How will Christer Björkman ruin this year's contest?

[LalehForWD]

This person keeps on destroying the contest. Now with the voting. No comment, like no comment. Can someone launch Bjorkman to a deserted cold island near the Arctic and forget him there??

No he is improving things and via Feng shui he liberate positive energy and magic into the contest.

 

[theditz83]

I'm getting a little tired of Bjorkman being the victim of every Eurofan's anger when something changes with the contest - and this time is the most annoying of all.

EBU implemented this change - not SVT, and not Bjorkman. How much influence the host nation had in bringing this change about when the contest is being held their nation is not clear, but the fact remains that the EBU and their committee are responsible for this rule coming into play. And it's really not that big a deal - we're still going to have all of the same performances and the same wonderful shows.

 

[A-lister]

I'm not a big fan of Björkman, but now I have to step in and actually defend the ol' geezer... I mean the change made to the voting system this year is not BAD... I might have done it slightly different myself but how is it bad that the public finally gets more say again? The juries still gets the upper-hand, but certainly this is long due.

I mean sure they could do the new system and have the spokespersons present a new scale instead (up to theoratically 24pts), but then people would whine about that the classical 1-8, 10, 12 system would be gone...

At first I thought that presenting the public vote combined in the end might kill the build-up suspense and the classical voting procedure, but giving it a more close thought I actually think this might add suspense, afterall the second voting part will have 26 sets of points given out and done in a nice fashion it might even add suspense. I can't say that turning ESC into MF is something I want and I hate that they introduced the power to broadcasters to choose the running order, but the change in the voting system being presented similarly to the MF one is not really a bad thing.

 

[Mii11]

I'm not a big fan of Björkman, but now I have to step in and actually defend the ol' geezer... I mean the change made to the voting system this year is not BAD... I might have done it slightly different myself but how is it bad that the public finally gets more say again? The juries still gets the upper-hand, but certainly this is long due.

I mean sure they could do the new system and have the spokespersons present a new scale instead (up to theoratically 24pts), but then people would whine about that the classical 1-8, 10, 12 system would be gone...

At first I thought that presenting the public vote combined in the end might kill the build-up suspense and the classical voting procedure, but giving it a more close thought I actually think this might add suspense, afterall the second voting part will have 26 sets of points given out and done in a nice fashion it might even add suspense. I can't say that turning ESC into MF is something I want and I hate that they introduced the power to broadcasters to choose the running order, but the change in the voting system being presented similarly to the MF one is not really a bad thing.

The thing is that the contest is actually no longer Eurovision we knew and it is turning into some kind of global version of Melodifestivalen. Now, we that we have Australia in the contest, more artists that are performing songs made by Swedish composers (Margaret, NuAngels and surely Azerbaijani artist, to name few), majority of countries that no longer perform in their national languages (even and ), changing running orders and now the voting system copied from Melodifestivalen... How is it about joining Europe together? How is it about showcasing European diversity? How juries are doing what they were meant to do (increasing chances of unfortunate countries to get into final and perhaps win) when they are actually supporting the ones that are doing well (Sweden and Azerbaijan, and those with boring ballads)? As someone said, it would be perhaps much better if every single year the host broadcaster modified rules slightly to make each edition of the contest unique. However, it seems that certain broadcasters (SVT for example) are allowed to do anything they want whereas suggestions of other broadcasters (e.g. TRT) are not addressed at all.

 

[Chorizo]

I wonder if the ORF could have changed the rules last year too. I suppose it didn't even occur to anyone in Vienna to ask for a rule change.

 

[Mii11]

I wonder if the ORF could have changed the rules last year too. I suppose it didn't even occur to anyone in Vienna to ask for a rule change.

They should have introduced speed voting if EBU wants something exciting

 

[Chorizo]

They should have introduced speed voting if EBU wants something exciting

That would indeed be more exciting.

 

[LalehForWD]

The thing is that the contest is actually no longer Eurovision we knew and it is turning into some kind of global version of Melodifestivalen. Now, we that we have Australia in the contest, more artists that are performing songs made by Swedish composers (Margaret, NuAngels and surely Azerbaijani artist, to name few), majority of countries that no longer perform in their national languages (even and ), changing running orders and now the voting system copied from Melodifestivalen... How is it about joining Europe together? How is it about showcasing European diversity? How juries are doing what they were meant to do (increasing chances of unfortunate countries to get into final and perhaps win) when they are actually supporting the ones that are doing well (Sweden and Azerbaijan, and those with boring ballads)? As someone said, it would be perhaps much better if every single year the host broadcaster modified rules slightly to make each edition of the contest unique. However, it seems that certain broadcasters (SVT for example) are allowed to do anything they want whereas suggestions of other broadcasters (e.g. TRT) are not addressed at all.

