ABOUT US
How it All Started
This is the space to introduce visitors to the business or brand. Briefly explain who's behind it, what it does and what makes it unique. Share its core values and what this site has to offer.
OPEN LETTER TO WIJ ZIJN DOX, ITS BOARD, AND THE DUTCH ARTS COMMUNITY
After the NRC investigation: Why #RespectArtists matters
Today, NRC publishes its investigation into the dispute between Anderson Carvalho, ACDC and Wij Zijn DOX.
I have decided to speak publicly again, not to prejudge the court, but because this case raises questions that go far beyond my own situation.
It is about respect.
It is about transparency.
It is about power.
And it is about how artists are treated by the institutions that depend on their creativity.
This is bigger than one artist
For years, I have worked to build opportunities for dancers and artists across different countries and communities. I believe deeply in collaboration, in sharing knowledge, and in creating structures where artists can develop their own voices and careers.
That is why this situation has been so painful.
The issue is not simply a disagreement between an artist and an institution.
It concerns how artistic work, names, ideas, organisations and professional relationships can be represented within public funding systems, and what happens when an artist believes those representations were made without their knowledge or agreement.
The current legal proceedings concern transparency and access to documents relating to public funding applications. The court has not yet ruled on the broader substantive dispute.
But the fact that greater transparency has been ordered matters.
It matters because artists should not have to fight simply to understand how their work, their organisations or their names have been represented in applications for public money.
Public funding requires public responsibility
Public cultural funding exists to support artistic development, cultural participation and the people who make the work possible.
That creates a responsibility.
When institutions apply for public funding involving artists, organisations or proposed collaborations, those artists should know.
They should know what is being proposed.
They should know how they are being described.
They should know what role they are said to have.
And they should have the opportunity to agree, or disagree.
This should not be treated as an unreasonable demand.
It should be basic professional practice.
The NRC investigation illustrates a wider structural problem: subsidy applications can describe intended collaborations and relationships, while the artists named in those applications may not necessarily have the same understanding of what has been proposed or represented.
That grey area creates an imbalance of power.
Institutions have access to funding systems, professional networks and administrative structures.
Individual artists often do not.
That imbalance must not become an excuse for opacity.
Collaboration must mean reciprocity
I believe in collaboration.
But collaboration is not ownership.
Support is not authorship.
Being mentioned is not the same as being informed.
And being connected to an institution does not automatically mean consenting to how your name, organisation or artistic work is used.
Artists deserve relationships based on recognition, transparency, reciprocity and opportunity.
These are the principles behind #RespectArtists.
They are not radical demands.
They are the minimum conditions for a healthy cultural ecosystem.
To Wij Zijn DOX
I want to be clear.
I am not asking for special treatment.
I am asking for accountability.
I am asking for transparency.
I am asking for an honest examination of what happened, how decisions were made, how funding applications were prepared, and how artists and organisations were represented within them.
And I am asking DOX, its board, and the wider cultural sector to recognise that institutional responsibility does not disappear simply because individual people involved have moved on.
The consequences remain.
Trust has consequences.
Records have consequences.
Public funding has consequences.
And the way artists are treated has consequences.
To the Dutch arts community
This should not be dismissed as one difficult relationship.
The NRC investigation itself shows that the questions raised here are part of a broader conversation about power, funding and the vulnerability of emerging artists. It also shows that experiences with institutions can differ greatly: some makers describe positive experiences, while others describe situations in which they felt unable to challenge institutional power
That is precisely why this conversation matters.
We need systems where artists can speak without fear that asking questions will cost them future opportunities.
We need funding structures where transparency is built into the process, not something artists must fight for afterwards.
We need clear documentation of proposed collaborations.
And when an artist is named in a funding application, there should be a meaningful mechanism through which that artist knows and can verify what is being submitted in their name.
This is why #RespectArtists exists
#RespectArtists is not about attacking institutions.
It is about challenging practices that allow artists to become invisible inside systems that depend on their creativity.
It is about recognising artists as creative leaders, not merely as resources for institutional programmes.
It is about protecting original ideas and concepts.
It is about creating genuine reciprocity.
And it is about making fair practice enforceable rather than optional.
I want to see a cultural sector where artists do not have to become lawyers, investigators or activists simply to understand how their own work has been represented.
My message today
I respect the Dutch judiciary and the legal process.
I will not pretend that the court has already decided the broader questions that remain between ACDC and DOX.
But I also will not remain silent about the principles at stake.
Artists deserve to know when their work and their names are being used in public funding applications.
Artists deserve transparency.
Artists deserve recognition.
Artists deserve meaningful consent in professional collaborations.
And artists deserve institutions that understand that trust is not something they are entitled to, it is something they must earn and protect.
This is not only my fight.
It is a conversation about what kind of cultural sector we want to build.
One where institutional power protects itself?
Or one where institutions are accountable to the artists whose creativity makes their work possible?
I choose the second.
And that is why I will continue to speak.
Respect Creativity.
Respect Collaboration.
Respect Artists.
#RespectArtists
Anderson Carvalho
ACDC — Anderson Carvalho Dance & Choreography