Contemporary Music Exchange in Europe: Finland & Norway

This recap summarizes the workshop Contemporary Music Exchange in Europe: Finland & Norway. The workshop series offers insights into the diverse landscape of contemporary music in Europe, presents concrete entry points and initial opportunities for transnational exchange, and highlights actors beyond the major festivals and venues.

Hosted by: 

• Music Finland https://musicfinland.com/

• Music Norway https://musicnorway.no/english/

Moderator: 
Les Vynogradov

Presenters:

• Yumi Murakami, Advisor for Art and Contemporary Music at Music Norway
• Tuuli Elo, Export Manager at Music Finland
• Heli Lampi, Head of Communications & Promotion at Music Finland

Panelists:

• Heloisa Amaral, Director and Artistic Director of Ultima Contemporary Music Festival in Oslo
• Johan Tallgren, Artistic Director of the Time of Music festival in Viitasaari, Finland
• Tuuli Lindeberg, Artistic Director of Musica Nova Helsinki

1. Yumi Murakami. Contemporary Music Scene in Norway and the STATUS Network

Presentation:
Contemporary Music in Norway – Presentation by Yumi Murakami, Music Norway

Q: At the previous workshop, Regin Petersen from Art Music Denmark mentioned that, unlike Germany, Denmark really hasn't experienced any dramatic cultural funding cuts in recent years. How has the situation been in Norway in that respect? 

A: I think the situation is somewhat similar to Denmark. We haven't had any dramatic cuts to cultural funding, but it hasn't been adjusted to account for inflation or rising costs, which have been significant. When the size of a fund remains unchanged for many years, it effectively amounts to a real-terms cut.

In addition, the number of artists competing for public funding has increased significantly. The number of applicants has risen dramatically since the pandemic. There are many theories as to why this is happening, but I think, in general, people have less money than before and are therefore looking for new ways to fund their projects.

As I mentioned in my presentation, the greatest challenge facing the independent art sector is the lack of long-term funding. Long-term funding does exist, but it is rare, and most of us work from project to project. Artists often move from one funding round to the next, making it difficult to plan ahead. Many are forced to work under less-than-ideal conditions, sometimes even reducing their own fees just to make project budgets add up.

Q: Are there any structurally subsidized ensembles in Norway, for example: grants for a longer period (5 years)? Or only project subsidies?

A: Some of the ensembles I mentioned in my presentation have more stable government funding, particularly the first two, Cikada and Bit20. We also have Oslo Sinfonietta, which I didn't mention but which is one of the oldest ensembles and has a more long-term funding arrangement. I believe everyone else has to apply for funding each year.

Q: Since STATUS focuses on knowledge exchange, could you share some of the insights you have learned in recent years?

A: In the STATUS network, we share what we call "signals." A signal can be any important development in a member's country and is based on the personal insights and experiences of network members. We cover many themes, including environment and sustainability, infrastructure, education, innovation, and more. I can share a few examples to give you an impression of the type of knowledge we exchange.

We actually had a meeting this week, and Art Music Denmark shared a signal related to infrastructure. They are involved in a pilot project called Tourbus, an AI tool designed to help artists discover venues that match their specific genres in cities where they do not already have contacts. The Tourbus project has two parts, exploring opportunities both in the Nordic countries and across Europe. There is currently an open call for participants, which closes later in June, and they are looking for five artists and five venues. It is an interesting pilot project that they are now involved in.

We also received a signal from our colleagues in Finland. They shared information about a new database published on Music Finland's composers and repertoire platform, which offers more than 150 Finnish works. The project aims to make it easier for music teachers to find pieces that match their students' skill levels and to introduce young musicians to contemporary Finnish repertoire.These are the kinds of signals we share with one another. They can inspire new projects and help us stay informed about developments across the Nordic region. It is a very valuable network for us.

2. Tuuli Elo and Heli Lampi. Contemporary Music in Finland and the Northern Connection Network

Presentations:
Contemporary Music in Finland – Presentation by Tuuli Elo, Music Finland
Northern Connection – Presentation by Heli Lampi, Music Finland

Q: Tell us a little bit about Scotland's participation in the Northern Connection. How did that come about, and what other countries have a chance at joining in the future? 

