Difference between revisions of "Janteloven (Denmark, Norway and Sweden)"

<div class="mw-collapsible-content">

<div class="mw-collapsible-content">

The term was first coined by Danish-Norwegian author Aksel Sandemose in his book En flyktning krysser sitt spor (1933). Inspired by his own upbringing in the small town of Nykøbing Mors, Denmark, Sandemose depicted the upbringing of a young boy in the fictional town of Jante who experienced immense pressure to conform to the peasant life of its inhabitants. By studying the behaviour of the villagers, the author codified the norms of the small society into ten commandments reminiscent of the Biblical Ten Commandments, and named them janteloven. They read as follows:

The term was first coined by Danish-Norwegian author Aksel Sandemose in his book En flyktning krysser sitt spor (1933). Inspired by his own upbringing in the small town of Nykøbing Mors, Denmark, Sandemose depicted the upbringing of a young boy in the fictional town of Jante who experienced immense pressure to conform to the peasant life of its inhabitants. By studying the behaviour of the villagers, the author codified the norms of the small society into ten commandments reminiscent of the Biblical Ten Commandments, and named them janteloven. They read as follows:

1. Thou shalt not believe that thou art something.

1. Thou shalt not believe that thou art something.

While the practice exists in Denmark and Norway as janteloven, it is known in Sweden as jantelagen. It has been claimed that the same norms and practices, although not identified by a specific name, are present in other Nordic societies such as Finland (Booth 2015: 242)<ref>Booth, K. 2015. The Almost Nearly Perfect People: Behind the Myth of the Scandinavian Utopia. London: Vintage</ref>. The Greek mythology concepts of hubris and nemesis express similar ideas (Sprognævnet 2004)<ref>Sprognævnet. 2004. ‘Janteloven’, Sproget.dk, 1 September, http://sproget.dk/raad-og-regler/artikler-mv/svarbase/SV00001169 </ref>. Sandemose claimed that janteloven applied not only to small communities within Denmark, but identified it as a specific trait of human nature that had the possibility of flourishing in any society (Sandemose 1994: 15)<ref>Sandemose, A. 1994. En flygtning krydser sit spor. Aalborg: Aalborg Stiftsbogtrykkeri</ref>.However, those who practice it seldom clarify what is meant by the term, which poses challenges when investigating its supposed influence. Some consider it a social practice, while others use it as a label for a specific set of norms. The ambiguity of the term is also recognised in public. According to a survey conducted by a Danish newspaper in 2008, half of the Danish population believed that janteloven was often rhetorically misused as an excuse by people who were experiencing a lack of success (Lenler and Faber 2008b)<ref>Lelner, J. and K. Fabler. 2008b. ‘Janteloven er en undskyldning’, Politiken.dk, 23 June, http://politiken.dk/indland/ECE528333/janteloven-er-en-undskyldning/</ref>.

While the practice exists in Denmark and Norway as janteloven, it is known in Sweden as jantelagen. It has been claimed that the same norms and practices, although not identified by a specific name, are present in other Nordic societies such as Finland (Booth 2015: 242)<ref>Booth, K. 2015. The Almost Nearly Perfect People: Behind the Myth of the Scandinavian Utopia. London: Vintage</ref>. The Greek mythology concepts of hubris and nemesis express similar ideas (Sprognævnet 2004)<ref>Sprognævnet. 2004. ‘Janteloven’, Sproget.dk, 1 September, http://sproget.dk/raad-og-regler/artikler-mv/svarbase/SV00001169 </ref>. Sandemose claimed that janteloven applied not only to small communities within Denmark, but identified it as a specific trait of human nature that had the possibility of flourishing in any society (Sandemose 1994: 15)<ref>Sandemose, A. 1994. En flygtning krydser sit spor. Aalborg: Aalborg Stiftsbogtrykkeri</ref>.However, those who practice it seldom clarify what is meant by the term, which poses challenges when investigating its supposed influence. Some consider it a social practice, while others use it as a label for a specific set of norms. The ambiguity of the term is also recognised in public. According to a survey conducted by a Danish newspaper in 2008, half of the Danish population believed that janteloven was often rhetorically misused as an excuse by people who were experiencing a lack of success (Lenler and Faber 2008b)<ref>Lelner, J. and K. Fabler. 2008b. ‘Janteloven er en undskyldning’, Politiken.dk, 23 June, http://politiken.dk/indland/ECE528333/janteloven-er-en-undskyldning/</ref>.

There has been little academic research on janteloven in its own right. This is likely due to the conceptual imprecision of a term loaded with meanings and controversies, as well as the elusive character of these practices, which do not easily lend themselves to scientific research. Nevertheless, the term has been used in an academic context to explain social relations in Scandinavia: it has been suggested that as a set of norms and informal practices it plays a role in Scandinavian society. Some scholars have considered it a useful label for describing socially acceptable and appropriate behaviours in Norway (Avant and Knutsen 1993-94)<ref>Avant G. R. and K. P. Knutsen. 1993-94. ‘Understanding Cultural Differences: Janteloven and Social Conformity in Norway’, ETC: A Review of General Semantics, 50 (4): 449-460</ref>.In this case janteloven reflects larger societal norms of conformity. Norwegian society is highly homogenous and egalitarian with a considerable emphasis on societal solidarity. The extensive welfare state reflects this solidarity as it tries to eliminate poverty through welfare redistribution and social benefits. In the context of this research janteloven functions as a label for the underlying norms explaining these modern developments, whilst also being used as a social tool to ensure that people stay within the boundaries that serve the community and do not set out on an independent trajectory.

There has been little academic research on janteloven in its own right. This is likely due to the conceptual imprecision of a term loaded with meanings and controversies, as well as the elusive character of these practices, which do not easily lend themselves to scientific research. Nevertheless, the term has been used in an academic context to explain social relations in Scandinavia: it has been suggested that as a set of norms and informal practices it plays a role in Scandinavian society. Some scholars have considered it a useful label for describing socially acceptable and appropriate behaviours in Norway (Avant and Knutsen 1993-94)<ref>Avant G. R. and K. P. Knutsen. 1993-94. ‘Understanding Cultural Differences: Janteloven and Social Conformity in Norway’, ETC: A Review of General Semantics, 50 (4): 449-460</ref>.In this case janteloven reflects larger societal norms of conformity. Norwegian society is highly homogenous and egalitarian with a considerable emphasis on societal solidarity. The extensive welfare state reflects this solidarity as it tries to eliminate poverty through welfare redistribution and social benefits. In the context of this research janteloven functions as a label for the underlying norms explaining these modern developments, whilst also being used as a social tool to ensure that people stay within the boundaries that serve the community and do not set out on an independent trajectory.