HOW 严肃游戏 | 肯特·希里：现代和平主义
严肃游戏
展期：2019年8月2日-11月2日
艺术家：阿莱克斯·马伊思(Alexis Mailles)、冯晨、哈伦·法罗基(Harun Farocki)、乔恩·拉夫曼(Jon Rafman)、肯特·希里(Kent Sheely)、陆浩明、陆明龙、马修·切拉比尼(Matthieu Cherubini)、佩恩恩、彼得·尼尔森(Peter Nelson)、吴其育
策展人：付了了
地址：昊美术馆（上海）三楼展厅6、7
*购买展览门票请点击文末“阅读原文”
Please scroll down for English version.
昊美术馆（上海）最新群展“严肃游戏”于8月2日正式开幕。展览同时呈现一系列艺术家关于游戏的写作和创作手记，希望借此激发对电子游戏及相关议题的进一步思考和讨论。今天介绍的是艺术家肯特·希里(Kent Sheely)此次参展作品《DoD（胜利之日战争新闻学）》《重回二战》及其文章《现代和平主义》。
《DoD（胜利之日
战争新闻学）》
&
《重回二战》
DoD (胜利之日战争新闻学)，2009-2012
肯特·希里
录像
致谢艺术家
“我玩了一个以二战为主题的游戏：‘胜利之日：起源’，但不是作为一名参与战斗的人员，而是作为一名记者，不是参与战斗而是捕获战争画面。
为了成为一名记者，我编辑了游戏文件以删除屏幕上所有的统计数据、弹药计数器和其他指示器，并使我的武器不可见。我还更改了控制方案，这样我就不能攻击; 按下鼠标上的“开火”按钮只会保存一个屏幕截图。
每张照片的颗粒状、模糊的美学都向摄影记者罗伯特·卡帕(Robert Capa)的作品致敬，他最著名的摄影作品《诺曼底登陆》由于实验室技术人员的错误而变得模糊不清，但却成为了标志性的照片。”
—— 肯特·希里
重回二战, 2009
肯特·希里游戏截屏：盖瑞模块（威尔乌“阀门”公司，2004）/ Adobe Photoshop
致谢艺术家
通过在虚拟空间中组织可获取的物品，重新创作第二次世界大战的著名摄影作品。
现代和平主义
肯特·希里
2016年2月3日，星期三-16:05
文章发表于videogametourism.at
游戏不仅仅是娱乐。综合媒介艺术家肯特·希里探索了电子游戏在违背创造者意图的情况下是如何被玩的。
如果你之前未曾玩过任何“使命召唤”系列游戏，你需要了解其中的两个细节。第一，这些游戏是传统的第一人称视角的射击游戏，那意味着在分数滚动之前，你将有可能击杀几百位敌军。第二，游戏被展现为高超的电影体验，在这种情况下，你周围时刻都有大量的战斗发生，其中大部分都与你游戏角色的目标无关，只是作为氛围背景出现。你应当觉得自己只是一支庞大军队中的普通士兵。然而，因为你是故事的主角，如果按游戏创造者的预期玩，你就得在前线做很多脏活。
最近，我第一次玩“使命召唤：现代战争”，这是该系列的第四部并且是粉丝的最爱。尽管暴力代理在该类型的大多数游戏中都是常见的思路，但是在“使命召唤”系列中，无处不在的、由计算机控制的队友在我看来是一种引人入胜的变化。如果你选择逃避自己的“责任”，并且让你的盟友承担起切断位于你和胜利之间敌军防线的责任，会发生什么？游戏编程是否允许你以和平主义者的身份参与游戏？这是我脑海中闪过的问题。在未开一枪就完成了第一个任务后，我意识到自己无聊的猜测事实上可能有一定的价值，我把这作为个人的责任——看我能在不伤害周围任何人的情况下把故事推进多远。
事实上，这一壮举的可能性微乎其微，这本身就是一个有趣的发现。这是一个系列，它的名字要求你，即玩家，履行你的职责，尽一切努力确保胜利。如果你放弃了这一责任，你就违背了游戏的全部意图。
我很快地制定了各个策略来推进了每一个关卡的发展，而不是直接参与到每一个回合所设定在我面前的目标。通常情况下，这包括在队伍中从一个地点移动到另一个地点，直到我找到一个藏身之地，在那里等待着我的同伴们把所有敌人从当前地区清除出去。有时我需要跑到下一个“触发点”，它会传送给我附近的朋友们，并使他们像我一样完全绕过整个交火现场。这些非常规的技术通常会完美的发挥作用，因为敌人被设定在预定的交战点突然出现来进行快速交火，而我的战友们也被设定在一条路线上作为我的“支援”，他们寻找掩护，偶尔也会出现来帮助战斗。玩家们本应成为这场秀的明星，但当情况危急时，这些小卒会毫不犹豫的扣动扳机，而你却不能（在我的情况下——不会）。
然而，这趟征途的某些部分需要更为复杂的操作，比如手动将盟军推进火线来迫使他们为我与敌人交战。其他出现在任务目标上的复杂情况要求我采取具体行动，比如在防空武器上放置炸药，或向挡住去路的一小队坦克发射火箭。我在每一关都进行了大量的练习，试图找到最好的路线和最安全的策略，在不死亡或不使用武器的情况下坚持到底。在某些情况下，解决的方法只是找到正确的移动模式，以绕过任何阻碍我的人，但事实证明，避免一些编排的剧情是一项挑战，如果我不积极参与到故事中，我将无法完成这一挑战。在遇到这样的障碍之前，我成功的完成了几个任务。但当情况发生时，我决定需要为自己制定一套具体的规则：
