Anique Eberhart | Practice & Methodology

My Practice & Methodology

I do not see fixed roles, predefined titles, or singular professional categories as sufficient to describe the way I work. Terms such as “artist,” “director,” or “lead” function more as temporary and fluid positions that I move through, inhabit for certain moments, and continuously renegotiate.
- Moving between different roles allows me to develop a broader and more nuanced understanding of collaborative processes, perspectives, and forms of knowledge. Temporarily inhabiting different positions creates a stronger sensitivity toward the conditions, responsibilities, and ways of thinking connected to them.
- Rather than identifying with one singular role, I value the possibility of shifting perspectives, remaining adaptable, and engaging with practices relationally and collectively. I understand artistic expression as a shared and fundamental human capacity, not something that belongs exclusively to specific professions or disciplines.
- My practice is therefore grounded in exchange, and the freedom to move between different forms of contribution and collaboration. Even when external structures require certain labels, these categories do not fully define the nature of my work.
- While such labels are often necessary to navigate systems of visibility, funding, and institutional or market structures, I understand them as practical tools rather than definitive frameworks for my practice or identity.

My practice is grounded in autonomy and responsibility. I create frameworks for projects, hold space, and take ownership of both process and outcome without relying on rigid hierarchies. I work in ways that allow complexity, openness, and shared authorship.

Collaboration is central to my approach. I work through processes in which meaning and form emerge collectively, beyond what any individual could produce alone. My practice is situational, relational, and rooted in community and participatory contexts.

I don't see visibility, self-promotion, or continuous self-marketing as neutral requirements, but as structures that shape how work and identities are perceived and consumed. For me, it is important to maintain agency over my own narrative and to decide consciously when, how, and in which contexts my work is made visible, documented, or communicated. I am interested in forms of visibility that allow for complexity, nuance, and contextual understanding rather than reducing practices to constant production, simplified representation, or personal branding. For this reason, I approach external mediation — including journalistic framing and promotional formats — with a certain critical distance, especially when they risk flattening or instrumentalizing artistic and intellectual processes.

When my work is supported through public funding (made possible by collective contribution) I understand this as a responsibility to give something back. I aim to create work that extends beyond itself, engages publics, and contributes to shared cultural and social contexts.

I prefer physical, direct, and collective encounters, and I tend to work from a grounded presence in shared, situated experiences. My practice is often rooted in offline contexts as a conscious choice, as they allow for a different quality of attention and interaction. At the same time, I do not see online and offline formats in opposition. My position is not fixed to one or the other — I engage with both, depending on the context and what the situation requires. What matters to me is the quality of exchange and the conditions under which it takes place, rather than the medium itself.

I value fun as part of practice, as curiosity, play, experimentation, and openness. Seriousness and depth do not exclude lightness; they can coexist and inform each other.

I create events and performances on demand. I do not work with a fixed programme or pre-defined formats, but respond to concrete contexts such as a topic, a group, or a specific request. This approach is important to me for two main reasons: First, it keeps the work closely connected to specific contexts, needs, and questions. Second, it allows for a more open and collaborative process, where nothing is fully fixed at the beginning and there is space for input, change, and unexpected developments. The structure of each project can evolve through direct engagement with the situation itself. This approach allows the work to remain relevant, grounded, and context-sensitive.

I am interested in intergenerational and multigenerational approaches, working with diverse groups across different ages and backgrounds.

I use computational tools and AI-supported systems in my processes. AI-tools are part of an expanded field of thinking and making in my process. I see its potential to support, extend, and sometimes strengthen individual capacities and forms of expertise when used critically and reflectively.
- For example, in organizational and conceptual processes, these tools help me structure workflows, process complex information more efficiently, and articulate ideas more clearly. Because my thinking often moves quickly and associatively, I find such systems particularly useful for organizing thoughts, mapping connections, and creating temporary structures that allow ideas to develop further. In this sense, they function less as substitutes for thinking and more as supportive frameworks that help me shape complex processes.
- At the same time, I approach these technologies with a strong sense of responsibility and critical awareness. Their risks are evident to me — including automation bias, overreliance on machine-generated outputs, and the reproduction of existing limitations or biases embedded within datasets and systems. For this reason, reflective and conscious engagement with such tools is essential to my practice.
- I see myself as a curator of ideas and processes, taking responsibility for how my knowledge, concepts, and structures are framed and developed. The use of such tools is always situated, contextual, and embedded within human decision-making.

I work across diverse and cross-systemic environments. I engage with each context as it is and respond to it in the best possible way I can. I do not reject people or situations a priori. My approach is guided by curiosity, attentiveness, and an interest in understanding different perspectives and positions.