletarian class culture of their own. The social movements had nonetheless a strong position in the Nordic countries and held a central position in the democratizing project. Many of the political leaders during the nineteenth and twentieth century had their training in the social movements, thus

contributing to a political legitimacy for the social movements at the highest political level. The tradition of cultural work in the social movements instructed the development of cultural policy in the Nordic countries from the 1930’s onward, especially during the after-war period. This influence may be noted in the 1970’s cultural policy emphasis on decentralization, amateur culture, and an endeavor to reach previously excluded groups. The democratic argument undeniably pervaded much of the cultural work within the social movements. Arguably, as a democratizing tool, the social activities in themselves might have overshadowed the experience of arts and culture. Closely related to the democratizing

potential of arts and culture, arguments for education and science follows the same reasoning, if however, from a politically and economically stronger position.

2.3.2. Policy Documents

The policy document pertaining to the public service television this thesis will analyze, is the Government bill 1977/78: 91, Om radions och televisionens fortsatta verksamhet m.m., which was the steering document for the license agreement lasting from 1979 to 1986.41_{The license}

agreement itself will be included for reference in the appendix. The film policy documents that will be analyzed are the Government bill 1981/82: 111, Om vissa filmfrågor m.m., and parts of the Film Agreement of 1982, which also will be included in the appendix.42 Given the

41_{Department of Education, Om radions och televisionens fortsatta verksamhet m.m., Regeringens proposition}

1977/78: 91, by Jan-Erik Wikström.

42_{Department of Education, Om vissa filmfrågor m.m., regeringens proposition 1981/82: 111, by Jan-Erik}

(20)

16

thesis’ focus on the instrumental arguments concerning the case study, I will not analyze the entirety of the documents. Sections regulating other distinct areas, such as radio broadcasting or technical details, will be left out, and the analysis will focus on sections that pertain to the declaration of purpose as well as those directly connected to the production, distribution and funding of Pica Pica.

3. Findings and Analysis

3.1. Production, Distribution, and Funding

3.1.1. Context and Background: SVT

In the 1994 book Nordic Television. History, Politics, Aesthetics Madeleine Kleberg argues that the history of Swedish Television can be divided in three periods. The first years, 1956-1969, when Swedish Television consisted of a one channel-system; the era of the

monopolistic two channel-system from 1969 to the mid-80’s; and the third period beginning in the mid-80’s with the event of new distributive systems such as cable and satellite.43 It may be argued that other important shifts in organization may have occurred since 1994 when Kleberg’s text was written, but as the focus of my study falls within the scope of the first two periods I will leave questions of this nature aside. The introduction of Swedish television in 1956 was a state controlled monopoly loosely based on the British public service idea.44 Jan Olsson in his chapter on the early experiment of Sandrew’s Television Week, describes the power struggle behind the formation of Swedish Television's organization that eventually came to be structured along the same line as Swedish Radio. Television was to be freed of market considerations and with “a program concept envisioned as educational, culturally uplifting, and interspersed with quality entertainment along with a centralized, semiofficial

43_{Madeleine Kleberg, “The History of Swedish Television. Three Stages,” in Nordic Television. History,}

Politics, Aesthetics, eds. Francesco Bono and Ib Bondebjerg (Copenhagen: Sekvens, 1994), 187-217.

44_{Olof Hedling, “’An Unintended Effect of the Introduction of the Public Support Systems’—Film policy, film}

support and the contemporary Scandinavian production landscape,” in “Minitema om filmpolitik” eds. Lars Gustaf Andersson, John Sundholm and Per Vesterlund The Nordic Journal of Cultural Policy 16, no. 1 (2013): 94.