A: There has actually been a lot of interest from outside the Nordic countries as well. When we have presented the project at festivals and other events, quite a few people have approached us and asked, "How can we join?" Of course, that is very encouraging.

So far, however, we have tried to keep the project manageable. Growth is positive, but at the same time, we are concerned that if it grows too much, it may become difficult to keep it functioning effectively. Ideally, we would have a dedicated project manager for Northern Connection, but that would require additional funding. To date, the project has been relatively lightweight in terms of administration.

That said, we are thinking about these questions. And regarding why Scotland is involved, I think it is a very relevant question. After Brexit, Scotland has increasingly turned toward the Nordic countries. This is partly due to geographical proximity, but even more to cultural identity. As we have learned from our Scottish colleagues, they feel a strong connection to the North, and we wanted to acknowledge and encourage that sense of identity.

There were also already many connections between people and organizations, so it felt natural to include Scotland. Tuuli mentioned Nordic Music Days earlier, and I can add that the festival was held in Glasgow for the first time two years ago. The contemporary music community in the North has really welcomed Scotland warmly.

Q: Is playing as a foreign ensemble difficult in Finland? I had, for example, a good contact with a Turku festival for a booking, but it seems they don't have their own separate budget for paying artists. We need to find our own way to get funding to play. Is that a common thing there, or are there festivals that have their own (bigger) budget to start from? 

A: I think it is quite common that festivals, especially nowadays, are affected by cuts to cultural budgets in Finland in recent years. As a result, many festivals and organizations are increasingly struggling with funding, which unfortunately limits their ability to book artists. In addition, travel costs are rising, which makes it more difficult to bring in ensembles from outside Finland.

Of course, we may not be the right people to answer this question, but I think Turku Music Festival still has a relatively large budget compared to some smaller festivals. It really depends on the case, though. Later, Johan and Tuuli, who represent the festival field, may have more insightful comments on this. I know that both of them still invite ensembles from abroad when possible, within their budget and framework. Overall, it is handled on a case-by-case basis.

Q: Is there any funding particularly for supporting the commissioning of new pieces from Finnish composers? 

A: Yes, there are. The Society of Finnish Composers offers funding that composers or commissioners can apply for. In addition, Teosto, the Copyright Society of Finland, also has a fund that can be used for this purpose.

Grants for commissions from Finnish composers: 

        https://composers.fi/en/sibelius-fund/

        https://composers.fi/en/madetoja-foundation/

        https://composers.fi/en/travel-grants/

        https://www.teosto.fi/en/members/services/grants-and-subsidies-for-music/

Q: What do you see as the main challenges that the Finnish independent music scene is facing these days? 

A: I think the main issue is the uncertainty of funding in the long run. There is still a strong base of public funding in Finland, but the amount of money has decreased compared to some years ago, and it is not very stable. This makes it more difficult to plan several years ahead than before.

As we understand it, the same situation applies across Europe at the moment. Budget cuts in cultural funding are unfortunately quite common and reflect the current times. The Finnish economy has not been doing very well recently, and the government has taken a rather strict approach toward arts and culture funding. 

We have an election next year, and we hope things will improve. For example, the growing defense budget and similar factors significantly influence the overall climate for arts funding.

At the same time, more support and advocacy for the arts are emerging. Difficult times tend to strengthen advocacy efforts, and some people even suggest that the next election may be, to a greater extent than before, a “cultural election,” in which culture plays a larger role in public debate. Let’s hope that is the case.

Q: From what I understood, right now the composers and their pieces are being played by different ensembles part of the Northern Connection. The piece is then played multiple times, but each ensemble plays it only once. Would it also be possible to have one ensemble touring and presenting the new creation multiple times? 

A: Yes, absolutely. In the first round, we had three nominated ensembles: one from Finland, one from Scotland, and one from Norway. They all had the same instrumentation, so they could perform all the commissioned pieces.

In fact, all three ensembles ended up performing all of the works. We have tried to keep the instrumentation consistent across rounds to make it easier to arrange reruns. This also allowed the ensembles to perform some of the works multiple times. They were touring with the Northern Connection piece, especially the Norwegian Ensemble Temporum.

