Interview Programme Selection
How to decide what gets presented?
On curation, responsibility and perspectives in the independent arts scene and at the FAVORITEN Festival 2026
The festival received 400 entries in response to an open call, of which 308 from artists across North Rhine-Westphalia were eligible for consideration. In collaboration with the advisory board – Khadidiatou Bangoura, Balindile ka Ngcobo, Thusnelda Marín Jungmann and Valerie Wehrens – a programme comprising 13 productions was ultimately put together based on a defined rating system. Dance scholar and curator Johanna Kasperowitsch speaks with the advisory board and the artistic directors Jonas Leifert and Rika Sakalak about the challenges, gaps and potential of this selection process, collaboration within the group, and the question of which perspectives are reflected in the final programme.
Johanna Kasperowitsch: Let’s talk about decision-making structures first. The collaboration process of an artistic direction with an advisory board in a festival-context is not a new way of deciding and selecting. How do you think about this structure of the advisory board in general, when it comes to transparency of processes, sharing knowledge and responsibility?
Rika Sakalak: From the outset, Jonas and I felt that selecting the entire festival program ourselves would not adequately reflect the diversity of the independent scene. It was therefore important to us to incorporate a broader range of perspectives into the curation, which led us to establish an advisory board. To assemble the group, we invited recommendations from within the scene, asking colleagues to suggest people whose experience and approach they felt would enrich the selection process. This enabled us to bring together a group with diverse backgrounds, experiences and connections to the scene.
Thusnelda Marín Jungmann: Yet even when you bring together different perspectives, you always make decisions based on your own worldview. That is why I think it would be interesting for future curatorial projects to involve a citizens’ jury in at least part of the process, in order to facilitate a broader range of perspectives.
Jonas Leifert: Of course, these are all questions of resources. We decided to work with professionals from the scene as part of an advisory board because we would not have been able to adequately remunerate a jury comprising members of the public on a larger scale.
Valerie Wehrens: Until now, I have mainly perceived the decision-making power of a jury or an advisory board from the outside, but I now have a better understanding of the enormous amount of work and the responsibility involved. After all, the remuneration for all this is rather symbolic.
Khadidiatou Bangoura: And in the end, I think in terms of the vision, the question is not so much how to change the curatorial process or how to change the structure, but who is involved.
Johanna: Who could these people be, that are the right ones? There is a wide range of voices within society that are not represented in the festival, concerning the artistic works and the team. What would it cause if, for example, a person with very conservative opinions was part of this advisory board?
Jonas: When it came to decisions regarding content and aesthetics, we had to give a great deal of thought during the selection process to who actually has what resources within the cultural sector. And in this regard, productions that resonate with more conservative circles often have a financially more affluent audience than others, and consequently often have different production possibilities.
Valerie: Progressive voices – or so-called progressive voices – are, of course, quite firmly established in the arts. In my view, this is for a very good reason, given the extent of right-wing activism that is now evident in our society. At the same time, I see people outside the arts taking far greater risks with their activism, for example by trying to act against fascist-like tendencies or against the ongoing genocide. Within the arts, this level of resistance – and consequently repression – also occurs, but it has been less radical and quite rare. There were always moments during the process when we asked ourselves how to position the festival.
Khadidiatou: For me, the fundamental principle of having a competent decision-making body is, regardless of political views or affiliations, to respect human rights. To accept and respect different identities and different ways of being. Of course, we all have biases, prejudices and stereotypes that we carry with us and that somehow influence our views. But I think that in a competent decision-making body, we need people who are aware of their own biases, prejudices and partiality and inclinations as they are making the decision. It’s about having a common agreement on honoring and upholding basic human rights for everyone.
Johanna: How do you see the festival in light of current social erasure, all the cuttings in the social and artistic field and the political situation in Germany? Do you see any kind of connections that the festival could make, or any potentials or maybe also gaps where you feel that this is how far the festival gets, but not further?