(21)

17

voice for news”.45 Swedish Television, run by Sveriges Radio, was quickly popularized, in the first year nine-thousand broadcast reception licenses were sold and by the beginning of 1960 the number of licenses had increased to six-hundred-thousand.46 According to Furhammar, television quickly shaped the entire structure of the Swedish home environment and became the symbol of the modern family community and a national unifier, creating new and

pervasive social rituals.47 Early on, Swedish Television had regional differences where both Malmö and Gothenburg stood out as pioneers, not only in terms of local productions but also through their international co-operations. For instance, the southern region had access to Danish National Television as early as 1952.48 However, during the end of the 1950’s Swedish Radio was criticized of being too Stockholm-centered and during the 1960’s the regional organizations expanded.49 Head of the Malmö district was Gunnar Ollén who already in 1955 produced a southern Swedish television journal, Sydsvenska TV-journalen that was aired on Danish National Television ahead of their regular programming every Friday; the material consisted of segments from Stockholm but also contained material produced in southern Sweden.50 _{Gunnar Ollén was not only a pioneer in terms of local news but also knew}

how to use the regional resources available such as theaters and the University of Lund, resulting in popular national programs such as the fact entertainment program Fråga Lund, where scholars answered questions from the audience.51 On a national level television in the 1960’s also functioned as an artistic haven for documentary filmmakers. Under the guidance of the head of the Film Section, Lennart Ehrenborg, the documentary filmmaking flourished. Ehrenborg’s strategy was to keep the staffed section minimized and to outsource the film production as much as possible to a wide array of freelance filmmakers. The contract was a two-step agreement where Sveriges Radio accounted for the raw film stock and laboratory-costs and the filmmaker supplied the work. If the result was satisfactory the final agreement gave Sveriges Radio the television screening rights and the filmmaker held all other rights to

45_{Jan Olsson, “One Commercial Week: Television in Sweden Prior to Public Service,” in Television after TV:}

Essays on a Medium in Transition, eds., Lynn Spigel and Jan Olsson (Durham: Duke University Press, 2004), 256.

46_{Furhammar (1998), 249.}

47_{Leif Furhammar, Den rörliga bildens århundrade: Liten allmänbildningsbok om film, TV och}

1900-talshistoria (Stockholm: Natur och Kultur, 2001), 86–87.

48_{Olsson (2004), 251–252.}

49_{Stig Hadenius, Kampen om Monopolet: Sveriges radio och TV under 1900-talet (Stockholm: Prisma och}

Stiftelsen Etermedierna i Sverige, 1998), 194–198.

50_{Hadenius (1998), 176.} 51_{Hadenius (1998), 229.}

(22)

18

their work.52 The 1960’s has by many been described as the most expansive period of Swedish Television, when the technical knowledge and artistic creativity reached a peak. Controversy concerning subject matter, accusations of political bias, and the costly

introduction of the two-channel system, however, led to a mounting critique. In 1970 Otto Nordenskiöld was recruited as the new CEO of Swedish Radio and was put to work on rationalizing the production and to make the organization more cost efficient. Together with budget cut downs this led to an economically dire period for Swedish Television.53

As an increased regionalization was viewed with skepticism by the board of Sveriges Radio on the grounds that it would be too costly, Gunnar Ollén tried to circumvent the obstacle by during the spring of 1970 presenting two examples of regional news programs produced on existing funds. As a result, and by not asking for extra funding he was allowed to continue with his regional news broadcasts. Other regions were inspired and began regional news programs themselves, and the newly started second channel TV2 discovered that the regional sections drew an audience which they at the time greatly needed.54_{Apart from the}

increase in regional production one area that grew economically as well as artistically was children’s television programs. With the introduction of a second channel there were more hours to be filled with content and combined with a paradigm shift towards children being viewed as individuals in their own right, there was a surge of creative powers directed at that audience segment. Initiated by Ingrid Edström, head of the newly inaugurated second channel TV2’s children’s section, a two-day inspirational workshop was held with some of the most prestigious artists, authors and filmmakers in order to gather ideas.55 Under the supervision of Edström, the children’s section grew strong and through efforts such as raising the pay for the creators of children’s programming to match that of the creators from other sections, the status of children programming grew. But the recruitment of staff for the new channel was not viewed on with keen eyes by everyone, the former chairman of the board, Per Eckerberg, later stated that he found the recruitment process severely mismanaged. In his opinion, the new staff mainly came from the university environment and which according to Eckerberg, explained the bizarre political undercurrents that came to follow.56 Apart from accusations of

52_{Leif Furhammar, Med TV i verkligheten. Sveriges Television och de dokumentära genrerna (Stockholm:}

Stiftelsen Etermedierna, 1995), 47–48.

