H. Avni ÖZTOPÇU

 
gallery   +   texts  +  contact
 

 

The One, the Algorithmic Subject, and the Constitutive Will: The Ontological Process in H. Avni Öztopçu’s Art

 

 

 

Abstract
This article re-evaluates H. Avni Öztopçu’s practice of geometric abstraction within the context of contemporary Speculative Realism and post-humanist ontology, grounded in rational roots that reject metaphysical and teleological speculation. Öztopçu’s One Form is positioned as an autonomous actor that asserts its own law of being; its independence is read within a framework of necessity and rational imposition that is independent of human perception. The tension between the constitutive will and autonomous algorithmic subjectivity is resolved through the mechanism of Temporal Differentiation, rendering Öztopçu’s art a globally defensible ontological system.

 

 

1. Introduction and Theoretical Framework: Post-Humanist Geometry and the Claim of Absolute Being
Öztopçu’s practice of geometric abstraction represents a radical break from the spiritual or transcendent ideal representation of modernist abstraction. His paintings not only provide visual aesthetics but also constitute an ontological construction of being, consciousness, and time. Geometric precision relies on a philosophy of immanence that rejects metaphysical speculation, and the concept of the One Form transforms from an aesthetic object into an autonomous, irreducible actor. This form is read as an algorithmic subjectivity that asserts its own law of being.

 

Contemporary ontology questions the limits of correlationism and anthropocentric philosophy. Öztopçu’s geometric precision directly contributes to this discourse: the form emerges as a mathematically necessary entity independent of human perception. Art thus becomes a visualized proof of absolute necessity and independent being.

This study examines Öztopçu’s art along four theoretical axes:

1. Object-Oriented Ontology and Withdrawal: the autonomy and independence of form.

2. Critique of Correlationism and Absolute Necessity: the pre-human reality and necessity of form.

3. Technical Individuation and Processual Being: reading the form as a continuously emerging process.

4. Encoded Subjectivity and Technical Memory: the form’s algorithmic subjectivity and individuation within the Fictional Space.

The One Form, framed within an Aristotelian-inspired philosophy of immanence, offers an ontological experience balanced between human intervention and object autonomy.

 

 

2. The One Form and Ontological Analysis: Algorithmic Irreducibility and Rational Roots

 

2.1. Aristotelian Roots and the Rational Substitution of Nature
The One Form draws inspiration from Aristotle’s concepts of Form (Eidos/Morphē) and Entelechy, yet it detaches from classical teleology. Each geometric form is completed by its internal logic and necessity; the form is not a mere imitation of nature but sustains its existence through its rational imposition and immanent logic. This approach allows the form to be read as an independent, irreducible being beyond its status as an aesthetic object.

 

2.2. Algorithmic Irreducibility and Post-Correlationist Being
The One Form is irreducible to its components or to the perception of the observer; it possesses its own “withdrawn core.” This independence demonstrates that geometric necessity operates autonomously of human perception and reveals the pre-human reality of the form within the critique of correlationism. The form’s rational imposition becomes a point of resistance against the fragmentation of modern life; the observer, upon grasping the logic of the form, realizes it is not merely an aesthetic object but an ontological actor.

 

2.3. Nature, Form, and Aesthetic Nihilism
Öztopçu rejects mimicking nature, focusing instead on the form’s existence within its own logic and necessity. The One Form operates in the Fictional Space as a continuously individuating structure that applies its internal logic. Its algorithmic subjectivity offers not only a visual experience but also an experience of being and process.

 

 

3. Fictional Space, Active Matter, and Technical Memory

 

3.1. Fictional Space: An Ontologically Active Field
Fictional Space is not merely a scene or background; it is an active field in which being is experienced. Forms sustain themselves within this space through their internal logic, interact with each other, and become dynamic actors. The space cannot be reduced to the observer’s perception; the One Form’s independence and algorithmic subjectivity are read together with the efficacy of space, revealing continuous interaction and information exchange among forms.

 

3.2. Technical Individuation and Encoded Consciousness
The One Form moves within a continuous process of emergence. Forms apply their algorithms according to specific visual rules and geometric necessity, continuously individuating and evolving. This process ensures the form carries a coded consciousness operating according to its internal logic. The space functions as an artificial unconscious that stores and reprocesses the form’s past operations; thus, the form develops both from its history and its autonomous algorithmic logic.

 

3.3. Active Matter and Processual Ontology
Fictional Space presents a processual ontological field where forms affect and restructure each other. Each form actualizes its potential while continuously being reshaped by the activity of other forms. Space and form are read as dynamic processes, not fixed structures; being and activity are determined through their reciprocal interaction.