Balindile ka Ngcobo: One of the questions that we spoke about was how art functions in relation to its observers. We went into discussing political positionality, what pressures are there for the festival and how we would handle that. Those early conversations helped us to find out how we want to anticipate that there are local and global political conflicts and problems. We also spoke about the working conditions of art within the processes. What kind of working conditions are created in individual productions and what are the ethics of those conditions?
Thusnelda: It is obvious that artistic venues and organisations are now aligning themselves with political movements – or at the very least, are not taking a clear stand against them – for fear of having their funding cut. I very much doubt that this is the right approach. I believe the greatest strength we have right now is to keep spaces open so that different people can have their say. Voices should not simply be suppressed. After all, a selection process doesn’t just begin with the finalised festival programme, but right from the question of who resources are made available to in the first place, and who receives funding. What responsibility does this entail for a festival like FAVORITEN – particularly in a situation where the independent arts scene is competing for fewer and fewer resources?
Johanna: If we break this responsibility down to the specific selection process: how did you decide which works and which perspectives should be showcased at this festival?
Valerie: The festival tries to showcase the variety of the freelance scene in NRW. Therefore, the program opens the possibility to deeply engage with the vividness of the scene in NRW in its plurality. It was really important to reflect the scene without this thought of creating a “Best-Selection”, even though the festival’s name is hinting in that direction a little bit. The process of choosing the works to be shown was about being in conversation with the scene and what is present and urgent there in terms of aesthetics, modes of production and resources. But most of all we had lots of debates on the question of who the festival is for.
Balindile: I think that’s a very good point, this notion of whom is this festival for.
There was always the question of what our own personal taste might include versus what would be best for the festival. We had to keep going back between not just negotiating a wide range of questions within the group, but negotiating with ourselves as individuals. What do I like and why do I like it? Why do I have reservations about something?
Thusnelda: Furthermore, FAVORITEN is very versatile in its programme design – and that was, in part, where the difficulty lay. It wasn’t always easy to strike a balance between the festival’s various aspects and requirements. Clearly, certain genres and perspectives are now missing from the programme. Looking back, this raises the question for me of where curation sets its priorities – or, due to organisational constraints, is forced to set them, even unintentionally. For us, the most important question was: what values does a festival represent?
Khadidiatou: It was important to assess whether a production would attract new audience groups who might not yet be familiar with FAVORITEN. Because we weren’t just interested in the themes the artists addressed, but were more focused on the craftsmanship and innovation. During the process, I was on the lookout for pieces where I might be able to say: well, this isn’t my personal aesthetic, this isn’t my personal taste, but I can see the value in it.
Johanna: How did you manage to deal with this conflict between personal taste and the festival’s overall interests or vision?
Balindile: We had a specific system while going through all of the works with regards to how we were rating them. At least two of us were watching a work at the same time. Then we went through our rating system and marked pieces in red (for ‘no’, productions that do not meet our criteria for the festival), yellow (for ‘maybe’) or green (for ‘yes’). So, it happened that we were on opposite ends of the spectrum with these initial ratings. That meant that we were taking more time to discuss whether the whole group should review the respective work. It was very helpful because I don’t think we would have reached a consensus on most productions. Speaking intensively about it and negotiating certain themes or ideas around what it was that we believed in also allowed for the letting go of certain personal positions.
Valerie: This was the system we worked with up to the list of 75 pieces: we chose between three colors, then looked at where we agreed and where we differed. From there, we decided whether to continue discussing a work or let it go. On our last day together, when we needed to hand it over to the production team, we narrowed the 75 down to 25 pieces. Ultimately, it also came down to time and personal resources. As the advisory board, we gave a written assessment of the remaining works and handed the final decision over to Rika and Jonas as to which of the 25 would make it into the festival program. Still, we felt that it was a multi-vocal decision. We trusted that they wouldn’t disregard our observations, questions and comments, while also recognizing Rika’s and Jonas’ broader understanding of the festival, including financial matters and their coordination with different partners and the city of Dortmund. For we must not only defend our own decisions before the citizens of the city, but are also, in these processes, in a relationship of collaboration and interdependence with larger institutional and financial structures to which we must always be accountable.
