以下為作者原文

For years you may have known me through a fictional entity called "Wootha". Today I have decided to destroy this entity. In this text, I will explain to you what motivated this decision.

Some major contingent events in our lives are like rhythms that, punctuating our lives accent after accent, remind us of our existence's essence. I recently lived one of these events, which I'm not going to explain further, but triggered this decision.

For many years, I have observed that existence is punctuated by events that have the potential force to divert our life courses from their linear trajectory.

I say "potential force" because for it to be realized, it must be accompanied by an effort of will, which, if it is applied with intuition, without fear, makes it possible to operate the miracle of creative destruction.

I decided to leave the art industry. I believed - or attempted to believe - that through entertainment, we could raise awareness of the ecocide's reality and perhaps help bring about systemic change through mass-narratives.

But I think today that the problem is precisely linked to a phenomenon of scale. Any desire to produce emotions, truths, thoughts, stories, art, desires, whose finality is mass broadcasting is part of the problem.

By this act, I therefore deliberately destroy years spent building a career in concept art, to free my creative energy from the restraints in which it was embedded and thus mobilize it in other forms.

25 years ago, I first consciously experienced the phenomenon of creative destruction.

I was 19, and after one of these events, I decided to go alone, without money, on Spain's roads, with only sculpting tools and a few clothes. This initiatory journey took me towards discovering what simplicity and renunciation contain in creative and regenerative power. Everything I am today is, to some degree, a consequence of this journey. Just like this journey was a consequence of many other decisions I took before.

Since then, though, whenever in my life I feel the urgent need for a change of trajectory, I go through a creative destruction process.

I have decided to be radical in the face of what I believe is the most perilous situation humanity has ever known in at least twelve millennia and the Younger Dryas end.

It seems to me that the ecosystem crisis we are experiencing, this terrible tierracide (a word invented by Glenn Albrecht to name the conscious murder of the Earth), can only be stopped by a profound change in our current civilizational paradigm.

I believe this change can only come about through creative destruction.

We spend our lives accumulating goods, experiences, memories, and recognition and convincing ourselves that we possess them, to nourish our sense of identity. We identify ourselves with all these possessions and believe that we are a sum that must constantly grow in order not to fall apart.

Like the belief in infinite growth in a finite world that nourishes our social order, we believe that we can continue to amass all these possessions until our death, the final event of a long linear trajectory that ends in ultimate dispossession. For a finite mind, the ontological perception of a linear scale amounts to thinking of death as nothingness instead as the end of a cycle: in a society which asserts that the universe is finite, the linear trajectory can only lead to the confines of nothingness.

This moribund representation of the world nourishes an insatiable desire for accumulation that invisibilizes the mind's infinite creative power.

We are collectively anchored in that very imaginary linear trajectory that will one day end into nothingness. It feeds both our compulsion for accumulation, which results in frenzied extractivism and our morbid tendency to strive for the destruction of the earth, both in our apocalyptic narratives and in our production modes.

Yet never more than today in human history as we know it, have we had more need of this infinite creative power of the mind. So many different futures are imaginable and desirable, and yet, we limit ourselves to considering a very small number as possible, relegating all others to the realms of utopia or entertainment.

If human responsibility for global warming is not unanimous, the tierracide - that is to say the premeditated, organized, rationalized, and systematized murder of the earth - resonates in our daily lives wherever we are on the planet.

Many people are tempted to take an extremely pessimistic view of the situation, or on the contrary, to deny it. Some believe that we can still "change the system" or that we need to bring life to other planets to preserve it. But if we take a step back, the difference between all these proposals is tiny compared to the infinite creative power of the human mind. It lies in the small delta of the perpetiation of the existing system that the philosopher F. Lordon calls the angle α: the acceptable difference between the injunction to conformity useful to the system and the individual's singular desires. The more we advance on the linear trajectory that humanity has taken since the industrial revolution, the more the angle α tends towards nullity, the more we anticipate injunctions and confuse them with our own desires. We, concept artists, only are "artists" by the name thrown at our ego, as a reward for our blind servility, just like we throw a peanut at a caged chimpanzee when he creates a new variant of the same grimace.

However, among the infinity of desirable and magnificent futures, in which humanity would change its current trajectory towards truly different possibilities, we seem able to imagine only those which fit in the angle α: they are encapsulated in the form of stories we call "fictions", locked inside the reassuring membrane of the "entertainment" realm, within which the desire for imaginary can flourish without risking to question the established social order which is responsible for the tierracide.