It's just that some of these things you mention are general changes in Europe due to better communication and more interaction between countries. Christer Björkman is just an employee at SVT, he's not even in charge. To think he has influence to change European cultural patterns is ridiculous. He is simply a competent person devoted to Eurovision and his work. He utilise the possibilities and positions given to him, providing feedback and ideas of improvements. A perfectly common and normal behaviour. Another word for it is career. What about the opposite with people just sitting on their chairs lifting salary? I find it detestable the way the Eurovision "fan" community is shaming him. Some even find it funny as "jokes".

The idea of Eurovision as a global version of Melodifestivalen is impossible and shows a very shallow understanding of what the successful and important aspects of our NF are. I would say this idea is more an expression of an Eurovision perception that emphasises the contest aspect of Eurovision and support the concept that songs can be objectively judged in a good and bad scale. There's also a sense that Melodifestivalen somehow oppose this concept.

I think the truth is that the driving force in the contest is of course to be the winner. Some countries are more motivated than others to win and actively seeking the winning concept. If it is Swedish songwriters today it could be Albanian dancers tomorrow.

 

[Mii11]

It's just that some of these things you mention are general changes in Europe due to better communication and more interaction between countries. Christer Björkman is just an employee at SVT, he's not even in charge. To think he has influence to change European cultural patterns is ridiculous. He is simply a competent person devoted to Eurovision and his work. He utilise the possibilities and positions given to him, providing feedback and ideas of improvements. A perfectly common and normal behaviour. Another word for it is career. What about the opposite with people just sitting on their chairs lifting salary? I find it detestable the way the Eurovision "fan" community is shaming him. Some even find it funny as "jokes".

The idea of Eurovision as a global version of Melodifestivalen is impossible and shows a very shallow understanding of what the successful and important aspects of our NF are. I would say this idea is more an expression of an Eurovision perception that emphasises the contest aspect of Eurovision and support the concept that songs can be objectively judged in a good and bad scale. There's also a sense that Melodifestivalen somehow oppose this concept.

I think the truth is that the driving force in the contest is of course to be the winner. Some countries are more motivated than others to win and actively seeking the winning concept. If it is Swedish songwriters today it could be Albanian dancers tomorrow.

What kind of changes? Increasing usage of English language? Cultural trends do not matter - the fact that English is used in majority of songs in the contest is due to the stereotype that entries in English language have better chances of winning. EBU did not help at all - the juries they have introduced prevented Italian song from winning the contest. Also they prevented Portugal from qualifying so that 'Azerbaijani' (or rather Swedish) song could qualify. I am not saying that Bjorkman does not commit to his work and is careless - perhaps he is trying to make the contest even better and perhaps he thinks Melodifestivalen is show of higher quality so he tries to turn Eurovision into Melodifestivalen. IMO this is not right.

Why is it impossible? I get impression that that is exactly what they are trying to do. I think Melodifestivalen is a brilliant show and many songs from Melodifestivalen are extraordinarily good. The fact that many Swedes watch is not an accident but a result of high quality of the show. However, it doesn't give EBU an excuse to turn Eurovision into Melodifestivalen. How is it diversity if countries are buying Swedish songs and the contest is resembling the Swedish music competition more and more? Why EBU allows SVT to change the rules whereas it seems to ignores other countries?

 

[aletem]

No he is improving things and via Feng shui he liberate positive energy and magic into the contest.

Oh, really? How thoughtful. I am sure at some point the glass will start spilling. We already had a big low in the past two years in terms of participants, and maybe from next year onward is gonna go down again.
This person has a big influence over EBU and he is meddling where he shouldn't be. The goal is not to make Eurovision like that Swedish festival - Melodifestivalen. The point system has been there before you were born, surely. Why change it? Changes were made during 2013 - fixed draw, ranking of the jury. Now, hosting again in 2016, changes to be made to make it look like MF. There suppose to be one set of 12 points. Most viewers, yes even the ordinary ones, will expect the 1-12 and the show to be over, not to wait for the televote total tally for each country.
It's not a good change. One can live with the ranking of the jury (if that was to whatever bring the diaspora vote down and have a more precise outcome), but this now is too weird. This change does not make the contest exciting! Just saying!

