Fidelity to the Trace: Fictional
Space as Ontological Resistance Against Algorithmic Erasure and
Atemporality
1. Introduction: Fidelity, Temporal Consistency, and
Historicity
1.1 Ethics and Ontology of Fidelity
Today, forgetting has become a technological and
social phenomenon. Speed and constant innovation erode an
individual’s memory and capacity for attachment to enduring values.
In this context, fidelity (fidelity/vefa) transforms into a radical
stance against forgetting and an ontological form of resistance.
Fidelity is not mere obedience; it signifies an existential act of
remembrance laden with ethical responsibility.
Simondon (1964), in his theory of individuation,
shows that sustaining a being’s identity is possible only through
fidelity to its past and ontological traces. Fidelity, in this
sense, is both a measure of temporal consistency of identity and a
sign of ethical responsibility.
Mengüþoðlu (1968) enriches this framework with the
concept of historicity: humans are historical beings; they must
confront the past, live the present grounded in past achievements,
and consider the future. Atemporality is the inability to correctly
connect past and present, resulting in a lack of continuity and
ontological depth. Fidelity, therefore, is both loyalty to the trace
of the past and an ethical practice that opens towards the future.
Nietzsche’s reflections on forgetting and remembrance
conceptually frame this technological and social tendency to forget.
Fidelity represents a conscious practice of remembrance resisting
this trend.
1.2 Fictional Space: Structural Architecture of
Ethics and Historicity
Hüseyin Avni Öztopçu’s Fictional Space embodies
this ethical and historical imperative. The artist engraves the
trace of memory into space through form, color, and rhythm.
Öztopçu’s works do not merely depict memory; they demonstrate
structural fidelity to it.
Core Thesis: Fictional
Space is a structure that enables the corporeal and cognitive
experience of fidelity in its temporal, historical, and ethical
dimensions, offering ontological resistance against algorithmic
erasure and atemporality.
2. Fictional Space: Corporeal Trace, Neuroaesthetics,
and Phenomenology
2.1 Merleau-Ponty: Corporeal Embodiment of Fidelity
Fictional Space is not merely visual; it is a
corporeal and phenomenological architecture of memory. Merleau-Ponty’s Le
Visible et l’Invisible (1964) concept of the Flesh shows that
fidelity is not an abstract mental act but the concrete outcome of
the perceiving body’s relationship with the world and spatial
surface. Fidelity occurs as an existential act through the body
encoding past experiences.
Application: Öztopçu’s
abstract forms guide the viewer’s bodily perception. Following the
rhythm of the space, the viewer experiences its trace through bodily
memory. This corporeal participation concretizes fidelity as a
“visual touch,” enacted by the body itself.
2.2 Semir Zeki: Neuroaesthetic Traces of Memory
The phenomenological field gains cognitive depth
through neuroaesthetic studies. Zeki (1999) identifies the cognitive
traces abstract art leaves in the brain and the mechanisms by which
it activates memory.
Application: Abstract
forms, color contrasts, and rhythmic arrangements in Öztopçu’s
Fictional Space trigger conscious memory processes in specific brain
regions. These forms leave cognitive traces resisting forgetting.
Fictional Space thus becomes a deeply grounded architectural
experience both phenomenologically (corporeal) and
neuroaesthetically (cognitive).
3. Algorithmic Erasure, Atemporality, and Ontological
Limits
3.1 Technical Amnesia and the Threat of Algorithmic
Erasure
AI systems’ tendency to continuously delete data
relates to Stiegler’s (1994) concept of Technical Amnesia. As
technology externalizes memory, valuable cultural and ethical traces
risk being lost. Algorithmic Erasure is a modern manifestation of
this technical amnesia and constitutes an ethical threat.
3.2 Mengüþoðlu: Historicity, Conscience, and Ethical
Resistance
Mengüþoðlu (1968) defines humans as the only beings
endowed with ethical consciousness, responsible for their actions
and existence. Historicity and conscience ensure engagement with the
past and continuity. Human fidelity occurs within this context as an
ontological act.
