“Everything can be answered with art.” An Interview with DemocraTease.

In our round of interview with Culture of Solidarity Fund grantees we this time feature DemocraTease. DemocraTease – or Kontextus Program on social media – partnered with the Central European University’s Democracy Institute and CEU’s Civic Engagement Art and Culture Unit. In our announcement we wrote DemocraTease wants to explore democratic participation, civic engagement, and artistic expression by involving university students in art practices. This is no small feat in contemporary Hungary where Orban’s rule suffocates many civic actions. Our questions were answered by Attila Menesi, artist and artistic director of the Context Program, Flora Laszlo, Director at the Civic engagement, Arts & Culture Unit, CEU and Yoav Friedman, Senior Scientific Officer, Democracy Institute, CEU.

Can you share with us some insights on the position of the CEU in Budapest as the headquarters left for Vienna, following Orban’s government decision to strip it of its ability to issue US degrees.

DemocraTease: It is important to provide a bit of background and context for this answer, as I am not convinced that everyone is versed in the history of the matter. The core issue stemmed from the Hungarian government’s “Lex CEU” law, enacted in 2017. This legislation imposed conditions on foreign universities, requiring them to have a campus and offer comparable degree programs in their country of origin and to have an international treaty between Hungary and the institution’s home country. While CEU, a US-accredited institution, took steps to comply by partnering with Bard College in New York, the Hungarian government refused to sign the necessary agreement. This effectively stripped CEU of its ability to issue US degrees in Hungary for new students after January 1, 2019, forcing the relocation of these programs to Vienna starting in September 2019.

Despite the forced move of its degree-granting programs, CEU made a strategic decision to maintain a foothold in Budapest. This includes the Democracy Institute that serves as a research center for the study of democracy, that focuses on critical issues related to democratic resilience, illiberalism, and the rule of law; the Civic Engagement Art and Culture Unit that keeps the ongoing relations with the community and the fulfilment of CEU’s third mission of social responsibility despite the elimination of the student body; the Vera and Donald Blinken Open Society Archives (OSA) that serves  as a crucial resource for researchers studying communism, the Cold War, and open society issues; as well as the Institute for Advanced Study which supports scholarly research.

CEU’s partial retention in Budapest carries significant symbolic and political significance, as it serves as a physical reminder of the Hungarian government’s crackdown on academic freedom and independent institutions. CEU’s decision to maintain a presence, even under duress, can be seen as a form of continued resistance and a commitment to its open society values in a challenging environment. In this regard, the dynamics of CEU’s engagement within Budapest have also changed. While research and non-degree programs continue, the absence of a full-fledged student body means a different kind of interaction with the local academic and civic landscape. The “Kontextus” and later the “DemocraTease” projects, which involve local students and artists, is an example for such dynamic, as it is crucial for maintaining and fostering connections between the university and the young generation of Hungary.

In September 2024 you announced the project: “Artistic Thinking, Social Engagement. A new project of the CEU Democracy Institute and the Independent Art Department. Free interdisciplinary courses for undergraduates in any field of study at CEU.” How many students did enroll and did you already draft a curriculum?

DemocraTease: The course was launched in an open call, inviting students from all disciplines, and from all higher education institutions in Hungary. The call attracted 53 students from 10 Universities – not only from the city, but also from the countryside. Parallel to the call, we have developed the curriculum and refined it, and indeed, the course was successfully executed. The program is characterized by contemporary themes and artistic practices – a fact that allows all the students, coming from 25 different disciplines, to partake in the activity as it is relevant for all of them. It is to mention that the project deals with current social issues, but put them in the correct historical and cultural contexts. In this regard, it is important to mention that in addition to historians, researchers and internationally renowned professors, the program included numerous artists and art professionals, from witnesses of the Hungarian neo-avantgarde to representatives of the latest trends in contemporary fine art.

Can you provide some more insights into the coming together of the course – what was the interaction between theory and practice?

DemocraTease: The program was designed to cater for a very specific audience, in both content and form. As the project aims at students as an extra-curricular activity that requires significant amount of time and intellectual devotion, we had to plan the course to keep its intensity and be constantly demanding and rewarding at the same time. As we were afraid of early drop out of students, we design the program as a high-volume one – short and sweet.

The program is composed of six sessions, which have 2 main components: a lecture, workshop or discussion (four-hour time frame), coupled with common artistic work, that for us was a central focus. In between or after the four hours frontal lectures, an „hands-on” activities took place, in respect to the themes in question: for example, a public sculpture tour, an artistic reenactment or mapping locations in Budapest.

To maintain pedagogical continuity, the students were tasked with developing and carrying out joint projects on topics that contributed significantly to the creation of a strong network and social cohesiveness. These projects were exhibited at the seventh meeting – a presentation of the artistic outcomes developed during the semester – at an independent and public event, taking place in the public square in front of CEU, at the CEU Open Gallery, and at various locations around the university.

Looking at the overview on your social media the Kontextus Program played around with notions of what is public space, what is private space, often inverting their connotations. What were the reasons for this? 

DemocraTease: The project’s deliberate play with the notions of public and private space, often inverting their connotations, stems from a critical observation of contemporary societal shifts, particularly concerning the occupation and shrinking of genuinely public and free spaces by governmental or other controlling powers. This phenomenon is a symptom of broader pressures on civil society, the free press and media, as well as on university autonomy and the freedom of institutions.