 

[Dessi]

No he is improving things and via Feng shui he liberate positive energy and magic into the contest.

Some people like to whine... It's the same year after year... like the past 10 years or so... It's the same with Swedes living abroad with retirement money... complaining about Sweden not even knowing what's going on back home... They just make up their own conspiracy theories...

Yeah Christer Björkman is an alien... :?

 

[Matt]

I'm not a big fan of Björkman, but now I have to step in and actually defend the ol' geezer... I mean the change made to the voting system this year is not BAD... I might have done it slightly different myself but how is it bad that the public finally gets more say again? The juries still gets the upper-hand, but certainly this is long due.

I mean sure they could do the new system and have the spokespersons present a new scale instead (up to theoratically 24pts), but then people would whine about that the classical 1-8, 10, 12 system would be gone...

At first I thought that presenting the public vote combined in the end might kill the build-up suspense and the classical voting procedure, but giving it a more close thought I actually think this might add suspense, afterall the second voting part will have 26 sets of points given out and done in a nice fashion it might even add suspense. I can't say that turning ESC into MF is something I want and I hate that they introduced the power to broadcasters to choose the running order, but the change in the voting system being presented similarly to the MF one is not really a bad thing.

That sums it up. The changes in the point system may not be popular, I'm withholding my final opinion and wait how it plays out in May. I have seen Melodifestivalen and it can add excitement. At least this change will not affect the fairness of the competition such as the producer picked running order. I mean it's more obvious in MF where they strategically place the favorites but it still has an effect.

That being said, anyone who doesn't think that Bjorkman doesn't have a lot of power and influence is ignoring the facts. He was the Show producer in 2013 and is also the contest producer this year and has an incredibly strong influence. So now, he is not "just" an employee of SVT.

I think it is a fair criticizing the direction he is taking the contest, taking away from the competition/contest aspect and focus solely on Entertainment.

 

[LalehForWD]

Oh, really? How thoughtful. I am sure at some point the glass will start spilling. We already had a big low in the past two years in terms of participants, and maybe from next year onward is gonna go down again.
This person has a big influence over EBU and he is meddling where he shouldn't be. The goal is not to make Eurovision like that Swedish festival - Melodifestivalen. The point system has been there before you were born, surely. Why change it? Changes were made during 2013 - fixed draw, ranking of the jury. Now, hosting again in 2016, changes to be made to make it look like MF. There suppose to be one set of 12 points. Most viewers, yes even the ordinary ones, will expect the 1-12 and the show to be over, not to wait for the televote total tally for each country.
It's not a good change. One can live with the ranking of the jury (if that was to whatever bring the diaspora vote down and have a more precise outcome), but this now is too weird. This change does not make the contest exciting! Just saying!

Sorry, just tried to be funny. As been said several times, it's not the argumentation or the subject, it's the habit of blaming Christer Björkman for each and every thing you feel is wrong with Eurovision. No one here at forum knows what is going on inside EBU and the who, how and when about their decisions. The only one I know which is as transparent as he can is actually Christer Björkman. Now and then he drops some internal info against better judgement. I guess he has a some kind purpose with it. EBU is a private organisation for cooperation between broadcasters, it's not a democracy and they can rightfully decide whatever they like about the contest. It's just how it is.

 

[LalehForWD]

What kind of changes? Increasing usage of English language? Cultural trends do not matter - the fact that English is used in majority of songs in the contest is due to the stereotype that entries in English language have better chances of winning. EBU did not help at all - the juries they have introduced prevented Italian song from winning the contest. Also they prevented Portugal from qualifying so that 'Azerbaijani' (or rather Swedish) song could qualify. I am not saying that Bjorkman does not commit to his work and is careless - perhaps he is trying to make the contest even better and perhaps he thinks Melodifestivalen is show of higher quality so he tries to turn Eurovision into Melodifestivalen. IMO this is not right.

Why is it impossible? I get impression that that is exactly what they are trying to do. I think Melodifestivalen is a brilliant show and many songs from Melodifestivalen are extraordinarily good. The fact that many Swedes watch is not an accident but a result of high quality of the show. However, it doesn't give EBU an excuse to turn Eurovision into Melodifestivalen. How is it diversity if countries are buying Swedish songs and the contest is resembling the Swedish music competition more and more? Why EBU allows SVT to change the rules whereas it seems to ignores other countries?