This social order, wherever we call capitalism, neo-liberalism, modernity, anthropocene or some other name, has become both its own cause and its own consequence. At all times, the α angle ensures that our creativity is channeled towards the linearity of the world's trajectory, and that no event is coming to generate some creative destruction that could result in uncertainty and disorder. On the contrary, when creativity expresses itself within this angle, it becomes its opposite: destructive creativity. By strengthening the norms and injunctions that perpetuates a tierracidal social order, it participates in the atomization of society, eliminating uncertainty, returning to order, and simplifying the living: it is the reign of Thanatos over Eros, of the death drive and the desire for nothingness.

Because that is what it is: the struggle for entropy.

The universe goes from order to disorder, from simple to complex, from rational to irrational, from predictable to uncertainty.

Chaos is life's inseparable ally.

Our collective creative power can do more than the destructive creativity that resides within the α angle. We can bring to humanity imaginaries of a vast multitude of possible, desirable, and magnificent futures if we come out collectively.

To apply this philosophy to myself, I will once again indulge in the magic of creative destruction. "Wootha" is dead, but I'm still alive and well. I do not know how this creative force that inhabits me, just like each of us, will manifest. I believe it will take a very different form, rooted in local communities, the present actions, and a lot of friendship and solidarity.

Thank you.

Stéphane Richard.

關(guān)于這位藝術(shù)家退圈我其實看完屬于一種似懂非懂的感受。但是看到他在聊到大眾傳播和現(xiàn)代互聯(lián)網(wǎng)娛樂行業(yè)對人們的影響，我在想類似在國內(nèi)現(xiàn)在社交媒體上，我們這些靠互聯(lián)網(wǎng)生存死畫圖的，除了打工服務(wù)給上級領(lǐng)導(dǎo)和甲方外，其他時候我們的創(chuàng)作都會積極的發(fā)表在各種平臺上以增加我們的曝光度，這樣我們可以收到更多工作機會和粉絲。

甚至很多很多人做作品是以點贊和上熱門，拿獎等等這些純粹的功利性去做創(chuàng)作，如果自己做了自己滿意的作品在網(wǎng)絡(luò)反而沒有好的響應(yīng)，很多作者就會否定掉自己。

那這種數(shù)字繪畫形式的創(chuàng)作，究竟最后是以什么人什么群體為基準(zhǔn)在評判呢？要知道不同平臺是有完全不同的用戶在使用，知乎，b站，快手抖音，微博，小紅書都是針對完全不同的人群做出來的app，對于作品的喜好認(rèn)知也是大不相同。

所以作為做數(shù)字藝術(shù)的創(chuàng)作人，除開純粹的盈利工作，當(dāng)我們自己的創(chuàng)作發(fā)表到互聯(lián)網(wǎng)后，最后到底是為誰在服務(wù)？如果自己很在意點贊和好評的話，其實本質(zhì)是依然是作為一個商人在推銷自己的產(chǎn)品，而不是一個藝術(shù)家在進(jìn)行自己和自己的對話，和觀眾的對話，和世界的對話。那為什么還要自稱自己是藝術(shù)家呢？最終目標(biāo)是做一個?點贊藝術(shù)家嗎？

互聯(lián)網(wǎng)讓創(chuàng)作者互相攀比，仿佛誰的點贊和粉絲最多，誰就是更厲害的存在。就像是中國學(xué)校要做成績單排名一樣。但是點贊和傳統(tǒng)繪畫的大眾點評其實是完全不一樣的審美邏輯，因為畫廊里的繪畫作品好歹是買家，評論家，和藝術(shù)愛好者在評價，而互聯(lián)網(wǎng)作品你完全不知道是什么人在對你做評論，而作者會被很多毫不相關(guān)的人的評論影響自己。這是一件很恐怖的事情。

然而這種事情作為互聯(lián)網(wǎng)創(chuàng)作者是不能避免的，因為cg藝術(shù)的商業(yè)屬性是非常強的，是完全不能作為架上繪畫放在畫廊里賣的。只能非常廉價的放在互聯(lián)網(wǎng)媒體上接受所有人評論。

寫到這里我想到，就像音樂人一樣，搞嘻哈的，批判社會的很多都發(fā)財了。真正批判社會的都去搞搖滾，然后自殺了。如果選擇做cg藝術(shù)，其實就是選擇了一條商業(yè)屬性非常強的路，其實沒有幾個cg藝術(shù)家真的有資格成為真正的藝術(shù)家，只是有一部分人把自己非要包裝一下罷了。也就是設(shè)計師行業(yè)和藝術(shù)家行業(yè)的本質(zhì)區(qū)別，為誰服務(wù)的問題，誰來批判的問題。

2022 11-19