Interview with Israel Aloni on partner organisations in European context

The iCoDaCo project brings together 10 collectives from different European countries. This multinational long-term collaboration enriches not only the artists, but also cultural managers. What have you personally learned, gained and achieved so far? Have you encountered any management tools, approaches or practices that have changed your own perspectives?

I believe iCoDaCo has taught me more about the importance of empathy and solidarity. The project is being realised at a time of immense geopolitical, social and cultural conflicts. Delivering a project specifically dedicated to collective processes and co-authoring has turned it into a microcosm of society at large, offering a practical opportunity to explore ways of being with others that reject the widespread abuse of power currently demonstrated by politicians, governments and institutions across the globe.

The management tool that I feel has been continuously reaffirmed throughout iCoDaCo is active listening. I view listening not just as processing auditory information, but as noticing subtle shifts in dynamics and relationships between the various elements and participants in any given situation or action.

Working on iCoDaCo has taught us something profound about how culture—both collective and personal—shapes communication styles and dynamics. For instance, in some contexts, silence signifies a chilling disagreement, whereas in others, it offers affirming support.

Having open, honest and vulnerable—yet structured and supported—communication is particularly vital in international collaborations today, especially when we are constantly told that differences hinder collective evolution. Through iCoDaCo, we continue to learn that differences are precisely where vitality and vividness emerge.

On a more practical level, maintaining a regular 6-to-12-month advance preview of upcoming project phases has proved essential, allowing the many people involved to plan effectively for the various components of the activity schedule.

The iCoDaCo project offers a unique opportunity to get to know different social, political and economical environments in which the partners work and create. Can you compare your local background with other countries? What benefits and, on the other hand, disadvantages do you think you have compared to others? 

The iCoDaCo consortium is indeed exceptionally diverse, and we are constantly reminded of how we connect strongly through shared intentions, objectives, and aspirations on the one hand, while navigating vastly different structural realities on the other.

For ilDance, our reality involves bringing iCoDaCo activities and creative processes to different regions across Sweden. We have built strong relationships, partnerships, and collaborations with a range of organisations, institutions, and cultural bodies nationwide. This decentralised approach is made possible in Sweden also by specific structural mechanisms such as Danscentrum—a network of four regional organisations that support independent dance artists locally while remaining interconnected at a national level. Furthermore, Swedish public cultural funding actively encourages deep partnerships with regional communities, linking them nationally. The financial support ilDance receives from the Swedish Arts Council, specifically for this project, enables us to realise iCoDaCo activities across the country.

This contrasts sharply with the conditions of some of our international partners, who are required by their funders to concentrate their activities within a single geographic location.

Rather than viewing these differences in infrastructure through a simple binary of advantages and disadvantages, I find it fascinating to observe what becomes possible within one operational reality compared to what emerges in another.

What is the position of performance arts and contemporary dance in Sweden, in terms of general audience perception and recognition, as well as political support? 

I believe this is a crucial question, yet one without a single objective answer. The cultural field—and contemporary dance specifically—is not a monolith; it is an ecosystem shaped by various, shifting realities.

Across the board, we are witnessing a noticeable decline in formal political support and appreciation for the arts. This is exemplified by dismissive rhetoric from certain lawmakers in Sweden, alongside pushback towards the privatisation of art and culture—treating them as luxury goods for an exclusive elite rather than vital organs of a healthy society. For example, the government's recent 10-year strategy for the cultural sectors explicitly reclassifies art through the lens of entrepreneurship, business growth, and market export. At the same time, some politicians have publicly questioned the legitimacy of funding non-commercial, experimental work, urging that public money be redirected toward traditional national heritage. These developments naturally impact the entire cultural ecosystem. Simultaneously, major institutions continue to perpetuate the notion of culture as a status symbol, attracting audiences who seek that very exclusivity.

For those of us in contemporary performing arts who view artistic practice as the vital metabolism of a healthy society—something that must remain accessible, affordable, and attainable to all, while continuously challenging societal expectations—finding a balance between these divergent directions is increasingly difficult.

Furthermore, engaging audiences and communities through contemporary dance has also grown more challenging recently, not due to a lack of interest in the adventurous experience of dance, but rather stemming from the severe economic pressures many people face in Sweden today. The rising cost of living, combined with sharp cuts to arts funding—which forces artists and cultural organisations into ever more precarious positions—and a pervasive uncertainty driven by global geopolitical conflict, means the public might find it harder to engage with experimental, explorative, and non-commercial work.

While Sweden holds a rich history of dance and a population that loves to move, in social and recreational activities, contemporary dance is rarely recognised politically as a legitimate vehicle for socio-political discourse. Ironically, populist political rhetoric often accuses artists of being disengaged from society—a stance that misrepresents our field entirely.

We find ourselves at a disheartening juncture in Sweden, facing political, discursive, and infrastructural shifts that threaten contemporary art. Yet, this moment of adversity acts as a summons to persist: to continue nurturing contemplative and experimental approaches, reminding us that our work exists deeply in context with society. Initiatives like iCoDaCo have become vastly more critical in this climate; they do not merely validate what we create, but actively safeguard the freedom of artistic practice against pressures that make it harder to sustain, while demonstrating viable ways to facilitate reciprocal, collaborative processes deeply rooted in artistic exploration.