3. Panel discussion

Q: Please briefly introduce your festival to the audience.

Heloisa Amaral: Ultima is a festival that takes place every September and has been running since 1991, so it has become quite a mature festival over time.

It is somewhat special in its structure, as it is organized as a foundation. Ultima consists of 18 member organizations, including orchestras, ensembles, choirs, educational institutions such as art and music schools, museums, and an experimental theater. Each year, these member institutions contribute productions or other resources to the festival. As a result, a large part of the program is developed collectively, with these organizations working together.

In addition, the festival has many collaborators in the city, such as the House of Dance and the UNM, a festival for young experimental music, with whom we often work. In this sense, Ultima reflects a Nordic model, in which multiple institutions come together to create opportunities that would otherwise not be possible. This structure also enables substantial productions, made possible through this shared effort. 

As a result, Ultima is quite cross-disciplinary. The program includes chamber music and orchestral concerts, as well as music theatre, sound installations, exhibitions, and talks. Genre-wise, the festival is also very fluid. While a significant part of the program is rooted in the Western classical tradition, we also work with Norwegian traditional music and musicians from jazz and improvisation scenes. This year, there is also a focus on noise music, making the range particularly broad.

The festival is closely tied to the city of Oslo. It typically takes place across around 25 to 30 venues each year, allowing audiences to experience the city through the festival. We also make strong use of site-specific work, and projects where space and music intersect are among our favorites.

Ultima has approximately 13,000 to 15,000 visitors each year over its 10-day duration.

We are also actively involved in various international networks and projects, including with colleagues here, such as Time of Music and Musica Nova Helsinki.

Tuuli Lindeberg: Musica Nova Helsinki is a festival that takes place every two years in Helsinki in February, when it is dark, cold, and wintry. It typically lasts about 10 days and includes over 20 concerts, a couple of staged productions with multiple performances, around a dozen public artist talks and lectures, and some educational collaborations.

The festival is organized in a somewhat similar way to Ultima, but with fewer main organizing partners. Currently, there are five: the Finnish Broadcasting Company, the Radio Symphony Orchestra, the Finnish Philharmonic Orchestra, the Espoo City Orchestra (Tapiola Sinfonietta), the Finnish Composers’ Society, and also the Helsinki Festival, which is the largest multi-arts festival in Finland and contributes a special contemporary music program in connection with Musica Nova every two years.

As Artistic Director, I see my role mainly as a kind of diplomat and facilitator between many different parties, including large institutions and the Finnish freelance field. Due to funding challenges, the festival has increasingly become a platform for numerous independent productions. We collaborate on marketing and communication with these projects, and I contribute to curating the content. I'm not the person who sits on a big pile of money, but it's more about the substance knowledge that I bring into the soup.

Due to funding challenges, there are currently more Finnish performers than before, as the number of international artist visits has decreased.

Johan Tallgren: Time of Music is one of the oldest Scandinavian festivals held annually, as it was established in 1982. In terms of scale and context, Time of Music is quite unique in many ways. Finland is sometimes perceived as a large or small country, but in fact it is roughly the size of Germany, though with a population of only about 5 million instead of 85 million. This creates certain proportional challenges.

Time of Music takes place in a small city of around 6,000 inhabitants. It used to be 10,000, so we are seeing what's happening there. In a way, it feels like going to a “Twin Peaks” hotel—somewhere remote and slightly surreal. For many participants, it has been a utopian experience, where you go to that little space, and suddenly you have a very big festival or a small festival, depending on the year.

The festival usually takes place in the first week of July. The week before, Avanti! Summer Sounds is held. In the 1980s, these developments were closely connected, and John Cage's 1983 visit to Viitasaari became a significant moment in Finnish music history. It helped spark experimentation, contributed to the development of ensembles such as Avanti!, and, more broadly, influenced the emergence of these festivals.

Nowadays, we are part of the Ulysses Network and have also had the opportunity to be involved in the Sounds Now network, including receiving some funding through it. In that sense, we are quite unusual, as we are likely one of the most international festivals in Finland.