Swedish artists almost exclusively use English in their songs. It's not because they dislike Swedish, love English or it is more difficult to write in Swedish. It's because they want to reach out internationally with their work. Perhaps it could also be seen as a sign of their artistry ambition. Sweden is a small country and if you want to make a living as a musician, you need to connect to the outside world. Besides our few international POP stars there are many Swedish musicians going on international tours belonging to a range of genres, for example metal bands (*). Singing in Swedish would in these circumstances merely be seen as a gimmick. Many artists also engage in song writing which seems to be at a high demand and lucrative. For example Laleh has written songs for Ellie Goulding and Demi Lovato.

So, no surprise that Melodifestivalen is dominated by English songs. The artists and the Swedish music industry just carry on as they usually do. In Eurovision the very point is also to reach out outside your country to the European voters in order to win. Note that some people want the contest to be about showcasing your country and culture, but not me and I think that would result in an incredibly cheesy camp-fest no one would care about. I think for example enforcing a language rule would result in Melodifestivalen being odd, irrelevant and off the reality in the music world. I don't know how the reality is in other European countries but I suspect it is similar. And of course, Christer Björkman is completely irrelevant regarding these things.

edit:
(*) Just to name drop other examples: The four neoprog bands I've been recently addicted to Swedish Kaipa, Karmakanic, Norwegian Airbag and Polish Riverside. They all have small but devoted international followers.

 

[A-lister]

The thing is that the contest is actually no longer Eurovision we knew and it is turning into some kind of global version of Melodifestivalen. Now, we that we have Australia in the contest, more artists that are performing songs made by Swedish composers (Margaret, NuAngels and surely Azerbaijani artist, to name few), majority of countries that no longer perform in their national languages (even and ), changing running orders and now the voting system copied from Melodifestivalen... How is it about joining Europe together? How is it about showcasing European diversity? How juries are doing what they were meant to do (increasing chances of unfortunate countries to get into final and perhaps win) when they are actually supporting the ones that are doing well (Sweden and Azerbaijan, and those with boring ballads)? As someone said, it would be perhaps much better if every single year the host broadcaster modified rules slightly to make each edition of the contest unique. However, it seems that certain broadcasters (SVT for example) are allowed to do anything they want whereas suggestions of other broadcasters (e.g. TRT) are not addressed at all.

I agree with more or less every word you just wrote, and everyone that have been following me on this forum know that I've been addressing these issues constantly over and over again, but if you read my comment closely I was simply pointing out the change in voting system that although it has been modelled after the Melodifestivalen procedure it is actually strengthening the public vote which I think in the long run will help out to balance out some of these issues you just pointed out because I think the public are way more openminded than the juries.

Let's just take a fast look at previous years. If the new rules would have been implemented back in 2013 when they instead introduced the awful combined-ranking system, then we would have for instance seen Montenegro and Bulgaria qualifying (both entries being highly underrated by the juries while the public voted for these two entries that indeed was bringing both linguistic and musical diversity to the contest). In 2014 Portugal would have qualified to the final for the first time in a long time and also Poland would have ended up within the top. 10... so I think if one is advocating more diversity then I believe the change in voting system could be beneficial because as far as I see it the juries are killing the linguistic and musical diversity, not the viewers.

 

[cegs5]

EDIT

 

[Mii11]

Swedish artists almost exclusively use English in their songs. It's not because they dislike Swedish, love English or it is more difficult to write in Swedish. It's because they want to reach out internationally with their work. Perhaps it could also be seen as a sign of their artistry ambition. Sweden is a small country and if you want to make a living as a musician, you need to connect to the outside world. Besides our few international POP stars there are many Swedish musicians going on international tours belonging to a range of genres, for example metal bands (*). Singing in Swedish would in these circumstances merely be seen as a gimmick. Many artists also engage in song writing which seems to be at a high demand and lucrative. For example Laleh has written songs for Ellie Goulding and Demi Lovato.

So, no surprise that Melodifestivalen is dominated by English songs. The artists and the Swedish music industry just carry on as they usually do. In Eurovision the very point is also to reach out outside your country to the European voters in order to win. Note that some people want the contest to be about showcasing your country and culture, but not me and I think that would result in an incredibly cheesy camp-fest no one would care about. I think for example enforcing a language rule would result in Melodifestivalen being odd, irrelevant and off the reality in the music world. I don't know how the reality is in other European countries but I suspect it is similar. And of course, Christer Björkman is completely irrelevant regarding these things.

edit:
(*) Just to name drop other examples: The four neoprog bands I've been recently addicted to Swedish Kaipa, Karmakanic, Norwegian Airbag and Polish Riverside. They all have small but devoted international followers.

