The Scandinavian countries are known as being wealthy, egalitarian, and “happy”. Since the first publication in 2012 of the United Nations’ World Happiness Reports, for instance, the Scandinavians have been ranked as the happiest nations in the world. This high level of self-reported life satisfaction is generally understood as caused by the social democratic welfare-state model. Emotionally, however, happiness is not necessarily the most dominant affect characterizing Scandinavians. In fact, the first Happiness Report shows that while Danes ranked no. 1 worldwide when it came to evaluative happiness, they ranked no. 100 when it came to affective happiness (answering the question of how they felt yesterday) (Helliwell et al. 2012). A dark side of happiness and privilege is guilt. Time and again, we encounter narratives in which Scandinavians are confronted with an unhappy, less privileged global other. Additionally, we also see representations of the ostracized self—“one of us”—a fellow Scandinavian who does not fit the image and status of the “happy” Scandinavian. Often, these external and internal others evoke guilt feelings based on a realization that one’s own happiness and privileges are, or have been, attained at the expense of suffering others. Also, in cases where one does not see a direct connection between one’s own privileges and the suffering of others, one may still feel responsible for alleviating the suffering of others—and guilty when not succeeding in doing so. These feelings of guilt may in turn be 1) foregrounded, debated, and attempted dealt with in order to promote social change, or 2) covered up, repressed, and redirected in order to maintain an image of individual and/or national coherence and innocence. In this volume, scholars from Denmark, Norway, and Sweden critically explore how such guilt is framed in contemporary Scandinavian film, television, and other visual media, including factual and fictional visual narratives, popular and art house genres. How are notions of guilt and guilt feelings evoked in and by narratives of privilege and lack? What does guilt do? How does guilt travel? How do gender, race, ethnicity, class, health, and age play into such narratives? How, overall, do such narratives reflect Scandinavian societies and set a moral compass for Scandinavian spectators (or not)? How does guilt serve to create affective communities? This special issue explores the visual narratives aesthetically and culturally by, on the one hand, close-reading the works, tending to the medium and genre specificity of film, television, and social media and, on the other hand, by situating the works in a particular Scandinavian context and further tracing guilt, guilt feeling, and guilt aversion across production processes and reception. This contextualization allows us to explore how guilt is redirected, reframed, and coopted for new ideological and rhetorical purposes in the Scandinavian welfare state and beyond. Framing guilt remains a matter of political power struggles. The title “Framing Scandinavian Guilt” is chosen as the verb “to frame” pertains 1) to the visual media —to camera angles and cropping—as one arranges images to a certain end, and 2) to (falsely) pinning people down as guilty. Our interest, as indicated above, is not in clear-cut (court and crime) cases and verdicts. Rather we are interested in an emotional landscape in which various forms of Scandinavian guilt circulate and in which film, TV, and social media at given points frame particular people, nations, and institutions as guilty of global and national ills. In order to understand this guilt better, we analyze not only how the films, TV-series, and social media frame people and institutions as guilty in a process already indicating ambivalence, but also turn to their production and reception to see how the people and institutions framed as guilty may accept, reject, or in other ways deflect guilt, maintaining that they are in fact innocent. Historically, guilt has been theorized as individual and collective, as bystander guilt, white guilt, liberal guilt, existential guilt, etc. Its effects, too, have been theorized as constructive and reparative on the one hand, and destructive and paralyzing on the other. 2 While one tends to distinguish between guilt and shame—with guilt pertaining to doing and shame pertaining to being—guilt and shame often converge. What one does reflects who one is. In addition, what was previously considered guilt, now tends to be regarded as shame. Hence, in the context of Scandinavian guilt, the articles also in several instances discuss shame. The third word of the title, the adjective “Scandinavian,” refers both to the origin of the audiovisual narratives examined, and to the abovementioned sense of guilt pertaining to Scandinavians. JOURNAL OF AESTHETICS & CULTURE, 2018 VOL. 10, NO. S1, 1–5 https://doi.org/10.1080/20004214.2018.1438725

