“A shared value base is essential, but differences are just as important”

What motivated you to apply for the European Solidarity Residency, and how does it connect to your current artistic or curatorial interests?

My schedule is usually very full, and I often move from and between projects to the other without having enough time to pause and reflect on what I am actually doing, why and how. The European Solidarity Residency felt like an opportunity to have a defined period dedicated entirely to my curatorial practice: to slow down, reflect, and rethink my methods. At this moment in my practice, I am especially interested in curation as a tool for community-building.
I don’t see curation only as the presentation of work, but as a relational process that can bring people together, create shared experiences, and open up spaces for dialogue. Through this residency, I wanted to deepen that interest, find new methodologies, and test how curatorial work can actively foster forms of collectivity both as curatorial and artistic practice.
A very concrete but crucial motivation was also the fact that the residency is paid. Without financial support, it would not have been possible for me to take this time, step back from other commitments, and fully focus on this. In parallel, I was curious to explore how my background as a maker could be more strongly integrated into my curatorial practice, rather than keeping those roles separate.

Before arriving, what did you hope to learn or experience through ESR, and has anything surprised you so far in Budapest?

Before arriving, I hoped to gain practical and conceptual tools for building communities through artistic and curatorial work, especially methods that allow reaching people beyond the usual art audiences. At the same time, I was very curious about the Hungarian art scene within a broader political context. I wanted to understand how artists and cultural workers operate in a country that is becoming increasingly authoritarian, and how political ideology shapes artistic strategies, resistance, and solidarity, especially in a European context where similar tendencies are spreading.
What surprised me most in Budapest was how alive and dynamic the scene feels. Despite the conditions, there is a strong sense of initiative and community. The people we met were incredibly open and generous: they shared contacts, recommended organizations and spaces aligned with our interests, and invited us not only to professional events but also to informal gatherings. This openness did not feel self-promotional, but from a genuine curiosity and desire to connect.

In your applications’ personal statements, you both highlight collaboration and shared authorship. Has the residency changed or expanded your understanding of what meaningful collaboration can look like?

One of the key realizations during the residency was that collaboration always ultimately comes down to individuals. Even when working with institutions, you are always engaging with specific people, each with their own values, visions, limitations, and working styles. This makes collaboration both enriching and challenging.
I became more aware that even if you start with a shared vision or write down common goals, real-life collaboration is always more complex than what can be captured on paper. A shared value base is essential, but differences are just as important. Meaningful collaboration is not about each actor pushing through their own ideas, but about allowing something new to emerge through mutual influence. In this interaction sometimes things get lost but also new things the sepreate parts couldn’t think of emerge, build on each other.
Another important insight was the role of lightness, play, and fun. There were moments when our process felt heavy or stuck, and it was often only when we allowed ourselves to approach the work with humor or experimentation that things started to move again.

You both have strong interests in socially engaged and participatory art. Can you share a moment during the residency when this approach felt especially relevant or inspiring?

Visiting Pro Progressione and learning about their long-term projects was particularly inspiring. To see how they set up projects from beginning to start and how they engage participants and work together with other oprganisations. It gave me a lot of desire to start my own international collaborations and insights how to approach ti and share responsibility.
Similarly, the encounter with Janka from MOME and her social design practice was very inspiring. The way her work actively includes the voices, opinions, and needs of others as shaping forces, rather than as feedback added at the end, stayed with me. Her research based approach was very interesting and an interesting frame to look at my own [projects (which before I only approachede from a curatorial or artistic lens. I think this reserach/design approahc could help me further with bigger structural projects.
Especially the analysis of the process; It was interesting how qualitative research and documentation are integrated into these projects. While I don’t believe others needs should always be completely accounted for and I see many flaws in trying to measure “impact”, it opened up new ways of thinking about reflection. It made me realize that reflection itself can be a shared and even artistic process.
Rather than treating evaluation as something external, it could become an experience in its own right. This gave me concrete tools for researching the needs of communities while also questioning how and why we do so.

Which organisations or cultural professionals you have met (e.g. Trafó, MOME, Autistic Art, Mászínház, FKSE) have influenced your thinking the most, and what did you take away from those encounters?

Our encounter with FKSE and Falu was especially impactful. They reminded me of collectives from my own generation in Belgium: initiatives that are not only concerned with making art, but also with how to organize collectively, how to collaborate sustainably, and how to deal with the precarity of artistic life. I appreciated that the focus was as much on care, structure, and mutual support as on artistic output, while at the same time being genuinely impressed by the quality and diversity of the artworks.
Visiting Trafó was also very inspiring. We attended a meeting with the director of an upcoming performance, who is currently in her research phase. It was fascinating to hear about the performative exercises she developed for both actors and non-actors as a way to to allow the form and substance of the piece emerge while examing her own and the actors positioning in all of this.
Additionally, Trafó’s “PerformanceBus” project, bringing performances and artworks to areas outside the city center to engage into shared issues and initiate dialogue about how things that are experienced differently still can affect us all. It sparked my interest in nomadic curatorial formats and reinforced my desire to develop projects that bring art to people, and not only expecting people to come to art institutions. Also the travel, the moving from one place to another as artistic place is something that I would like to explore.