To reach international community, you don't have to sing in English. xboring Derniere danse, Andalouse, Papaoutai, Lambada and Gangnam Style are not songs in English language and they were very popular at one point. Moreover, Swedish language has an advantage that (as far as I am concerned) it is partially mutually intelligible with Norwegian and Danish (and Swedish is also spoken in Finland). Also many people think Swedish language is very beautiful so I think a Swedish song would have a chance in the contest.

Eurovision is not about winning; if it was then Greece, Bosnia and Herzegovina and San Marino would not participate (the first two do not have money to host an eventual contest and San Marino has small chances of winning due to small size and population) but they keep participating. Eurovision is about showcasing your artists and their songs - without Eurovision I wouldn't be able to listen to wonderful artists such as Loreen, Amanita, Kristina, etc. Anyone who thinks it is only about winning is deluded IMO (although you are from Sweden, so it is understandable - Sweden is no longer interested in showing off its own unique culture and language as it seems to be ashamed of it). So you think showcasing your country and culture is cheesy? Do you think that Swedish culture and language is cheesy? To each their own. I don't think like that - I find it beautiful that Europe is a place with many different cultures and music styles. Therefore I'm not interested in a bland and soulless Anglophone fest full of ballads. English is not a native language for majority of Europe, and (believe it or not) many people do not speak English very well and do not understand English lyrics very well (especially this is a case in Eastern Europe) so by singing in English you do not increase your chances of winning.

 

[cegs5]

I agree with more or less every word you just wrote, and everyone that have been following me on this forum know that I've been addressing these issues constantly over and over again, but if you read my comment closely I was simply pointing out the change in voting system that although it has been modelled after the Melodifestivalen procedure it is actually strengthening the public vote which I think in the long run will help out to balance out some of these issues you just pointed out because I think the public are way more openminded than the juries.

Let's just take a fast look at previous years. If the new rules would have been implemented back in 2013 when they instead introduced the awful combined-ranking system, then we would have for instance seen Montenegro and Bulgaria qualifying (both entries being highly underrated by the juries while the public voted for these two entries that indeed was bringing both linguistic and musical diversity to the contest). In 2014 Portugal would have qualified to the final for the first time in a long time and also Poland would have ended up within the top. 10... so I think if one is advocating more diversity then I believe the change in voting system could be beneficial because as far as I see it the juries are killing the linguistic and musical diversity, not the viewers.

This is unluckily not true at all. Just having a glance at the results from last year, Austria didn't get any point from televoting but 40 from the jury... while Spaingot 26 from televoting and only 6 from the jury. If you apply this year's system to this, the accumulated score would be Austria 40 and Spain 32 ...being Austria ranked better than Spain even when they didn't get a single point from the televote, so in this case the jury had more power.

This new way of presenting the points will only give us the false idea that the televoting has the last word and will decide the winner...but if you do your maths it is not true at all.

 

[LalehForWD]

To reach international community, you don't have to sing in English. xboring Derniere danse, Andalouse, Papaoutai, Lambada and Gangnam Style are not songs in English language and they were very popular at one point. Moreover, Swedish language has an advantage that (as far as I am concerned) it is partially mutually intelligible with Norwegian and Danish (and Swedish is also spoken in Finland). Also many people think Swedish language is very beautiful so I think a Swedish song would have a chance in the contest.

Eurovision is not about winning; if it was then Greece, Bosnia and Herzegovina and San Marino would not participate (the first two do not have money to host an eventual contest and San Marino has small chances of winning due to small size and population) but they keep participating. Eurovision is about showcasing your artists and their songs - without Eurovision I wouldn't be able to listen to wonderful artists such as Loreen, Amanita, Kristina, etc. Anyone who thinks it is only about winning is deluded IMO (although you are from Sweden, so it is understandable - Sweden is no longer interested in showing off its own unique culture and language as it seems to be ashamed of it). So you think showcasing your country and culture is cheesy? Do you think that Swedish culture and language is cheesy? To each their own. I don't think like that - I find it beautiful that Europe is a place with many different cultures and music styles. Therefore I'm not interested in a bland and soulless Anglophone fest full of ballads. English is not a native language for majority of Europe, and (believe it or not) many people do not speak English very well and do not understand English lyrics very well (especially this is a case in Eastern Europe) so by singing in English you do not increase your chances of winning.