In response, the project seeks to actively highlight the paramount importance of free public (or even seemingly private) spaces as essential arenas for democratic discourse, creative expression, and independent thought. It achieves this by both offering alternatives and providing novel perspectives and practical examples of how these spaces can be utilized in unconventional, liberating ways that resist traditional top-down control. And by actively prompting the program’s audience to engage with and creatively reinterpret public and private environments. By doing so, the project fosters a sense of agency and demonstrates that these spaces can be reclaimed and reimagined as sites for critical reflection, artistic intervention, and genuine community building, thereby challenging the pervasive encroachment on fundamental freedoms.

A powerful example of this exploration occurred at the program’s closing event on May 29, 2025. Passersby and residents on Nádor Street witnessed a monitor placed on the pavement displaying images of a lively demonstration. However, the protest wasn’t happening on the street, but rather within the confines of an apartment. This created a striking inversion: people on the street were watching a “flat protest,” effectively making the private space (the apartment) public.

This one-hour action underscored the importance of bravely engaging with social issues today and showcased art’s capacity to respond to complex realities. By transforming a private act into a public spectacle, the program not only offered an alternative way to utilize space but also encouraged its audience to think creatively and critically about how public and private realms intersect and can be reclaimed in an era where free and open spaces are increasingly under pressure. This is yet another proof that everything can be answered with art. If we can think about it.

Students of the course also staged a silent protest in solidarity with the student led mass demonstrations in Serbia. Why was it important to do this?

DemocraTease: The decision to stage a silent protest in solidarity with the student-led mass demonstrations in Serbia was profoundly important for several reasons, deeply intertwined with the project’s broader aims of engaging with contemporary social issues and fostering critical awareness of public space.

Firstly, the action provided a vital platform for direct engagement and empathy with the Serbian student movement. By inviting a media researcher from the University of Novi Sad to personally brief participants on current events and “performative resistance”, we brought a raw, firsthand account of the challenges faced by students in Serbia. This direct testimony allowed students to grasp the nuances of the situation beyond media headlines, fostering a deeper understanding of the similarities and differences between the contexts in Serbia and Hungary regarding youth activism.

Secondly, the silent protest itself was a powerful act of “new context” creation and symbolic resistance. Staging it in the square in front of CEU, a prominent academic institution, during specific times (20:10 to 20:25) that symbolically marked the beginning and desired end of the current regime, transformed an everyday public space into a site of international solidarity and political commentary. This action directly exemplifies the project’s core objective of highlighting the importance of free public spaces—even by appropriating them for a temporary, symbolic act—as crucial arenas for expression when other avenues might be constrained.

Finally, in an environment where governments often occupy or restrict public and free spaces, and where civil society, free press, and university autonomy face pressures, the silent protest served as a concrete demonstration of artistic thinking applied to social activism. It showcased how even a seemingly simple, non-confrontational act can draw attention to systemic issues and empower individuals to engage creatively with their environment, thereby offering an alternative to traditional forms of public engagement and reinforcing the idea that living with social issues requires brave undertakings.

Over the last year DemocraTease collaborated with a series of partners. What does this say about the space in Hungary for independent artistic action?

DemocraTease: As a consequence of the transformation of the higher education system in Hungary, with the abolition of university autonomy, critical thinking has been marginalized. Voices independent of the government have become increasingly silenced; fewer and fewer different opinions are published; and there is less and less room for freedom. State policy has encroached on society and culture.

The rise of “illiberal democracies” across Europe presents a complex paradox: regimes that come to power through democratic elections then systematically dismantle democratic institutions, checks and balances, and fundamental freedoms from within. Hungary has been a prominent and often pioneering example of this phenomenon in Europe, demonstrating how a government can weaken the judiciary, control the media, restrict civil society, and undermine electoral integrity while maintaining a façade of democratic legitimacy. This model has, in various forms, served as an inspiration or blueprint for similar tendencies in other European nations.

It is not by chance that the DemocraTease project operates under the auspices of the CEU’s Democracy Institute, whose mission is to address threats to democracy and human rights by fostering research, public engagement, and education. In this context, the program’s experiences offer a few lessons in confronting the spread of illiberalism.

Our experience with the project, and through observing similar movements across Europe, teaches us several critical lessons:

• Students are a powerful force for change: As seen in Hungary, and as reflected in our program’s solidarity with student protests, young people are often at the forefront of defending democratic values and demanding accountability, even in the face of significant state pressure. Their energy and idealism are indispensable.
• There is a huge demand for understanding democracy: The engagement with our program reveals a profound desire among the public, particularly young people, to better understand the foundational principles of democracy and its tangible significance for practicing freedoms. This intellectual curiosity is a crucial counterweight to simplistic illiberal narratives.
• Art as a form of peaceful resistance is an effective tool: Our work demonstrates that artistic expression can be a potent, non-violent means to promote democratic values, challenge authoritarian narratives, and combat radicalization. By creatively re-contextualizing spaces and ideas, art can open dialogues and foster critical thinking where traditional political discourse might fail.
• Learning history contextualizes public spaces and personal lives: Understanding historical precedents allows individuals to critically analyze current events, discern patterns of power, and re-textualize both public spaces and their own lives within a broader narrative, thereby resisting manipulation and fostering resilience.
• The role of universities as powerhouses of knowledge is crucial: In our post-truth era, where disinformation thrives, research-based and informed discussions, championed by independent academic institutions like CEU, are absolutely vital. Universities serve as bastions of critical inquiry, providing the evidence and analytical frameworks necessary to counter illiberal narratives.

And, most importantly, that It is not too late to bring about change, and that we must maintain optimism! Despite the daunting rise of illiberalism, our experiences show that engagement, education, and creative resistance can make a difference. Maintaining optimism is not naive; it is a necessary prerequisite for sustained effort and collective action in the ongoing struggle for open societies.

cover photo: BRAVO2025, Social contexts of body, artistic work and publication with Zsuzsi Simon (detail)