ESR puts emphasis on solidarity, inclusion, and accessibility. How have you experienced these values in practice during your stay at Pro Progressione (mentoring, family-friendly approach, co-working environment, openness, etc.)?

I felt really welcomed throughout the residency. This was not only due to how the program was structured and the relevance of the organizations we met, catered to out needs, but also through a respect for personal boundaries. At one point, I felt overwhelmed by the amount of input and needed to take a day off. This was completely understood and respected, partly because expectations and “rules of the playing field” were clearly discussed from the beginning.
Our mentors were highly present and supportive: they accompanied us to external activities, shared additional recommendations, and were flexible in adapting the program to our needs. This created a very personal connection, making me feel that I wasn’t simply working for an institution, but collaborating with people who genuinely cared about our well-being and development. Shared moments, conversations, dancing, stories.
At the same time, solidarity also appeared in the mentoring itself: through respectful disagreement,critical questioning, and mutual challenge. We were encouraged not only to be open toward others, but also to question our own perspectives. In this way, solidarity became an active practice rather than an abstract value.

What specifc tools, skills, or metods have you gained here that you plan to apply in the future with
comunities, museums, oaticipants and audiences?

Like mentioned i would love to ask more about the needs of others, evaluate with them and see how to go further reflecting with them, and using that input as a starting point rather than a constraint. I don’t believe a project needs to satisfy everyone, but understanding different needs can open unexpected directions.
I am also very drawn to nomadic forms of curation, bringing work into public or non-institutional spaces, and shifting the focus from audiences traveling to art toward art traveling to audiences.
Additionally, I gained a much clearer understanding of funding structures and how to design projects that are legible and sustainable and that are workable for larger teams.

Can you describe one challenge you encountered during the residency and how you navigated it, either individually or with the support of mentors?

One challenge was realizing that our project was becoming too focused on what we thought others might want, which risked sidelining the artistic dimension and our own agency. Through conversations with other artists and mentors, we were able to reframe the project and allow more space for our own artistic perspectives. Hearing how others navigate similar dilemmas helped us recalibrate and gave me confidence that responsiveness and artistic autonomy do not have to be opposites.

Looking ahead, how do you imagine the impact of this residency on your long-term artistic or curatorial practice — and is there anything you would like to bring back to your local context?

The impact of this residency is significant, even if I can’t fully articulate it yet. I feel that something has shifted internally: I feel more confident initiating projects, more open to new collaborations, and more willing to think on an international scale. Before, I was mainly focused on working locally; now, I feel encouraged to connect local contexts with broader networks.
I am certain that I will integrate the methodologies I learned, and I am deeply grateful for the connections I made. I already envision future projects with people I met during the residency.
I feel that many of the ideas and approaches I encountered during the residency will resurface in future projects, sometimes unexpectedly. I can imagine returning to my notes as a way to help me guide the process or give new insights when I fele something is missing.

You describe art as a relational practice and often experiment with formats where audiences become co-creators rather than viewers. During this residency, did you encounter a space, conversation, or local initiative that sparked a new idea for participatory or site-responsive work, and how might you develop it further?

Relationality during the residency unfolded primarily through encounters. Through the ecnounter with people, I was led to places; through places, to new ideas and through conversation and exercise I shaped as wel ass being shaped. An internal, informal network emerged, formed by shared experiences rather than formal structures. A wandering as way to be.
Like I said Trafó’s nomadic bus project strongly inspired me, especially the idea of treating the vehicle itself as an artistic and social space, a place people can enter and leave freely – and the bigger idea attached to it where art becomes part of everyday movement and being. I was also excited by meeting Dobozí and learning about their expanded cinema practices, as well as meeting a MOME student who curates and programs experimental films. These encounters made me realize there is still a strong need for an experimental cinema community in Budapest, and I would love to become involved and find ways to connect different people and places to eachother national as well as international.
Finally, Falu’s role as an umbrella structure supporting different artists resonated deeply with my interest in creating frameworks rather than isolated events. All of these experiences are feeding into my desire to develop projects that grow out of relationships rather than predefined formats and stability.

Raouf is a filmmaker and curator born in Maastricht and is currently based in Ghent, Belgium. He/they holds Tunisian-Dutch nationality. Their work is situated around themes of space, placelessness, diaspora, wandering and emptiness through a lens of in-betweenness. Drawing from personal experience, their work reflects the mechanics of vision and the illusion of land(scape), tracing how perception, imaging and technologies shape our relation to the world emphasizing a shared, non-hierarchical existence. They treat art not simply as representation but as a relational practice. Raouf is a member of “Atelier OFFoff”, a collective that reimagines curatorship as a collaborative, process-based practice. The group focuses on expanded cinema, participatory formats, and dissolving traditional hierarchies between artists, audiences, and institutions.