BIlderatlas Mnemosyne practIce Is largely based on the Idea that vIewers experIence planes that blend culture and thought. It Is In a sequentIal unIty, juxtaposIng symbolIc elements wIth Images. It establIshes an Immanent and comprehensIble organisation through repetItIon. Thus, wIth a new mappIng approach, It reveals the relatIonal excess of modern thought, the new fIeld of thought created by subjective and objectIve knowledge. What Is essentIal here Is to develop and deepen the condItIons of connectIon, that Is, the relatIonal sItuatIon. Thus, It Is to operatIonalIse an aesthetIc practIce that we can call the archaeology of knowledge through new fIctIon possIbIlItIes and new materIal preferences.

fictionalising and visualising the history of the present

The imaginary and ideological background that determines or feeds the production of artists in the 2000s is the dialectic of action-environment and production that defines relational aesthetics. It investigates the processes of analysing contemporary art, the typological connections that become evident on the human being as the object of social and cultural change, and discusses the possibilities of deviation through production and meaning relations. It develops and harmonises the possibilities of possibility. On this plane, where the content is structured in a new and different way every moment on the basis of technical transitivity, it is aimed to create relational situations, quotation, transcendence, and to reach new forms of thought and meaning production through concepts belonging to different disciplines. In this respect, the meeting of East and East Asia and the West with such an appetite, the global interest that embraces the aesthetic sensitivity of African origin, the possibilities of meeting that eliminate distances and cultural divisions, undoubtedly necessitate new ways of thinking. Is this democratic development in the art scene a typical practice of globalisation? One has to wait. Is it an exit movement of local cultures that articulate with each other or gradually bring back their original character? This is largely a visible pattern of the new modernism. But it may also be a result of the demands of western thought, modernism, for a new knowledge, a new cultural connection. It is a demand for new content, form and similar cultural fields to be processed. It is clearly to dissolve the culture they came from in the new world and revitalise it. This attitude, look or behaviour is both a cultural resistance and a reconciliation of the new modern route for the purpose of adaptation. 

In this context, Warburg’s representational practice continues to be of great interest, as it enables complex or contradictory situations to be analysed and made visible. In the 1980s, in conjunction with the rise of postmodernism, it supported efforts to reformat art history. This system of thought and notion of representation, thus embraced, opens up a space for an interdisciplinary view and evaluation that extends to a relational aesthetics that is compatible and transitional with new conceptual expansions and developments in contemporary art. Historians such as Didi-Huberman and Uwe Fleckner emphasise Warburg’s conceptual approach, the transcendence of time, and especially the knowledge that the past and the present simultaneously disturb each other. Just as in the case of Tacita Dean, it complements and completes the approach of art as a practice that tries to explain a complex temporality and that shapes the narrative subject with anachronism.

Therefore, today, atlas projects continue to attract attention at the level of an intellectual solution and method as an applicable, renewable, reconstructible organising logic and approach that guides the way to understand the world.