THE AESTHETICS OF LOSS : TRANSFORMATIONS OF MEMORIAL SPACE IN VISUAL ART AND DESIGN OF THE 20 TH–21 ST CENTURIES

Abstract

The article explores the transformation of memorial space within visual art and architectural design of the 20 th321 st centuries. It traces the evolution of artistic and design strategies 3 from sacred polycentric structures of antiquity and the monumental forms of modernism to contemporary conceptual interpretations grounded in principles of minimalism, embodiment, affect, and materiality. The study emphasizes a shift in the semantic focus: from heroic rhetoric to personalized mourning, from figurative representation to abstract conceptuality, and from representation to empathetic engagement.
Memorials are reinterpreted as spaces of co-presence rather than narrative delivery, with architecture functioning as a visual
and spatial mediator of memory. Notable examples of postmemorial architecture are examined, including the Holocaust
Memorial in Berlin by Peter Eisenman, the 9/11 Memorial in New York by Michael Arad, and the Jewish Museum in Berlin
by Daniel Libeskind. These projects embody a design language of ethical silence and traumatic presence through spatial
voids, monochrome surfaces, and the absence of literal imagery. The memorial becomes a performative environment rather
than an illustrative object, evoking reflection and emotional intensity.
Particular attention is devoted to the Ukrainian context after 2014. The article investigates a significant cultural shift in
commemorative practices, conditioned by the experience of war, processes of decommunization, and the rise of grassroots
initiatives. Examples include the Memorial to the Heroes of the Heavenly Hundred in Lviv, the Wall of Remembrance in
Kyiv, and newly created memorials in Bucha and Irpin. These cases demonstrate a move toward ethical, affectively charged,
yet restrained memorial forms that reject triumphalist narratives in favor of dignity and silence. The research defines
conceptual foundations for designing Ukraine9s future Mars Field 3 a space of national conscience and moral presence under
the conditions of war. The memorial is no longer treated as a fixed genre but is understood as a living cultural structure,
creating a spatial field for presence, attentiveness, and intergenerational dialogue. It articulates a new memorial paradigm: one
that does not impose meaning but enables memory to emerge through form, material, and affective atmosphere.
Ultimately, the article argues that the contemporary memorial reflects a broader cultural rethinking of memory in
post-traumatic societies. Rather than monumentalizing the past, the new memorial creates a silent visual core for ethical
memory 3 a place not to glorify, but to remember, through the very structure of space.