Posthuman Perspective: AI
cannot experience fidelity; it lacks conscience, responsibility, and
corporeal being. Braidotti (2013) notes that AI can only analyze
rhythm and form in Öztopçu’s Fictional Space to model “algorithmic
perseverance.” The authentic experience of fidelity and conscience
remains human.
3.3 Ontological Resistance Mechanism of Fictional
Space
Fictional Space does not remain passive against
algorithmic erasure and atemporality. Öztopçu’s art, aligned with
Mengüþoðlu’s philosophy of historicity and ethics, provides a
collective architecture of traces to be preserved. The space
actively protects human memory and ethics from technical amnesia.
4. Conclusion: Fidelity to the Trace,
Atemporality, and Posthuman Ethics
Öztopçu’s Fictional Space is not merely visual; it is
a historical, ethical, and ontological field of resistance. The
article grounds fidelity in Simondon’s principle of temporal
consistency, Merleau-Ponty’s corporeal perception, and Mengüþoðlu’s
historicity and conscience.
In the posthuman creative era, Fictional Space
creates a shared ethical ground: humans experience and inhabit space
through conscience and fidelity, while AI analyzes its structure
algorithmically and recognizes ethical boundaries.
Global Contribution: The
significance of this article lies in redefining fidelity and
historical continuity as ontological resistance and structural
principle, offering a robust ethical response to Algorithmic Erasure
and atemporality threats through Öztopçu’s art. Fictional Space
becomes an ethical and aesthetic memory site where the forgotten is
preserved, and experience, history, and conscience converge.
The content of this study was prepared under the guidance of Pýnar
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 Pýnar Sumer Biber.
22 9 2025
English Summary
This article examines H. Avni Öztopçu’s Fictional
Space as an ontological resistance against algorithmic erasure
and atemporality. Fidelity is understood as a commitment to the
traces of the past and an ethical continuity toward the future.
Grounded in Simondon’s theory of individuation, Merleau-Ponty’s
concept of embodied perception, and Mengüþoðlu’s notion of
historicity, Fictional Space offers viewers both a bodily and
cognitive experience. The article emphasizes the importance of human
conscience and ethical responsibility in the posthuman era,
positioning Öztopçu’s art as a collective practice of remembrance
against forgetting and algorithmic erasure.
Deutsch Zusammenfassung – Erweiterte Version
Dieser Artikel untersucht H. Avni Öztopçus Konzept
des Fiktiven Raums als eine ontologische Widerstandspraktik
gegen algorithmisches Vergessen und zeitlose Entkopplung (Atemporality).
Zentral ist das Konzept der Treue (Fidelity), verstanden als
ethische Verpflichtung gegenüber den Spuren der Vergangenheit und
als ontologische Kontinuität in die Zukunft.
Der Artikel integriert mehrere theoretische
Perspektiven: Simondons Theorie der Individuation zeigt, wie
Identität und Selbstkohärenz auf der treuen Bewahrung ontologischer
Spuren basieren. Merleau-Pontys Verkörperungskonzept verdeutlicht,
dass Treue nicht nur ein abstraktes Gedächtnis, sondern eine
körperlich erlebte, phänomenologische Praxis ist. Mengüþoðlus Ansatz
von Historizität und Ethik ergänzt diese Perspektive, indem er die
Verantwortung des Menschen für seine Handlungen und seine Rolle als
historische Wesen betont.
Im Kontext der Posthumanismus-Debatte stellt die
Arbeit heraus, dass algorithmische Systeme Treue, ethische
Verantwortung oder Bewusstsein nicht erleben können. Öztopçus
Kunstwerk fungiert somit als kollektive, ethisch-historische
Speicherarchitektur, die sowohl das menschliche Gedächtnis schützt
als auch gegen die Risiken der technologischen Amnesie Widerstand
leistet. Das Werk verbindet visuelle, kognitive und körperliche
Erfahrungsebenen zu einem komplexen ontologischen Widerstandsraum,
der in einer Ära des technologischen Vergessens zentrale Relevanz
besitzt.
Résumé Français – Version Étendue
Cet article explore le concept d’Espace
Fictionnel de H. Avni Öztopçu comme une forme de résistance
ontologique contre l’effacement algorithmique et l’atemporalité. La
fidélité (fidelity) est présentée comme un engagement éthique envers
les traces du passé et comme une continuité ontologique et morale
vers le futur.