In Viitasaari, nothing is available on site, so everything has to be brought in. While we can use the spaces, each piece of equipment—especially electronics—must be rented, planned, and transported there. In that sense, the festival functions almost like a caravan that arrives in the small town for one week. And it's a lot of sauna and contemporary music.

In terms of international versus national participation, there has been a clear shift over time. I recently met Sarah Albu, who attended the first edition of the festival I worked on, in 2014. At that time, most students were Finnish, and she was one of the few international participants. Today, the situation has reversed: the majority of participants in our courses now come from around the world, and in some years, up to 90 percent of attendees are international.

At the same time, we are also a festival that must fundraise for nearly everything we do. We are strongly integrated into EU funding structures and international foundations, and at times, we have been among the Finnish festivals with the highest proportion of EU funding through combined projects. Overall, contemporary music festival budgeting is typically around 95 percent fundraising, with the remaining 5 percent coming from other sources.

A good illustration of my festival budget is that it is roughly the same this year as it was in 2014. However, between 2022 and 2023, the budget was almost double that. In that sense, the scale of the festival reflects quite clearly what is happening in society.

It is also interesting in relation to my work teaching at the Sibelius Academy and participating in admissions there. Each spring, when going through admissions both at the Sibelius Academy and at Time of Music courses, it provides a kind of snapshot of how society is doing internationally. What we can see is that developments in society since 2021 have had a clear impact on these contexts. For example, in one year, out of 100 artists, 98 were Finnish and only a very small number were international. 

However, this is not something that can be arranged simply by invitation—sending an email and confirming participation—because it depends entirely on available funding. As a result, I always need to fundraise for everything. This means that processes are often slow, and it takes time to determine what can be realized and when.

At the same time, this is also part of what makes it exciting. In years with stronger funding, it is possible to realize very large-scale projects. In years with limited funding, the focus shifts to more intimate formats. This variation is also artistically stimulating, as it allows programming to move in very different directions depending on the circumstances.

Q: What is the percentage of international artists invited yearly to Ultima? Or how many concerts? How possible could it be for a foreign ensemble (in our case, from Switzerland) to plan a tour consisting of several concerts in the North?

Heloisa Amaral: This is a difficult question, and I have never really counted it precisely, but I would say that at least 40% of the artists presenting at the festival come from abroad. The main approach is that some artists are invited directly by us—myself and my colleagues in the Ultima office—and many others are invited through the organizations we collaborate with. We often prioritize collaborations between international and Norwegian artists. This can mean Norwegian composers working with foreign ensembles, or composers from other countries working with Norwegian groups, or other similar constellations.

We also aim to develop international collaborations that are sustainable, often by working with different festivals or presenting partners, so that projects can be performed in multiple locations. This is generally the preferred scenario. 

In addition, we collaborate with specific funding organizations that propose artists to us. This is another way international artists come to our attention. There is also a pragmatic aspect to this process, as various funding bodies and export organizations actively contact us about foreign artists.

We work with international networks such as Ulysses, which is a platform for young and emerging artists. Through this, we become familiar with many artists and productions, including those connected to Northern Connection. We are also part of Sounds of Gathering, a network that promotes music by Indigenous artists globally, another channel through which international productions reach the festival. In this way, international programming comes through a range of networks, partnerships, and shared objectives and visions.

Q: Extending this question to everyone, what is your programming when it comes to international artists vs. local ones? Is it solely a question of available funds, or do you intend to support a specific percentage of local artists when programming?

Tuuli Lindeberg: We have relatively limited resources, but we are able to invite some international artists and composer guests through the main organizers. For example, the Helsinki Festival may invite an international contemporary music ensemble, while the organizing orchestras may bring in a composer whose work has been selected for the concert program.

Personally, if I have the opportunity to invite someone, it is important that there is some form of collaboration with the Finnish contemporary music community—a project or partnership that leaves a more lasting impact. Geographically, Finland is quite remote. It is almost like an island in that sense. It is not a place that artists simply pass through on a concert tour; coming to Finland requires time, effort, and resources. Therefore, a visit should be meaningful and create sustainable connections with the Finnish music scene.