53_{Furhammar (1995), 120.} 54_{Hadenius (1998), 230.}

55_{Malena Jansson, När bara den bästa TV:n var god åt barnen. Om sjuttiotalets svenska barnprogram}

(Stockholm: Karneval förlag, 2014), 14.

(23)

19

promoting left wing politics, Sveriges Radio was criticized for being over costly. Staffing and broadcasting hours had grown exponentially. In 1954 Sveriges Radio had one channel and 550 employees, whereas in 1970 the number of employees had risen to 4,100; with three radio channels broadcasting a total of 20,000 hours and two television channels broadcasting a total of 4,000 hours.57 The company was deemed too large and too bureaucratic, it didn’t matter that the same criticisms were raised in all countries with similar broadcasting systems, voices from the Treasury as well as from within the board sought to change the structure. In 1973, the government reduced the funding by more than 40 million Swedish Crowns. The report of the commission of inquiry of broadcasting was done in 1977 and suggested an increased influence for the regions. Three programming units were suggested: A Radio unit with national coverage and production centers spread out; TV S with national coverage with a production center based in Stockholm; TV R with national coverage and with extensive production centers spread out. The eleven television districts were to downscale to nine and each district would have audience councils. The final proposition the government made in 1978 and which was actualized in 1979 was a consortium with Sveriges Radio as a parent company with the subsidiaries: the TV company (SVT), the National Radio (RR), the Local Radio (LRAB), and the Educational Radio (UR).58 As a result of the restructuring, a large number of new posts had to be filled but according to Hadenius the appointments were characterized by political consensus and lack of controversy. Not only did the regional news broadcasts increase but the regional television production broadcast nationwide increased its percentage from 31% to 40%. The owner structure of Sveriges Radio remained untouched with 60% owned by the popular movements (folkrörelserna), 20% by the press, and 20% by trade and industry. Magnus Faxén, with a background as reporter as well as management posts in the organization became CEO of SVT. The programming responsibilities were to be had by the two channel directors: Sam Nilsson, politically tied to the right-wing party, was made head of Channel 1; and Oloph Hansson, a known Social Democrat, became head of Channel 2. Also, recruited from her post at the children’s section of Channel 2, Ingrid Edström was made head of the southern district, Malmö-TV. With her came Bengt Linné, who worked closely with Edström during her time at the children’s section, and who was later appointed as head of Malmö-TV in 1985.

57_{Hadenius (1998), 243f.}

58_{At the time the Tv company was also abbreviated as SvTV, but for clarity I will refer to it with its latterly}

(24)

20

During the 1980’s there were continued debates about the structure of SVT, and within the districts there was a sense of being considered as inferior to the production center in Stockholm. Thus, in 1986/87 an appropriation request was made and accepted that SVT would be divided into two parts, where Channel 1 was to be a Stockholm station, whereas Channel 2 was to be the Swedish station. All program producing units merged into Channel 1, and the ten districts were merged into Channel 2. The upper management of Channel 2 was based in Stockholm, but the district directors would be head of programming and have a place in the channel’s management. This was also in the beginning of a new era of a competition from commercial television through cable and satellite, but at the time of Pica Pica’s conception, Sveriges Radio had the sole broadcasting rights.

3.1.2. Context and Background: SFI

There are many ways of delineating film policy epochs, one would be that of Olof Hedling when he in his article on Swedish Film Policy in A Companion to Nordic Cinema identifies three crucial infrastructural changes that Swedish film policy have undergone. He argues that they not only have had great effect but also reflected general perceptions of the film industry in public life.59 The first starting with the introduction of the Film Agreement in 1963, the second occurring in the early 1990’s when the film support through the installment of a pan-Nordic support fund, lost its original national character. The third change being the

regionalization of the Swedish film production that occurred in the late 1990’s. However, I will begin by describing the earlier attempts of state subsidy that led up to the 1963 Film Agreement as well as identifying other epochs within public support for film and in depth consider the period between the 1982 and the 1993 Film Agreements, at which time Pica Pica was produced and exhibited.

