Hello
Gentle Reader
Last
week it was announced after their annual meeting, the Swedish Academy, had
released its newly revised internal statutes which would both: a) reflect
contemporary societies ideals and principles, and b) be the first step in
regaining and renewing its position as a pinnacle and focal point of sober probity
in Swedish culture, as well as international literary culture. To quote the pro tempore Permanent Secretary of the
Swedish Academy, Anders Olsson himself, the revised statutes goals are to: “re-establish
trust for its activities,” [meaning the activities of the Swedish Academy] and:
“produce a modern interpretation,” the already existing statutes, which were
codified in 1786, when the Swedish Academy was first formed and instituted as a
royal academy by the then reigning monarch, King Gustav III.
The
first statute to be codified is a loyalty obligation; or what others might know
as a Fiduciary Agreement. The statement is simply, the Swedish Academy expects
all members of the institution to keep in mind their membership carries responsibilities,
and that all members are to put the academy’s interests and activates, before
their own, and avoid any collusion, collision, or conflict of interest between
the academy’s activities, and their own personal interests, goals, and
activities. Furthermore, the statute outlines, that all sitting members are
expected to avoid and not participate in any slander or criticism against the
Swedish Academy or a fellow member, and again work within the statutes of confidentiality
and do the good work of the academy with honesty and integrity.
This
first statute already sets the playing field of how the Swedish Academy plans
to curtail and avoid further public scandals, like the spring incident. This
statute is aimed primarily at the vocal groups within the academy who choose to
exchange words publicly though media channels, interviews, public letters, and
other forms of public relations communications. Those members are:
Horace
Engdahl
Göran
Malmqvist
Sture
Allen
And
Sara
Danius
Peter
Englund
Kjell
Espmark
And
only later on, with an attempt at clarifications and accusations, the disgraced
member: Katarina Frostenson.
How
this will affect the buisness moving forward would be considered clear, but its
applications and implementations are still in the infancy stage. The public not
have a public dispute and war of words between the academy’s factions, but
there is still a bitterness brewing in the broth, and I doubt we’ve seen the
complete end of the dispute in a public light just yet.
Following
this statute, comes the matter of electing new members. By previous statute
measures, the Swedish Academy required twelve members to hold a quorum in order
to make major decisions, such as the election of new members. The Swedish
Academy wishes to revise this matter, and allow this statute to be bypassed in
the event of emergency situations, with the Kings consent to elect new members
despite lacking the quorum. This revised statute would therefore break the
current deadlock facing the Swedish Academy, and mean they do not require the
return of Sara Danius, Peter Englund of Kjell Espmark to participate in passive
roles, in order to elect new members.
Finally
the issue of expulsion is discussed during these statute revivals. However, the
Swedish Academy is still hesitant on discussing the matter with great clarity. When
discussing the statute of expulsion prior to this revival, it had appeared the
idea was precedence rather than a codified code of conduct, which had swayed
the discussion and end result on whether or not Katarina Frostenson should be
expelled from the Swedish Academy. Previously only one member had been expelled
from the Swedish Academy, and that was Gustaf Mauritz Armfelt; and he was
technically expelled twice; the second time, I believe he was excluded from the
academy, because he faced criminal charges of treason, as well as a sentence of
execution. By this precedence, the Swedish Academy was under the guise that
only a member who had committed a grave crime or faced extreme criminal charges
should be excluded from the academy. Now, in their revision, the Swedish
Academy has stated that a member can only be excluded when they have been found
to have committed “clear malpractice.”
What
is defined as “clear malpractice,” is still ironically enough: unclear. During
the spring scandal of the Swedish Academy, the law firm which investigated the
Swedish Academy’s the convoluted business ties with cultural club, Forum, run
by inactive member, Katarina Frostenson and her criminally accused (and
charged) husband Jean-Claude Arnault; the investigation revealed, Katarina
Frostenson accepted financial aid from the Swedish Academy to run the club with
her husband, as well as she had broken the statute of secrecy on several occasions,
by prematurely releasing information relating to the Nobel Prize for
Literature, to her husband. Does this count as malpractice, by the new statutes
perspective? If yes or no, the Swedish Academy has not elucidated or enlightened
the matter any further, and then what is stated in their documents.
There
were many other revisions and adjustments made to the statutes, these however
were considered the most important statutes to review and revise. It should
also be noted, previously this spring/summer, the King of Sweden, had made a
revision to the statutes allowing for members of the Swedish Academy to
voluntarily resign, or if they do not participate in the academy’s work for two
years, their membership is considered expired and their seat can be replaced.
These early amendments are also included in the amendments.
Ultimately
the King of Sweden as the royal patron must approve these newly renovated
documents, before they take any legal hold or authority or have been granted
policy powers. Cultural critics, literary critics, and jurisprudence/legal
experts and the public have been fiercely debating the amendments, and believe
even with these revisions the Swedish Academy, is either naïve or ignorant to
think they are out of the swamp just yet. They have a vast mountain to scale,
and a lot of work ahead of them before many will even consider giving them any benefit
of the doubt. This has been described at best: an act of good faith and keeping
face with the public, and merely a scratched attempt to regain former glory and
respect.
Thank-you
For Reading Gentle Reader
Take
Care
And
As Always
Stay
Well Read
M.
Mary
For Further
Reading, Please See The Following Links –
"[New] Swedish Academy Statutes," [Note: In Swedish]
Local Sweden: "Swedish Academy publishes new statutes after summer of scandals,"
No comments:
Post a Comment