A quick word about touring within the Nordic countries. It can sometimes come as a surprise how large the distances are. Cities are often far apart. In Finland, for example, the journey from Helsinki to Oulu, which was mentioned earlier, takes about six hours by train. As a result, people often have to fly, or travel by ferry, which usually means an overnight journey. This makes it difficult to organize tours in the way that is common in Central Europe, where a two-hour train ride can take you to multiple major cities and allow performances to be repeated several times.

In fact, Finnish professional and freelance musicians do not tour extensively with the same repertoire. Instead, they constantly prepare and perform new programs. It is a very different mindset for artists and musicians. The amount of repertoire that moves through the system each year is enormous.

For the same reasons, organizing international tours within the Nordic region can be challenging. Scheduling is often difficult, as festivals do not take place continuously across different cities. In addition, accommodation and travel are expensive because of the distances involved. These are important factors to consider when planning projects in the region. Festivals also rarely have funding available for activities outside their festival period. Funding is generally tied to the festival itself.

Johan Tallgren: I think it is always a slow process. I work with different themes and focal points from year to year. We develop large, multi-year projects and applications around different ideas. We are also part of various EU networks, which create certain frameworks and priorities for us. As a result, there are always many constraints that shape what we can do.

At the same time, our role is to identify exciting artists and projects and find ways to work with them. As artists and organizers, we naturally become excited about new ideas and collaborations. But when we decide that something is worth pursuing, it is usually not a project for next year—it is something that will happen several years down the line. Whether it ultimately takes place depends on how successful the fundraising process is. One of the major challenges today is that the level of certainty we used to have has diminished. Previously, we could be fairly confident that a project planned one or two years in advance would be feasible. Now, with all the broader societal changes, many foundations are revising their strategies and funding priorities. This creates increasing uncertainty and makes long-term planning and commitments more difficult.

As for traveling to Viitasaari from Central Europe, that is a significant undertaking in itself. If you catch a flight at seven in the morning, you may not arrive in Viitasaari until nine in the evening. Bringing an entire ensemble for a short visit is therefore not particularly cost-effective. It is very different from traveling between cities in Central Europe, where you can go from Frankfurt to Cologne and return the same evening. The distances involved make the budgetary considerations quite different.

What we usually try to do instead is invite artists for residencies, either as teachers or as performers, and sometimes bring ensembles for longer residencies as well. This requires a certain flexibility from the artists involved. If you are a performer, your repertoire and activities need to adapt to different contexts and ambitions. A residency may include two or three concerts, teaching activities, work with students, and various collaborative projects.

In that sense, success often depends on how adaptable the artist or ensemble is. If the approach is simply, "This is my repertoire, and this is what I perform," then the situation becomes more complicated. That model can work well for solo recitals, but when it comes to larger ensembles and residency-based projects, much greater flexibility is required.

Q: In view of these logistical challenges, what would you say would be the best way for musicians—performers or composers—who would like to be introduced to the Nordic scene through your festivals, to start working with you outside of just coming to the festival and saying hi? What pathways are there through the existing funding schemes or networks for musicians to really become a part of this scene?

Heloisa Amaral: This is a question I have thought about quite a lot because I am asked it frequently, and there is no really good answer. Johan and Tuuli, and before them, Yumi, Tuuli, and Heli have already mentioned many of the relevant organizations, structures, and networks. I have also spoken about the importance of participating in the activities of networks that festivals are connected to.

Of course, there are also the more conventional approaches. It is important to write clear emails, keep your website updated, provide good recordings, and make sure people can learn about your work. Festivals meet artists through many different channels, and all of these things can help. It is also important not to take it personally if you do not receive a response. Very often, the reason is simply that festivals receive an overwhelming number of proposals. We sometimes receive more than a hundred each week. I often see musicians who are disappointed or do not understand why festivals remain silent, but the reality is that most of us are small organizations with limited capacity. That is simply part of the situation.

At the same time, I think festival programmers generally try to stay well-informed. We actively attend concerts, look for new artists, and pay attention to what is happening in the field. Because of that, I would often prefer artists to focus less on repeatedly sending emails and more on developing a strong artistic identity.

