The city has become more expensive overall and therefore there is less free space – there are less “Freiräume”. Our definition has not changed as a project space.
The concept of an ideal space is completely dependent on what the organizers/artists/curators are interested in doing. In our opinion, there isn’t ONE type of space that is ideal which is actually what is so wonderful about project spaces in general – they are diverse, and completely different.
It seems that because of the lack of spaces and the increased rents, more project spaces have turned towards commercial models. But since funding has become more commonplace in the scene, meaning it’s more common to pay artists who are involved in shows, performances, readings, events, etc. at project spaces, this has put more pressure on spaces in general to have to secure financing. We would argue that since funding has become more readily available, the structures have begun to change. It’s a bit of a double-edged sword. It’s wonderful to receive funding and be able to support artists, and as a result, the scene has become much more professional. But at the same time, it is harder in some ways to do projects more spontaneously and in an improvised fashion. This, as a result, has changed the (power) dynamics between the artists and the project space organizers, as very often the organizers are NOT funded but the artists participating in the projects are. This creates a rather awkward dynamic and as organizers ourselves, it’s frustrating for us to not be paid for our efforts and contributions to the “Freie Szene”.Fördermöglichkeiten sind begrenzt und werden so stark nachgefragt, dass es einer Lotterie gleicht, ob man einen Zuschlag erhält.Kunst verliert ihre gemeinschaftsstiftende Qualität, sobald sie zum Privileg wird. Diese Qualität können im Besonderen Projekträume und inklusive Formate gewährleisten.