Johanna: This year’s edition is also about encounters and hospitality, both artistically and on a personal level. Looking back at the whole process now: what does FAVORITEN aim to achieve through this form of curation – for the independent arts scene and for the wider community?
Rika: Right from the start, it was important to us that coming together and celebrating as a shared experience should be an integral part of the festival. Furthermore, we want to establish formats in the city that also appeal to people who happen to pass by and are invited to stay. The festival should engage with the everyday lives of Dortmund’s residents and also reach people who have had no connection to the festival so far. These curatorial and conceptual approaches apply equally to the FAVORITEN Fest, the framework programme and the selection of pieces. However, we had very different financial resources at our disposal for the framework programme and the artistic programme. It was important to us that the core budget for the artistic selection went entirely to the artists and their productions.
Jonas: It is important to us to view FAVORITEN, on the one hand, as a professional festival where it is clear that there are pieces crafted with great skill. On the other hand, we try to communicate the content and approaches in an accessible way. The festival’s curatorial approaches are therefore based more on cooperation, collaboration and communication and less on a content- or aesthetics-driven agenda.
Advisory Board:
Khadidiatou Bangoura
Khadidiatou Bangoura is a Cologne-based dancer, choreographer and artistic director of KHARABA & GUESTS. After studies in International Relations in London, she trained in contemporary dance at Danceworks Berlin and at Tictac Art Center in Brussels. Choreographic works include ‘FÜHL DIE WELT DURCH MEINE HAUT – Observations on everyday racism’, ‘LIFE IS A JUNGLE – a dance performance for blind, visually impaired and sighted audiences’ and ‘PINKE PINKE – a poetic reflection about money for ages 8 and up’. From 2024 to 2025, she served as artistic co-director for the Sommerblut Kulturfestival.
Thusnelda Marín Jungmann
Thusnelda Marín Jungmann studied Performing Arts in Hildesheim and Musical Theatre in Osnabrück. Thusnelda lives in Cologne as a freelance performer and dramaturg, where they are currently working on her Master’s thesis (Dance Studies) – which includes a period abroad in Bern focusing on Expanded Theatre – exploring artistic audio description. Alongside their paid artistic work, they volunteer at the feminist legal advice service ‘Feminist Law Clinic’. They also work as a journalist for Theater der Zeit and tanz.
Balindile ka Ngcobo
Balindile ka Ngcobo (she/her) is a South African performer, dramaturg, writer, and scholar. At Ruhr University Bochum, she is a member of the Emmy Noether research group “Dramaturgies in the Afterlife of Violence.” Her PhD examines Black African/diasporic performance in the aftermath of the colonial exhibition, reimagining representations of the Black femme body and body of work. Balindile holds a Master’s degree in Theater & Performance from the University of Cape Town and a Bachelor’s degree from Africa’s leading film school, AFDA.
Valerie Wehrens
Valerie Wehrens (no pronouns) is a dance dramaturg and works alongside choreographers and performance artists as a critical and creative dialogue partner. Through ‘Wandering Dramaturgies’, Valerie has, together with Mona De Weerdt, established a platform for dramaturgical knowledge, which will be published as a website and print publication on 26 October. Valerie co-hosts the ‘TakeMoreCare’ initiative, which organises monthly meetings for artistic reflection and feedback, and devotes themself to their own writing projects (WORDSCAPES, assembly of ghosts), explores performative settings where dramaturgical thinking and text intersect. Aside from their paid artistic work, Valerie works part-time at a social services organisation supporting underage refugees and is a member of the Queer Lapdance Collective and the neighbourhood trade union Gemeinsam für Mülheim.