I can understand your reasoning and to some extent I agree with you. For me as a Swede songs in Swedish do get a deeper meaning and more emotional dimensions. Nice to hear you think Swedish is beautiful. I was just describing the reality in the music business. Also I as a Swede do not watch Eurovision the same way as I would look at for example a football game between Denmark and Sweden or a hockey game against Finland. Most of the time my favourite in Eurovision isn't Swedish, in fact 2011 I hated every point Saade got. So a Swedish win isn't my first priority. I don't even believe a win is essential for the artists and other professional parties involved. Perhaps the type and level of exposure is more important? In any case they try to have a professional approach with their involvement, which in practice mean a song for the international market and thus in the English language.

As a Swede my Swedish language and all the Swedish traditions comes natural to me. It's nothing I'm ashamed of or feel is strange in any way. New habits constantly develops and old is forgotten. Culture isn't isn't a concept you can grasp easily and all people have many different communities they participate in, all developing it's own culture. For me, some of these communities are exclusively Swedish, some are on the internet etc. Reducing this complexity to some symbols and call it "Swedish culture" will never be interesting or true. Typically what they tried in the late 1800s to create fake images of nationalism. If you come to Stockholm you can study Swedish "culture" at Skansen, which can be fun but give of course an ultimately false impression. You say that Swedes are "ashamed" of our "unique culture and language". Nothing could be more wrong. Almost all Swedes are incredibly proud of being Swedes, it just doesn't show in flag waving or singing the national anthem.

 

[Stargazer]

Besides our few international POP stars there are many Swedish musicians going on international tours belonging to a range of genres, for example metal bands (*). Singing in Swedish would in these circumstances merely be seen as a gimmick.

Actually, I would argue that in the metal world, singing in your national language is quite popular and often favored among a lot of metalheads. There are Swedish, Finnish, German, Russian, Hungarian (etc) bands that either partially or exclusively write songs in their native tongue and still achieve success internationally, and it's not seen (or meant to be seen) as a gimmick. Likewise, you have the whole folk music genre (which is still alive and thriving), where the native language is preferable even internationally. English only seems to matter in the mainstream world.

As a Swede my Swedish language and all the Swedish traditions comes natural to me. It's nothing I'm ashamed of or feel is strange in any way. New habits constantly develops and old is forgotten. Culture isn't isn't a concept you can grasp easily and all people have many different communities they participate in, all developing it's own culture. For me, some of these communities are exclusively Swedish, some are on the internet etc. Reducing this complexity to some symbols and call it "Swedish culture" will never be interesting or true. Typically what they tried in the late 1800s to create fake images of nationalism. If you come to Stockholm you can study Swedish "culture" at Skansen, which can be fun but give of course an ultimately false impression. You say that Swedes are "ashamed" of our "unique culture and language". Nothing could be more wrong. Almost all Swedes are incredibly proud of being Swedes, it just doesn't show in flag waving or singing the national anthem.

Oh dear, you sound like some of those terribly misinformed culture relativists who try to argue that "Sweden has no specific Swedish culture". While it is true that some so called "culture symbols" were incorporated during the early 1900s (like the dalahäst), it's certainly not true for all aspects of Swedish culture. Regarding Skansen, all the buildings from each and every province of Sweden that were brought to Skansen to represent that particular area culturally, are all of a type that was very typical for that area for a long time. They weren't created to show a culture that didn't exist. Many of the buildings are from the 1700s (in building styles that often date back to the Middle Ages), which would be long before the National Romantic movement of the late 1800s. The only really "false" thing about Skansen is that you find all these buildings clustered together, when they would have been spread out across the country in actuality.

Regarding culture symbols like regional folk costumes, most of them were "officially established" during the late 1800s or early 1900s yes, but they are all still based on what was culturally worn in that area for centuries. This is why they all have that kind of provincial 1600s/1700s century look about them.

We as Swedes might have a hard time grasping "what is typically Swedish" because we're living it 24/7, but I assure you it is there. If you'd ask a foreigner living in Sweden, I'm sure they'd be able to pinpoint exactly what Swedish culture is and what makes it unique (just like every country's culture is unique) in a heartbeat.