This cycle is currently in the initial evaluation and research phase and kind of a «growing and expanding document». Broadly speaking, it is an investigation into the culture of remembrance and our engagement with it as well as our handling of new challenges that are closely linked to the past but have nowadays a new relevance for us, as a society and as individuals. The following description represents an exploration, a probing and an immersion into the subject matter. 

In this analysis, I adopt a research-focused perspective to examine the current global trend toward insularity and heightened nationalism, alongside the divisions within societies driven by claims of moral, religious, or racial supremacy. I explore the complexities and challenges of fostering dialogue across divergent ideologies and viewpoints. As we move through the first quarter of the 21st century, we once again witness the resurgence of various "isms" and their inherent connection to historical horrors, shaping the realities of the present.

This inquiry delves into the boundaries that define us, the lingering remnants of memory, and the echoes of loss and trauma. I examine the silent histories and the ways in which personal narratives are either immortalized or forgotten through acts of commemoration. The phenomenon of memories that fade yet persist within individual and collective consciousness, and the recurrent failure to draw lessons from them in shaping a more hopeful future, motivates a deeper engagement with these themes.

My research is influenced by Aleida Assmann and her scientific work on European memory culture, Yad Vashem research center for holocaust studies, author Hannah Arendt about the banality of evil, artist Natalia Romik including her collaborating team around the theme of the Shoa and the time before, author Jan Phillipp Reemtsma and his book « Why memorials? » and many more. 

It primarily revolves around the narrative and how stories are told, both in the past and today. This is particularly interesting in comparison of commemorating wars on the one hand and genocides on the other, and most important if launched by government or private initiatives. The topic immediately raises many questions about authorship, winner or looser, the time it takes for stories to emerge, and the challenges of finally telling them—especially when dealing with deep traumas. Concerning genocides, it also highlights the dangers posed by historical revisionists, as we see today with those who attempt to minimize the Shoah by comparing it to other horrific atrocities within the colonialization narrative—often with a predominantly antisemitic agenda (Note: historians dispute 2.0).

Both of the great wars in the last century but in particular the First World War was marked by promises to soldiers and citizens that were deeply rooted in a heightened form of nationalism, characteristic of the era. This intensified patriotism portrayed the war as a necessary and noble endeavor, where the defense of the homeland or the conquest of others was seen as both a duty and a glorious opportunity to demonstrate national superiority. Citizens were assured that their sacrifices would secure the nation’s rightful place in the world, fostering a sense of unity and purpose.

However, this fervent nationalism also fueled unrealistic expectations. The glorification of war, with its promises of honor, victory, and national pride, obscured the brutal realities of the conflict. The ensuing disillusionment exposed the dangerous gap between the idealized vision of national destiny and the devastating human cost.

Promises confronts us with thinking about the tragic consequences of nationalist ideologies as seen again nowadays with the current war between Russia and the Ukraine. In doing so, I illuminate places of the first Great War that have become symbols of delusion and mass death - places where young men, often no older than twenty, were drawn into the senseless vortex of war. Today this places serve as silent observers of the past, preserving their stories.