I was speaking about this recently at a workshop for ensembles. What really captures my attention is not a polished professional presentation. It is the feeling that an artist or ensemble has a distinct artistic world of its own. Over time, you begin to recognize a coherent artistic universe in the way they talk about their work, the way they perform, and the music they commission and present.

The fact that an ensemble can play music by any composer is not particularly interesting to me. What is interesting is what they offer that is uniquely theirs.

If that artistic identity does not come across, then the promotional material becomes secondary. My advice would be to trust the networks you already have, to be active in your local environment, and to build from there. Become strong where you are and focus on developing your artistic voice. From there, connections will expand naturally rather than through sending yet another email to a festival in another country and waiting for a reply.

Increasingly, I believe this is the more realistic approach. Build your presence locally, develop your artistic strengths, and trust that people will hear about your work. We are all part of the same ecosystem, after all, and we tend to find out about one another sooner or later.

Sometimes these cycles of direct promotion become frustrating for everyone involved: frustrating for musicians who often do not receive a response, and frustrating for festival directors like myself, who would genuinely like to reply but often do not have the capacity. I do appreciate receiving information about new artists and projects, and I often find it interesting and useful. But direct promotion is not necessarily the most effective route into a festival program.

That is simply an honest description of how the process works from my perspective.

Tuuli Lindeberg: In my experience, some of the most rewarding and meaningful productions I have witnessed over the years have been projects where artists from abroad have come to Finland to work in a workshop setting or to develop a production together with Finnish musicians, composers, or orchestras. The result has often been more than the sum of its parts, creating benefits for everyone involved.

For the international artists, these collaborations provide a window into the Finnish music scene. We have a wonderful community here—perhaps somewhat secluded, but one that includes highly skilled professional musicians, outstanding composers, and excellent conductors. At the same time, Finnish artists and musicians gain the opportunity to work closely with international experts, whether that means a specialist in a particular aesthetic, a composer with a unique artistic perspective, or someone who can share valuable and timely knowledge.

There is also an important educational dimension to these exchanges. When international composers or artists visit Finland and give workshops at the Sibelius Academy, for example, students gain insights that are difficult to acquire in any other way. They can learn directly how a particular composer approaches extended techniques or how they imagine their music should be performed.

These kinds of experiences are invaluable because they cannot really be communicated through scores, written instructions, or remote communication. They require direct interaction and shared practice.

For me, this is perhaps the greatest value of international collaboration. It serves the Finnish music community while also benefiting the international participants. It creates mutual understanding, builds lasting connections, and helps spread knowledge about how things work in different artistic environments.

Johan Tallgren: The short answer is, it depends. It depends partly on what stage of your career you are at. For young musicians, courses and educational programs are often the best way to enter the field, because they provide opportunities to meet people, gain experience, and become part of the community.

For more established artists, the situation is somewhat different. We receive proposals from people at all stages of their careers. Having worked in this field for quite a long time—through Musica Nova, negotiations with orchestras, and later as an advisor to the Helsinki Festival—I have seen very different approaches over the years. At one point, much of the work involved agents and large institutions. You might be discussing projects with major orchestras such as the New York Philharmonic, and the dynamics were quite different.

The contemporary music scene, however, is relatively small. Over time, most people get to know one another. Artists, presenters, and organizers move through the same festivals, networks, and professional circles, and relationships gradually develop. 

I often think about how things worked 15 or 20 years ago. Back then, people met at concerts and festivals, tried to talk to one another, and often carried CDs to hand out. Someone would slip a CD into your conference bag, hoping something might come from it. You might put it on a shelf and listen to it six months later.

That has changed completely. Ten years ago, people were convinced that having a SoundCloud page would make things happen. Today, the reality is that presenters receive an enormous number of emails and proposals.

Fifteen years ago, agents would ask for meetings and suggest projects without even looking at what you programmed. They might try to sell you an orchestra project for a festival that could never accommodate an orchestra. Naturally, those proposals rarely received a response. If you are sending a proposal to someone, the first thing you should do is look at their programming from previous years. Otherwise, you are simply wasting your own time.