中文翻译：

---

使斯堪的纳维亚人感到内

斯堪的纳维亚国家以富有，平等和“幸福”着称。例如，自2012年联合国《世界幸福报告》首次出版以来，斯堪的纳维亚人就被评为世界上最幸福的国家。自我报告的这种高水平的生活满意度通常被认为是由社会民主福利国家模型引起的。然而，从情感上讲，幸福并不一定是斯堪的纳维亚人最主要的影响。实际上，第一份幸福报告显示，尽管丹麦人排名第一。在评估幸福感方面，全球排名第一。100涉及情感幸福（回答他们昨天的感觉的问题）（Helliwell等，2012）。幸福和特权的阴暗面是罪恶感。一次又一次地，我们遇到的叙事中，斯堪的纳维亚人面临着不快乐，特权较低的全球其他国家。此外，我们还看到了被排斥的自我（“我们中的一个人”）的代表，这是斯堪的纳维亚人，不符合“快乐”的斯堪的纳维亚人的形象和地位。通常，这些外在和内在的他人会因为意识到自己的幸福和特权已经获得或已经以牺牲他人为代价而感到内。同样，在某人没有看到自己的特权与他人的苦难之间有直接联系的情况下，人们可能仍会为减轻他人的苦难负有责任，而如果不这样做，则会感到内。这些内of感可能依次是：1）为了促进社会变革而提出，辩论和尝试处理，或2）掩盖，压制，并进行重定向，以保持个人和/或国家的连贯性和纯真的形象。在本卷中，来自丹麦，挪威和瑞典的学者批判性地探索了当代斯堪的纳维亚电影，电视和其他视觉媒体（包括事实和虚构的视觉叙事，流行和艺术流派）如何构成这种内。特权和缺乏的叙事如何引起内感和内感的观念？内是做什么的？内感如何传播？性别，种族，种族，阶级，健康状况和年龄如何体现在这些叙述中？总体而言，这样的叙述如何反映斯堪的纳维亚的社会并为（或没有）为斯堪的纳维亚的观众树立道德指南针？内感如何建立情感社区？本期特刊一方面探讨美学和文化上的视觉叙事，另一方面 近距离阅读作品，倾向于电影，电视和社交媒体的媒介和体裁特殊性，另一方面，通过将作品置于特定的斯堪的纳维亚语境中，并在整个生产过程中进一步追溯内tra感，内gui感和内gui感流程和接收。这种语境化使我们能够探索内感如何在斯堪的纳维亚福利国家及以后的国家中重新定位，重新构架和用于新的意识形态和修辞目的。负罪感仍然是政治权力斗争的问题。选择标题“框架斯堪的纳维亚罪恶感”是因为“ to frame”动词涉及1）视觉媒体-摄像机角度和裁剪-因为人们将图像布置到特定的一端，以及2）虚假地将人们固定在下面有罪。如上所述，我们的利益与明确的（法院和犯罪）案件和判决无关。相反，我们对一种情感格局感兴趣，在这种情感格局中，各种形式的斯堪的纳维亚人感到内，并且在给定时间点上的电影，电视和社交媒体将特定的人，国家和机构视为全球和国家的祸害。为了更好地理解这种罪恶感，我们不仅分析了电影，电视连续剧和社交媒体在已经表明矛盾的过程中如何将人和机构视为罪恶感，而且还分析了他们的制作和接受过程以了解人们和被定罪的机构可以接受，拒绝或以其他方式转移罪恶感，认为它们实际上是无辜的。从历史上看，内gui感被理论化为个体和集体，如旁观者内，感，白人内，感，自由内，感，存在内感等。从理论上讲，一方面具有建设性和修复性，另一方面具有破坏性和瘫痪性。2虽然人们倾向于区分内和羞耻（内doing与做事有关，内me与存在有关），但内gui和羞耻往往会融合在一起。一个人的所作所为反映了谁是谁。另外，以前被认为是有罪的，现在往往被认为是可耻的。因此，在斯堪的纳维亚人的内感的背景下，这些文章还多次讨论了羞耻感。标题的第三个单词，形容词“斯堪的纳维亚语”既指所考察的视听叙述的起源，也指上述与斯堪的纳维亚人有关的内sense感。美学与文化，2018卷。10号 S1，1-5 https://doi.org/10.1080/20004214.2018.1438725 2虽然人们倾向于区分内和羞耻（内doing与做事有关，内me与存在有关），但内gui和羞耻往往会融合在一起。一个人的行为反映了谁是谁。另外，以前被认为是有罪的，现在往往被认为是可耻的。因此，在斯堪的纳维亚人的内感的背景下，这些文章还多次讨论了羞耻感。标题的第三个单词，形容词“斯堪的纳维亚语”既指所考察的视听叙述的起源，也指上述与斯堪的纳维亚人有关的内sense感。美学与文化，2018卷。10号 S1，1-5 https://doi.org/10.1080/20004214.2018.1438725 2虽然人们倾向于区分内和羞耻（内doing与做事有关，内me与存在有关），但内gui和羞耻往往会融合在一起。一个人的所作所为反映了谁是谁。另外，以前被认为是有罪的，现在往往被认为是可耻的。因此，在斯堪的纳维亚人的内感的背景下，这些文章还多次讨论了羞耻感。标题的第三个单词，形容词“斯堪的纳维亚语”既指所考察的视听叙述的起源，也指上述与斯堪的纳维亚人有关的内sense感。美学与文化，2018卷。10号 S1，1-5 – https://doi.org/10.1080/20004214.2018.1438725 以前被认为有罪的东西现在被认为是可耻的。因此，在斯堪的纳维亚人的内感的背景下，这些文章还多次讨论了羞耻感。标题的第三个单词，形容词“斯堪的纳维亚语”既指所考察的视听叙述的起源，也指上述与斯堪的纳维亚人有关的内sense感。美学与文化，2018卷。10号 S1，1-5 https://doi.org/10.1080/20004214.2018.1438725 以前被认为有罪的东西现在被认为是可耻的。因此，在斯堪的纳维亚人的内感的背景下，这些文章还多次讨论了羞耻感。标题的第三个单词，形容词“斯堪的纳维亚语”既指所考察的视听叙述的起源，也指上述与斯堪的纳维亚人有关的内sense感。美学与文化，2018卷。10号 S1，1-5 https://doi.org/10.1080/20004214.2018.1438725 美学与文化，2018卷。10号 S1，1-5 https://doi.org/10.1080/20004214.2018.1438725 美学与文化，2018卷。10号 S1，1-5 https://doi.org/10.1080/20004214.2018.1438725