Up until 1951 the Swedish government did not subsidize film as a form of art, and the state measures were instead characterized by a restraining stance by the way of censorship and entertainment taxes.60 In 1950, the Swedish Minister of Finance decided to commission an official report on the need for public support for film production which in combination

59_{Olof Hedling, “Cinema in the Welfare State. Notes on Public Support, Regional Film Funds, and Swedish}

Film Policy,” in A Companion to Nordic Cinema, eds. Mette Hjort and Ursula Lindqvist (Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell, 2016), 60-61.

(25)

21

with the threat of a full scale production stop from The Swedish Film Producers Association led to the implementation of the first film subsidy by way of a 20 % return of the

entertainment tax from every Swedish film back to the producers.61 In a petition signed by among others Harry Schein and Arne Sucksdorff, the reform was, however, criticized for only enhancing the monopolistic tendencies in the Swedish film industry and for not sufficiently taking quality standards into consideration.62 In 1956 an Entertainment Tax report was

commissioned, and 1957 yet another official report on film commenced, and when the reports were discussed in the parliament in 1960 the Minister of Finance Gunnar Sträng concluded that the production of Swedish films had decreased by approximately 50 % and that many cinema theaters were suffering. Mikael Timm, in his book on Swedish film politics writes that it is not often that a minister wants to implement more drastic measures than those

recommended by his official investigators, but Sträng in his speech suggested that the entirety of the entertainment tax should be returned in support of Swedish film production.63_Leif

Furhammar notes that the timing of the 1957 report was a bit unfortunate as the impact of the start of regular television broadcasts in 1956 could not yet be foreseen.64_{Roger Blomgren}

describes the years between 1952-1963 as a period of complete reversal of the Swedish government’s attitude concerning Swedish film policy, culminating in the inauguration of the Film Agreement of 1963, marking the birth of Swedish film policy proper.65

Apart from the above mentioned 1951 petition from important figures within Swedish film, two books published in 1962 had a great influence on the shape of the agreement: the book Visionen i svensk film written by the future film director Bo Widerberg and secondly Harry Scheins book Har vi råd med kultur?. Widerberg made a general attack on the film industry arguing that the lack of innovation in Swedish film was not the fault of individual directors’ inability to make good films but that the fault instead lay with the film companies’ restrictions on the directors. Schein on the other hand focused on the actual organization of

61_{Leif Furhammar, Filmen i Sverige: En historia i tio kapitel (Stockholm: Bra Böcker, 1998), 206.}

62_{Per Vesterlund, ”Vägen till filmavtalet—Harry Scheins filmpolitiska aktivitet innan 1963,” in ”Minitema om}

filmpolitik” eds. Lars Gustaf Andersson, John Sundholm and Per Vesterlund The Nordic Journal of Cultural Policy 16, no. 1 (2013): 55-56.

63_{Mikael Timm, Dröm och förbannad verklighet. Spelet om svensk film under 40 år (Stockholm: Brombergs} Förlag i samarbete med Svenska Filminstitutet, 2003), 22–23.

64_{Furhammar (1998), 262.} 65_{Blomgren (1998), 66.}

(26)

22

state subsidy of film.66 Harry Schein was an influential film critic, columnist, and confidant of the political elite at the time, and in 1963 his lobbying work came into fruition when on July 1st the first Swedish Film Agreement entered into force.67 Negotiations had taken place during the spring the same year between the Swedish government on one hand and on the other hand the Swedish film industry represented by the Swedish Exhibitors Association, the National Association Folkets Hus, the sobriety movement the Association Våra Gårdar, the Swedish Film Distributors Association, and the Swedish Film Producers Association. With the Film Agreement, the Swedish Film Institute was created and was put in charge of distributing the funds, and with that the cultural and societal status of film in Sweden changed.68