Le texte articule plusieurs cadres théoriques : la
théorie de l’individuation de Simondon illustre comment la cohérence
identitaire repose sur le respect des traces ontologiques passées.
La perception incarnée selon Merleau-Ponty montre que la fidélité
n’est pas une abstraction mentale mais une pratique vécue et
corporelle. La notion de historicité et d’éthique de Mengüþoðlu
renforce cette approche en mettant en lumière la responsabilité
humaine et le rôle actif de l’homme en tant qu’être historique.
Dans le cadre du posthumanisme, l’étude souligne que
les systèmes algorithmiques sont incapables d’expérimenter la
fidélité, la conscience ou la responsabilité éthique. L’œuvre de
Öztopçu devient alors un espace collectif de mémoire et de
résistance éthique, protégeant la mémoire humaine tout en offrant
une architecture ontologique qui s’oppose aux menaces de l’oubli
technologique. L’Espace Fictionnel articule expérience visuelle,
corporelle et cognitive pour créer un domaine complexe de résistance
ontologique, crucial dans un monde où le risque de l’effacement
algorithmique est croissant.
Sintesi Italiana – Versione Estesa
Questo articolo analizza lo Spazio Fictionale di
H. Avni Öztopçu come forma di resistenza ontologica contro la
cancellazione algoritmica e l’atemporalità. La fedeltà (fidelity) è
intesa come impegno etico verso le tracce del passato e come
continuità ontologica ed etica verso il futuro.
Il testo integra prospettive teoriche multiple: la
teoria dell’individuazione di Simondon mostra come la coerenza
identitaria dipenda dalla preservazione delle tracce ontologiche. La
percezione incarnata di Merleau-Ponty evidenzia che la fedeltà non è
un’astrazione mentale, ma una pratica corporea ed esperienziale. La
nozione di storicità e di responsabilità etica di Mengüþoðlu
arricchisce il quadro, sottolineando l’importanza dell’uomo come
essere storico e responsabile delle proprie azioni.
Nell’ambito del postumanesimo, l’articolo sottolinea
che i sistemi algoritmici non possono vivere la fedeltà, la
coscienza o la responsabilità etica. L’opera di Öztopçu diventa così
un’architettura collettiva della memoria e della resistenza etica,
proteggendo la memoria umana e opponendosi ai rischi dell’oblio
tecnologico. Lo Spazio Fictionale integra dimensioni visive,
corporee e cognitive, creando un complesso dominio di resistenza
ontologica, fondamentale in un’epoca di crescente rischio di
cancellazione algoritmica.
A. Artist and Conceptual Sources
· Öztopçu,
H. Avni. Fictional Space. Unpublished
Proficiency in Art Thesis. Advisor: Prof. Dinçer Erimez. Mimar Sinan
Fine Arts University, Graduate School of Social Sciences, Department
of Painting, 1989. (Accessed via YÖK National Thesis Center).
· Öztopçu,
H. Avni. Conceptual Framework of Fictional Space.
Official website of the artist, Conceptual Texts section. (Access
date: October 16, 2025).
B. Universal Philosophical and Theoretical Sources
3. Mengüþoðlu, Takiyettin. Historicity and Atemporality.
Felsefe Arkivi Journal, Istanbul, 1968.
4. Mengüþoðlu, Takiyettin. Human Philosophy. Istanbul:
Felsefe Arþivi, 1968.
5. Merleau-Ponty, Maurice. Le Visible et l’Invisible.
Paris: Gallimard, 1964.
6. Simondon, Gilbert. L’Individuation à la lumière des notions
de forme et d’information. Paris: Presses Universitaires de
France, 1964.
7. Stiegler, Bernard. Technics and Time, 1: The Fault of
Epimetheus. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1994.
8. Nietzsche, Friedrich. On the Use and Abuse of History for
Life. Leipzig, 1874.
9. Zeki, Semir. Inner Vision: An Exploration of Art and the
Brain. London: Thames & Hudson, 1999.
10. Braidotti, Rosi. The Posthuman. Cambridge: Polity Press,
2013.