Portrayal of Islam and Muslims in Cinema as Part of Swedish Cultural Discourse

From the early 2000s to the present, characters who can be identified as Muslims have become widespread in the Swedish film industry. Religious themes have always occupied a special place in Swedish cinema, but during this period the cultural discourse associated with Islam has changed. The aim of this study is to identify strategies for constructing images of Islam and Muslims in the Swedish film industry from 2000–2024. To achieve this goal it was necessary to first assess the degree to which the issue of the image of Muslims in world and Swedish cinema is problematized in connection with the demands of cultural diplomacy and the theory of soft power; second, to establish the structural features of the phenomenon known as “Islamic cinema”; third, using specific material, describe the techniques for creating and the features of interpreting film images as possible sources of stereotypes introduced into public opinion. This required combining the optics of a comprehensive cultural studies approach with discourse analysis and SWOT analysis applied to the visual materials of Swedish feature films, media publications (critical articles, interviews, etc.), as well as analytical scientific articles and published surveys conducted by various public organizations on the issues under investigation. The study concluded that there are three main strategies for constructing the image of Islam and Muslims in Swedish cinema: positive, negative and conditionally neutral. These film images influence public opinion and create both, consciously and unconsciously as well as directly and indirectly, a significant part of the agenda discussed by society, while simultaneously acting as a kind of brand of Swedish culture abroad. Cinematic discourse extends beyond direct discussions of films, although measurements of the influence of films on the audience show the absence of straightforward assessments such as 'good' or 'bad,'. More often, we are talking about problematization through the initial fixation of attention on topics related to traditional moral concepts and social roles accepted in different communities. As a result, through the expansion of the area of discussions about the role of the Other in culture, polarization of discourses enters public consciousness, which, in turn, sharply raises the question of the cultural role of constructing the Other in the prism of postcolonial studies, when the very fact of otherness is associated with imposed separation and secondary provocation of clashes of counter-discourses, fraught with an increase in social tension. The very structure of Swedish Islamic cinema, which incorporates not only films about Islam and Muslims, but also describes their creators according to their cultural-religious and ethno-religious affiliation, contributes to such separation. This is how the concepts of “immigrant cinema”, “diaspora cinema” and the oxymoron of international Swedish cinema, which is filmed by directors of the first two groups in collaboration with foreign partners, who often also position themselves as followers of Islam, arise. The positive, negative and neutral images created by Swedish cinema are interpreted, reinterpreted, and deconstructed by the professional community, the media, researchers, and viewers. “New Swedish cinema” as an expression of the “migrant problem” in the prism of Islam is gaining popularity all over the world, which makes it necessary to continue researching this phenomenon, including from the standpoint of cultural studies.

1. Bakøy, E. (2010) ‘Perspektiver på innvandring i tre norskproduserte filmer — Le Regard, Import Eksport og Izzat’, Norsk medietidsskrift, 17(2), pp. 135–160. https://doi.org/10.18261/ISSN0805-9535-2010-02-03

2. Bakøy, E. (2011) ‘From lonely guest workers to conflict-ridden diasporas: A historical survey of Norwegian migrant cinema’, in Media in motion: Cultural complexity and migration in the Nordic region. London: Ashgate, pp. 145–162. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315594484

3. Barthes, R. (1957) Mythologies. Paris: Éditions du Seuil (Russ. ed.: (2023) Mifologii. Moscow: Akademicheskij proekt Publ.).

4. Berghahn, D. and Sternberg, C. (2010b) ‘Locating Migrant and Diasporic Cinema in Contemporary Europe’, in European Cinema in Motion: Migrant and Diasporic Cinema in Contemporary Europe. London: Palgrave Macmillan UK, pp. 12–49. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230295070_2

5. Björkman, S., Lindblad, H. and Sahlin, F. (eds) (2002) Fucking Film: den nya svenska filmen. Stockholm: AlfabetaAnamma.

6. Fiske, J. (2000) Kommunikationsteorier: En introduktion. Stockholm: Wahlström & Widstrand.

7. Gillota, D. (2013) Ethnic Humor in Multiethnic America. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.

8. Hall, S. (ed.) (1997) Representation — cultural representations and signifying practices. London: Sage.

9. Hiltunen, K. (2016) ‘Encounters with immigrants in recent Finnish feature films’, Journal of Scandinavian

10. Cinema, 6(3), pp. 235–252. https://doi.org/10.1386/jsca.6.3.235_1

11. Hjort, M. (2005) Small nation, global cinema: the new Danish cinema. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

12. Koroleva, A. A. (2015) ‘"Soft Power Strategy in Building the Russian Federation’s and the Kingdom of Spain’s Images Abroad’, Journal of Law and Administration, (1), pp. 97–103. (In Russian).

13. Kuipers, G. (2008) ‘The sociology of humor’, in The Primer of Humor Research. Berlin; New York: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 361–398. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110198492.361

14. Larsen, L. O. (2015) ‘New Voices, New Stories: Migrant Cinema and Television in Norway’, in European Cinema and Television. London: Palgrave Macmillan UK, pp. 169–191. https://doi. org/10.1057/9781137356888_9

15. Lebedeva, M. M. (2017) ‘Soft Power: The Concept and Approaches’, MGIMO Review of International

16. Relations, (3), pp. 212–223. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.24833/2071-8160-2017-3-54-212-223

17. Lebedeva, M. M. and Kharkevich, M. V. (2014) ‘The Role of the Russian Soft Power in Eurasian Integration’, MGIMO Review of International Relations, (2), pp. 10–13. (In Russian). https://doi. org/10.24833/2071-8160-2014-2-35-10-13 de los Reyes, P. and Mulinari, D. (2005) Intersektionalitet : kritiska reflektioner över (o)jämlikhetens landskap. Malmö: Liber AB.

18. Miles, M. R. (1996) Seeing and believing: religion and values in the movies. Boston: Beacon Press.

19. Naficy, H. (2001) An Accented Cinema: Exilic and Diasporic Filmmaking. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

20. Nye, J. S. (2004) Soft Power: the Means to Success in World Politics. New York: Public Affairs.

21. Shaheen, J. G. (2003) ‘Reel Bad Arabs: How Hollywood Vilifies a People’, The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 588(1), pp. 171–193. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716203588001011

22. Shestopal, A. V. and Silantjeva, M. V. (2012) ‘Intercultural communication in the light of current modernization process, “soft power” cultural modulators’, MGIMO Review of International Relations, (6), pp. 168–171. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.24833/2071-8160-2012-6-27-168-171

23. Sjö, S. (2012) ‘Bad religion/good spirituality? Explorations of religion in contemporary Scandinavian films’, Journal of Scandinavian Cinema, 2(1), pp. 33–46. https://doi.org/10.1386/jsca.2.1.33_1

24. Sjö, S. and Daníelsson, Á. S. (2013) ‘Detraditionalization, Diversity, Andmediatization Explorations of Religion in Nordic Films’, Nordic Journal of Religion and Society, 26(1), pp. 45–62. https://doi.org/10.18261/ISSN1890-7008-2013-01-04

25. Wright, R. (1998) The visible wall: Jews and other ethnic outsiders in Swedish film. Uppsala: Uppsala Universitet.