The first Film Agreement ran for approximately ten years until its 1972 revision. Through the reform the 25 % entertainment tax on cinema tickets was abolished and replaced with a 10 % fee on ticket sales that went straight to the Swedish Film Institute. The resources were then divided into five foundations named from A to E. Approximately a third of the resources went into the A-Foundation which was aimed at the producers and directly connected to their ticket revenue. The B- and the C-Foundations were directed towards

quality films and also got approximately a third, however slightly more than the general grant. And finally, the last third went into the D- and the E-Foundations which were aimed at

promoting film cultural purposes including the administration of the Film Institute itself.69 But the core of the Film Agreement was the B-Foundation and its quality criteria, presided over by a jury who through a system of points voted which films were to receive funds. If a film was granted subsidies from the B-Foundation it was also eligible to apply from the C-Foundation, which was a foundation directed at covering losses. Combined, the two

foundations could distribute funding of great economic importance. Furhammar describes the film production that followed as “rich, heterogeneous, and contradictory”, allowing for a plethora of filmmaking styles to flourish.70 The surge in film production after the installment of the Film Agreement did however, not last and compared to the 1950’s, the film production

66_{Tytti Soila, ”Sweden,” in Nordic National Cinemas eds. Tytti Soila, Astrid Söderbergh Widding and Gunnar}

Iversen (London: Routledge, 2005), 195–197, accessed January 17, 2019,

https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=nlebk&AN=136000&authtype=cookie,cpid&custid=ns 011508&lang=sv&site=ehost-live&scope=site 67_{Olof Hedling (2016), 63.} 68_{Furhammar (1998), 281.} 69_{Furhammar (1998), 282.} 70_{Furhammar (1998), 295.}

(27)

23

of the 1960’s only resulted in approximately half as many films.71_{Besides the capricious}

nature of personal taste within the jury, there was also a volatility inherent to the subsidies depending on the fact that whatever funds the SFI had at its disposal was decided by what revenue the cinema theaters garnered each year.72 The Film Agreement created an economical foundation for an industry in decline and although many Swedish film productions came out at loss, Furhammar estimates that the average production still was profitable.73 As television experienced a golden era, film production and cinema-going dwindled and in 1972 a revision of the Film Agreement came about.

There were three major revisions in the 1972 agreement: firstly, the dismantling of the general subsidy, distributed by the A-Foundation, which awarded films in relation to their ticket sales. Secondly, the creation of the H-Foundation, a foundation that in contrast to the previous system that had exclusively been distributed after-the-fact, was aimed at pre-production. The H-Foundation distributed 30% of the total funding which amounted to the same sum as the now discontinued A-Foundation. In order to ensure a balance of opinion the H-Foundation was governed by two boards, H1 and H2. The H1 consisted of four

representatives from the film industry and one representative from the film workers’

organization, and the H2 was constructed in the opposite manner. Thirdly, and significantly, the G-Foundation was created. With 10% of the total funding, the foundation was intended for film production by the SFI themselves and for the first time allowed the SFI to establish an in-house production unit of their own. Of the G-Foundation 70% of the subsidies was aimed at feature length films, and 30% aimed at short films. In 1974, the parliament adopted a cultural policy bill where film was included as a cultural policy area of interest for the state. One issue was how television should contribute to film production in their capacity of film

distributors.74 Consequently in 1975 there was an amendment to the agreement, and Sveriges Radio, the state and the SFI, all contributed to yet another foundation: the I-Foundation. Sveriges Radio and the state invested approximately half each, and the SFI contributed with substantially less. However, for all intents and purposes the I-Foundation functioned as an addition to the G-Foundation.75 The feature film production funds were managed by

71_{Soila (2005), 200.} 72_{Soila (2005), 199.} 73_{Furhammar (1998), 309.} 74_{Blomgren (1998), 85.} 75_{Furhammar (1998), 326.}

(28)

24

periodically engaged film producers, whereas the short film section had a permanently employed producer, namely Lisbet Gabrielsson.76