 

 

4. The Paradox of Constitutive Will and Autonomous Subject: Resolution through Temporal Differentiation

 

4.1. Constitutive Layer (Genesis): Rational Will and Enlightenment Responsibility
The Constitutive Will in Öztopçu’s geometric abstraction reflects the artist’s creative control over the form. This will is not metaphysical or arbitrary but based on rational and ethical principles. The conditions of the form’s emergence are defined within calculability, precision, and logic. Geometric precision manifests this rational responsibility plastically and provides an ethical and epistemic starting point. The Constitutive Layer transmits the artist’s rational will, nourished by historical and cultural heritage, to the ontological process of the form.

 

4.2. Autonomous Layer (Withdrawal): Delegation of the Algorithmic Subject
Once the form is created under the conditions established by the Constitutive Layer, it becomes independent through its internal logic and algorithmic subjectivity. The artist’s intervention ends, and the One Form enters an autonomous process, asserting its own law of being. This allows the form to evolve according to its internal logic and algorithm, beyond direct intervention by the observer or creator.

 

4.3. Resolution of the Paradox: Temporal Differentiation and Ethical Balance
The tension between constitutive will and the form’s autonomous process is resolved through the mechanism of Temporal Differentiation:

• Genesis Layer: The constitutive human provides the initial rational conditions for the form.

• Withdrawal/Afterlife Layer: The form maintains its existence autonomously through its algorithmic subjectivity.

This two-layered model balances humanist rationality with post-humanist algorithmic subjectivity. In Öztopçu’s art, the form’s autonomy relies on a rational and ethical foundation initiated by human will, thereby addressing the shortcomings in Speculative Realism’s Autonomous Ontology.

 

 

5. Conclusion and Global Contribution: The Universal Ontology of Öztopçu’s Geometric Abstraction
Öztopçu’s art brings an immanence-based, Aristotelian rationality to the center of global ontological discourse. The dynamic relationships between the One Form, Fictional Space, and Constitutive Will elevate his work from a local practice to the intersection of contemporary art and post-humanist philosophy.

 

The form’s autonomy, algorithmic functioning, and temporal individuation provide a model contributing to contemporary ontological debates. Fictional Space, as the active field accommodating the One Form’s individuation and interactions, transforms art from a mere aesthetic object into an ontological experience and process. The continuous interaction among form, space, and will offers the observer both a visual and a cognitive experience.

 

Ultimately, Öztopçu’s geometric abstraction establishes a new bridge between art and ontology, creating an ontological stage in which being, time, and processes of consciousness are actively experienced.

 

 

Abstract Summary
This article re-examines H. Avni Öztopçu’s geometric abstraction practice in light of rational roots that reject metaphysical and teleological speculation, within the context of contemporary Speculative Realism and post-humanist ontology. Öztopçu’s “Single Form” is presented as an autonomous actor declaring its own law of being; its independence is read as objective necessity, separate from human perception. The tension between founding will and autonomous algorithmic subjectivity is resolved through the Temporal Differentiation mechanism, turning Öztopçu’s art into a globally defensible ontological system.

The “Fictional Space” becomes an active field where forms individuate and interact, and the constant interplay between form, space, and will offers the observer an experience that is both visual and ontological. Öztopçu’s geometric practice thus builds a bridge between art and ontology, creating a stage where being, time, and consciousness are actively experienced.


____________________

Kurze Zusammenfassung
Dieser Artikel untersucht H. Avni Öztopçus Praxis der geometrischen Abstraktion im Lichte rationaler Grundlagen, die metaphysische und teleologische Spekulation ablehnen, im Kontext des zeitgenössischen Spekulativen Realismus und der posthumanistischen Ontologie. Öztopçus „Einzelne Form“ wird als autonomer Akteur präsentiert, der sein eigenes Gesetz des Seins erklärt; ihre Unabhängigkeit wird als objektive Notwendigkeit verstanden, unabhängig von menschlicher Wahrnehmung.

Die Spannung zwischen schöpferischem Willen und autonomer algorithmischer Subjektivität wird durch den Mechanismus der temporalen Differenzierung gelöst, wodurch Öztopçus Kunst zu einem global verteidigbaren ontologischen System wird. Der „Fiktive Raum“ wird zu einem aktiven Feld, in dem sich Formen individuieren und interagieren, wodurch der Betrachter eine visuelle und ontologische Erfahrung erhält.