At the same time, networks play an important role. For example, Tuuli and I meet regularly in Helsinki through our work. We also meet Heloisa and many others through various professional networks. In those contexts, we naturally talk about projects, ideas, and developments in the field.

Importantly, these conversations are not usually about pitching a project and immediately getting it programmed. They are about being present and being part of the community. People talk about exciting ensembles, interesting artists, reliable collaborators, and sometimes about difficult experiences as well. That is simply how professional communities function.

In that sense, building a career is a holistic process. Your artistic work, your professional relationships, and your reputation all develop together. People gradually form an impression of who you are and how you work. I remember one of the first festival networks I participated in. One of the things people appreciated most about a particular artist was that they were not constantly promoting themselves. They were simply interested in getting to know people and understanding what was happening around them.

Over time, trust develops. People become familiar with your artistic ideas and your way of working. Then, when the right opportunity appears, someone says, "Now is the moment—we should do something together." In my experience, that mutual understanding and trust are often what ultimately lead to collaborations.

Q: How would you define Nordic music and the Nordic scene? What makes them unique and different from others? What is the Nordic perspective when it comes to independent music?

Heloisa Amaral: That is a very difficult question. I probably could have answered it more clearly some years ago, when I moved to Norway after studying in Germany. This was more than 20 years ago, and I learned something quite interesting about contemporary music at that time. What struck me was the extraordinary openness regarding what music could be. In Norway, and I think to some extent in other Scandinavian countries as well, there was a much broader sense of what contemporary music might include. This may be more pronounced in Norway than in Denmark or Sweden.

Norway does not have the same long-standing institutional tradition in contemporary music as Germany or France, nor the same deeply established schools and lineages. As a result, there has been a strong circulation of Norwegian artists across different contexts and influences. At the time, it was possible to hear something like a melodic line or an octave in a Norwegian contemporary music concert, which would have been far less likely in Germany then. This openness initially surprised me, because I had been quite dogmatic in my own thinking and wanted clear boundaries for what contemporary music should be.

Over time, however, I came to see this openness as a strength. It is reflected in how musicians work across genres and disciplines. For example, improvising musicians often collaborate closely with classically trained composers, and artists frequently move between different musical worlds. It is a very interesting scene to be part of if one is open-minded. 

Tuuli Lindeberg: Yes, in a way, I recognize what Heloisa just said—that there is a certain “nature child” mindset in the Nordics. But I think it may come, on a deeper level, from the values of the so-called welfare state, where we are used to speaking in terms of democracy, equity, and a humane, respectful approach. This also includes an emphasis on civilized discussion, education, and relatively low hierarchies, where women and minorities can more easily have a voice.

This framework may help us look at things from different perspectives. I think this becomes even more important in the future, when we increasingly need to address and counteract polarization on a societal level.

In this context, artists can offer important tools, especially from outside institutional frameworks. Contemporary music in particular can function as a kind of sandbox for exploring these possibilities.

Johan Tallgren: The history of what we refer to as “Nordic” is, of course, closely linked to post–WWII values and the development of welfare states. We also try to include a significant number of Nordic projects and funding applications in this context.

However, when working with these applications, we often need to reflect on what “Nordic” actually means. Over time, this has become more complicated. In the 1990s, when I was studying, it felt quite clear: if you were Danish or Norwegian, and I was a Swedish in Finland, we would speak our languages and try to understand each other. Today, that picture has changed significantly. English is now the common language, and a large proportion of students at our universities come from outside the Nordic region. As a result, the idea of what is “Nordic” is much broader and more fluid than it used to be, and we are continually updating our understanding of it.

At the same time, we see certain values challenged or endangered, which makes the question of reference points more important. In that context, the idea of “Nordic values” often reappears as a useful framework, even if it is complex and evolving.

Q: I feel that the whole music scene is becoming obsessed with a very neoliberal logic. I rarely talk with promoters about quality and content. Most of the conversations are short and about ticket sales. Do you recognize this, and how can we work together to avoid ending up in a music industry that is ruled by capitalist norms?