In 1982, Klas Olofsson became head of the SFI and it was his role to implement the new 1982 Film Agreement, and to resolve the financial difficulties that the film industry faced. The base of the agreement was as before the 10% of ticket sales but with the new agreement the threat of the increasing video-rental market was transformed into a much-needed inflow of capital by way of a video-rental fee. As the video market grew, by the end of the 1980’s the funds gained from the video-rental fees amounted to four-fifths of the funds gained from the cinema ticket sales.77 With the 1982 agreement, the earlier board system was dismantled and a new system of committees put in its place. Through the 1982 agreement the central role of the SFI was cemented and the funds were to be distributed through: A) At least 20% allocated for the SFI’s dedication to produce films. The board of the SFI was also entitled to administer additional production guarantees to distinctly artistically valuable feature films from this allotment; B) At least 35% allocated for production guarantees for feature films, this was to be distributed by two committees, the B1-Committee and the B2-Committee, the committees were appointed according to the same principles as the previous H-Boards; C) At least 5% for production guarantees for short films; D) At least 5% for distribution and screening of valuable films.78 According to Blomgren, the government bill from 1981 demonstrates that for the first time there was a political ambition to have a holistic approach to film policy, from production to screening.79 The 1982 agreement lasted until 1993 when a new agreement was signed, and it was thus during this film policy epoch that Pica

Pica was funded, produced, and distributed. 3.1.3. The Case of Pica Pica

The conception of Pica Pica began when Kristersson by chance encountered a flock of magpies circling the corpse of a hare, laying on the street nearby his house. As Kristersson had film stock left to him by Malmö-TV in case that they needed news material, he had film stock enough for ten minutes. As the first take lasted for about 8 minutes, the thought emerged to produce a lengthier film about magpies, using long takes rather than relying

76_{Furhammar (1998), 342.} 77_{Furhammar (1998), 352.} 78_{Blomgren (1998), 101.} 79_{Blomgren (1998), 103.}

(29)

25

heavily on montage. Kristersson had begun his career as a filmmaker in his early teens when producer Ingrid Edström and her team came to his hometown of Falsterbo to film the

renowned bird migrations for a children’s television program. Spending time with the team and showing them his best bird-watching spots, the idea formed to begin filming himself and he started saving to buy a 16 mm camera. When a second TV-team came to film flocks of birds, the weather happened to be bad and fortunately for Kristersson they could not catch the images they came for. But seeing as Kristersson had a camera of his own, the producer Lasse Ekholm suggested he could leave rolls of film for Kristersson so that he could film in his stead and send to Stockholm. Thus begun Kristersson’s work for Swedish Television.

By the time Kristersson filmed the magpies circling the dead hare, he had, apart from some short segments and contributions, made 13 short films for television – ranging from ten to sixty minutes. Kristersson worked as a freelance filmmaker mainly doing work for Malmö-TV. In the early days, the films were fully financed and paid according to a time schedule. Another beneficial circumstance, according to Kristersson, was that Malmö-TV at the time cared for the lab expenses which meant that the development of the film came out of the television company’s part, thus significantly simplifying the budget calculations for the filmmaker. The head of Malmö-TV at the time, Bengt Linné, in his account also emphasizes the importance of Malmö-TV being a comprehensive television company. Together with Ingrid Edström, Linné strove to complete the entire production chain in-house with sound mixing equipment, light technicians, large studios et cetera. Linné also emphasizes the importance of the co-operation with Ingrid Edström. He describes the process as highly creative and that her impact on the way they formed the structure of Malmö-TV cannot be overestimated. The film director and producer Christina Olofson echo the sentiment

concerning the impact of Ingrid Edström during Olofson’s time at TV2. In regard to funding and fighting for one’s program department, Olofson describes how Edström intentionally used up her budget for children’s programming ahead of time, and how the direction when faced with the risk of having nothing to air, allocated more funds. Edström and Linné had worked together at TV2, and Linné says that when they moved to Malmö-TV they incorporated the praxis of frequently utilizing freelance filmmakers. However, unlike later years practice, they did not simply buy the broadcasting rights and left the filmmakers to find finance where they could. Instead they aimed to make sure that directors and producers had reasonable monthly wages that they could live on, often offering full financing. So, when Kristersson sent his