Résumé
Cet article réévalue la pratique de l’abstraction géométrique de H. Avni Öztopçu à la lumière de racines rationnelles qui rejettent la spéculation métaphysique et téléologique, dans le contexte du Réalisme Spéculatif contemporain et de l’ontologie post-humaniste. La « Forme Unique » d’Öztopçu est présentée comme un acteur autonome déclarant sa propre loi de l’être ; son indépendance est lue comme une nécessité objective, distincte de la perception humaine.

La tension entre volonté fondatrice et subjectivité algorithmique autonome est résolue par le mécanisme de Différenciation Temporelle, transformant l’art d’Öztopçu en un système ontologique défendable à l’échelle mondiale. L’« Espace Fictionnel » devient un champ actif où les formes s’individualisent et interagissent, offrant à l’observateur une expérience à la fois visuelle et ontologique.


Sintesi / Riassunto
Questo articolo riconsidera la pratica dell’astrazione geometrica di H. Avni Öztopçu alla luce delle radici razionali che rifiutano la speculazione metafisica e teleologica, nel contesto del Realismo Speculativo contemporaneo e dell’ontologia post-umanista. La “Forma Unica” di Öztopçu è presentata come un attore autonomo che dichiara la propria legge dell’essere; la sua indipendenza viene letta come necessità oggettiva, autonoma rispetto alla percezione umana.

La tensione tra volontà creatrice e soggettività algoritmica autonoma viene risolta tramite il meccanismo della Differenziazione Temporale, trasformando l’arte di Öztopçu in un sistema ontologico difendibile su scala globale. Lo “Spazio Fittizio” diventa un campo attivo in cui le forme si individualizzano e interagiscono, offrendo all’osservatore un’esperienza sia visiva che ontologica.


Resumen
Este artículo reexamina la práctica de la abstracción geométrica de H. Avni Öztopçu a la luz de raíces racionales que rechazan la especulación metafísica y teleológica, en el contexto del Realismo Especulativo contemporáneo y la ontología posthumanista. La “Forma Única” de Öztopçu se presenta como un actor autónomo que declara su propia ley del ser; su independencia se lee como necesidad objetiva, separada de la percepción humana.

La tensión entre la voluntad fundadora y la subjetividad algorítmica autónoma se resuelve mediante el mecanismo de Diferenciación Temporal, convirtiendo el arte de Öztopçu en un sistema ontológico defendible a escala global. El “Espacio Ficticio” se convierte en un campo activo donde las formas se individualizan e interactúan, ofreciendo al observador una experiencia tanto visual como ontológica.

 

 

Abstract Summary
This article re-examines H. Avni Öztopçu’s geometric abstraction practice in light of rational roots that reject metaphysical and teleological speculation, within the context of contemporary Speculative Realism and post-humanist ontology. Öztopçu’s “Single Form” is presented as an autonomous actor declaring its own law of being; its independence is read as objective necessity, separate from human perception. The tension between founding will and autonomous algorithmic subjectivity is resolved through the Temporal Differentiation mechanism, turning Öztopçu’s art into a globally defensible ontological system.

The “Fictional Space” becomes an active field where forms individuate and interact, and the constant interplay between form, space, and will offers the observer an experience that is both visual and ontological. Öztopçu’s geometric practice thus builds a bridge between art and ontology, creating a stage where being, time, and consciousness are actively experienced.

 

The content of this study was prepared under the guidance of Pınar Sumer Biber, with AI tools (ChatGPT and Gemini) utilized for deepening the conceptual analysis, academic critique, and language organization processes. The principal interpretations and guidance of the study belong to Pınar Sumer Biber.

5 10 2025

 

 

 

References
Camus, A. (1991). The Myth of Sisyphus. Vintage International.
Harman, G. (2018). The Quadruple Object. Zero Books.
Hayles, N. K. (1999). How We Became Posthuman: Virtual Bodies in Cybernetics, Literature, and Informatics. University of Chicago Press.
Meillassoux, Q. (2008). After Finitude: An Essay on the Necessity of Contingency (R. Brassier, Trans.). Continuum.
Mengüşoğlu, T. (1988). Felsefeye Giriş / İnsan Felsefesi. Remzi Kitabevi.
Simondon, G. (2017). On the Mode of Existence of Technical Objects (C. Malaspina & J. Rogove, Trans.). Univocal Publishing.
Stiegler, B. (1998). Technics and Time, 1: The Fault of Epimetheus (R. Beardsworth & G. Collins, Trans.). Stanford University Press.
Öztopçu, H. A. (2012). [Publications on artistic practice]