Tuuli Lindeberg: I have been thinking about this a lot, and I find it quite disturbing. Coming from an artistic background and education, we are trained to prioritize content and substance first. For me, that has remained important, and even after becoming an artistic director, I still try to maintain that high level of artistic integrity and focus on substance.

At the same time, it has been an eye-opener to realize that I cannot afford to be purely idealistic. While I still value artistic quality above all, resources and funding structures constantly set limits on what is possible. I also feel there are now different approaches to curating and promotion. Some are more substance- and quality-oriented, while others are more artist-driven, focusing on the overall personality or profile of the artist. In a way, this latter approach seems influenced by the commercial entertainment industry, where film stars and public personas play a central role.

As a result, some people are trying to promote so-called serious artists using the same logic as the entertainment industry. I find this challenging because it can lead audiences to lose the ability to evaluate artistic substance. It becomes less clear what is considered good or bad, or what is truly worth buying a ticket for.

Johan Tallgren: I would say that might be the larger picture. But if we are talking about a field where almost everything depends on funding structures, peer review, and evaluation processes, then I do not think that is necessarily the main concern. In this field, the central question is often simply how to assemble the funding required to make projects possible.

The greater shift, I think, comes from the attention society we are living in today, and I am not entirely sure it is the right or healthy model for art. It affects what art is produced and how it is shared. One of the key challenges is that everything has become increasingly individualized. As a result, it becomes harder to talk about art from an aesthetic or shared perspective. I fear that, in the long run, this creates a structural problem that we will eventually need to address collectively.

I do not have an answer to that. But it feels like we haven't solved the problem.

Q: To some extent, does contemporary music remain connected to folk traditions, not as preservation of the past, but as a transformation of inherited ways of listening, transmitting, and imagining sound? And how might contemporary musical programming become a space through which northern countries enter into relation with one another?

Heloisa Amaral: For instance, there is an artist I was talking about recently who plays a traditional Finnish instrument, but also works with electronics and is actively creating a new sound world for it. Through technology, they are developing new ways of inhabiting and extending the instrument. It is just one example, but there are quite many artists working in similar ways.

What is interesting is that through this kind of practice, the traditions connected to the instrument are also brought into a broader contemporary context, where they can enter into dialogue with other artistic approaches. In this case, we discovered quite a few commonalities with other artists working with related ideas and techniques.

I also think it is significant that more and more festivals in the Nordic region are interested in programming Sámi artists and are increasingly aware of what is happening in Sápmi, a territory spanning Finland, Sweden, and Norway. This is also a way of getting to know each other across borders and contexts.

In that sense, I already feel there is a shared space forming in which these countries connect. This is also part of what Northern Connection is doing: presenting works from different countries, bringing composers together, and supporting collaboration between festivals. A lot of time is spent in dialogue, building this shared space, and developing it collectively.

Q: I have a question about composers in the Nordic scene: what I usually see in the contemporary music scene is a reproduction of the same structure seen in classical music, where all the initiatives are led by performers/ensembles, and where composers are working through commissions. Are there other models emerging, where composers (or composers-performers-improvisers) are at the center of organizations/ensembles?

Johan Tallgren: There are different worlds coexisting at the same time. Increasingly, much of the field is shaped by collaborations, curatorship, and flexible project formats. At the same time, many large ensembles are now dealing with a shift in expectations: the traditional model of a big ensemble performing a major “masterpiece” by a well-known composer, which used to be central to festival programming, is becoming less and less compelling in itself.

What is interesting is that audiences’ responses are often unpredictable—sometimes what seems conventional draws a lot of attention, while other formats do not.

I also think that for many young composers, the idea of writing a large “masterpiece” designed to win competitions already feels somewhat outdated. Even the expectation of attending a concert with a long, singular work in a traditional format can sometimes feel less relevant.

In that sense, we are operating with two different temporal layers. Both, however, come with their own challenges. On the one hand, there are highly collaborative projects that exist only for a single performance and then disappear, which raises questions about sustainability. On the other hand, the idea of producing large-scale, traditional works is also becoming increasingly difficult to question or sustain in the same way as before.

We are therefore likely entering a period of significant change in how these values and structures function.