我将不会伤害步兵或车辆。假如必须使用炸药或者任何形式的武器，我必须尽全力确保没有敌军步兵被困在爆炸中。如果游戏编程绝对不允许我以其他方式进行，我才能违反上述规则。
令人难以置信的是，只有少数几处要求我违背自己制定的道德准则。在大部分关卡中，我可以简单地让事件自由地发展，而不需要我的任何直接参与。
当我以这种方式结束游戏之后，我坐在椅子上，望着屏幕上滚动的分数，思考我刚刚所做的事情的意义。
回顾我的游戏录像，我首先意识到了在无数情况下，如果我愿意让子弹贯穿一名敌方战斗人员的头颅，我就可以用一颗子弹避免千万人的死亡。多少次我眼睁睁的看着同胞们英勇地向前跑，却被同样的机枪扫射在地。我应该为这些死亡负责吗？还是因为我拒绝积极参与这场流血冲突而仍占据了道德制高点？
这让我想起大一新生的哲学入门课，想起了伊曼纽尔·康德(Immanuel Kant)和他的主张——谋杀永远是错误的，不管结果有多好。这就是我选择坚持的信条，拒绝通过推测暴力的结果来为暴力辩护。然而，从对立的功利主义角度看，这些假设的杀戮在道德上是合乎情理的，因为它们可以挽救无数人的生命。
当思考这两个对立的道德框架时，我感觉自己又一次坐在了大学早课的第一排，手忙脚乱地翻找出自己从上周课堂中马虎记下的要点，并拼命的试图捍卫自己的立场——为我的不作为所导致付出的这么多条生命而辩护。即使在我写下这些话的时候，我也觉得自己没有能力做出这样的判断。
我很快又意识到另一个令人不安的事实，尽管拒绝扣动扳机，但我仍然是这场大屠杀中的机械组成部分。我仅仅是从一个地方移动到另一个地方，就把我的盟友们推到了危险的境地，迫使他们因自卫而杀人，并且经常代替我死去。因为我躲在附近的掩体后，拒绝让自己成为目标。
其他时候，我直接胁迫盟友们对其他人采取暴力行为，把他们推到一个别无选择、只能采取致命行动的位置。我不仅拒绝承受重担，实际上恰恰是我在操纵他们为我夺取生命。在某种程度上，我的一些避免谋杀的策略实际上远比简单地按照游戏要求去做要糟糕得多，如果我只是像一个优秀的士兵那样拔出武器并扣动扳机。
同样，有时我被迫采取的行动直接导致了敌军死亡，这些妥协应该被详细说明。当时我冷酷地接受了这些时刻，意识到如果要结束这场试验，我不得不违背自己的规则。当时，我只是为了完成游戏而继续坚持，但如果我只是拒绝再继续下去呢？我本可以在第一个需要致命武力的路口结束实验，然后宣布这项任务是不可能完成的。
不过，我对停滞不前的恐惧最终战胜了我自己。我选择了破例、找借口，而不是接受失败。我想坚持到底，因为我知道自己仍在尽最大的努力来避免夺走他人生命。在我看来，我依然站在道德制高点。因为不得不炸毁那辆坦克显然不是我的错误。把我推到死角是游戏的错误，它将火箭发射器塞到我手里并说：“拿着，我们需要你为我们做一件事，这样我们才能继续前进。”我别无选择。但是…如果我停止玩呢？
在游戏的最后，我“击杀”了约三十人（如果算上我最后射中腿或手臂的人，在这种情况下游戏会把它们算作是一次“杀戮”。因为在某些关卡中我必须击毙必要数量的敌人，否则游戏无法继续）。我可能还会再次尝试，看我是否能进一步减少这个数字。因为有些地方我可以在更好的时间引爆炸药，或者使用不同的策略完全避开某些区域。
我仍然不确定，我在“使命召唤：现代战争”中保护生命的努力，如果发生在现实世界中，在道义上是否合理。我想，这一结论取决于我们是如何单独回答这些古老的道德问题，以及我们如何权衡我们作为和不作为的后果。在一款原本为了逃避现实而设计的游戏中，对我来说一开始浅显的挑战，却变成了一种深刻的哲学体验，我认为最终的结果值得仔细研究。我拒绝接受不值得去探索和突破其局限性的任何形式的互动媒体，即使这意味着采取完全相反的方法，只是退后一步让事物按照他们自己的意愿发展。你可以决定自己如何看待这些结果。
关于艺术家
肯特·希里
工作、生活于加利福尼亚。他创作介于电子游戏、艺术和流行文化的交叉领域。他主要从事 2D 数字复合、游戏修改、机械电影和互动作品，他分析了视频游戏和互联网是如何影响我们的思维方式，并记录了从中伴随着我们回到现实世界的事物。
“严肃游戏”展览现场
“严肃游戏”展览现场，2019 图片©昊美术馆
点击以下链接回顾更多相关内容：
HOW 严肃游戏 | Jon Rafman：荣誉密码
HOW 严肃游戏 | 陆明龙：2065
HOW 严肃游戏 | 佩恩恩：天梯系统
HOW 严肃游戏 | 自动保存: 城门棱堡
HOW 严肃游戏 | 马修·切拉比尼：一切都是可以计算的吗？
Serious Games
Duration: 2019/08/02 - 2019/11/02
Artists: Alexis Mailles, Feng Chen, Harun Farocki, Jon Rafman, Kent Sheely, Andrew Luk, Lawrence Lek, Matthieu Cherubini, Payne Zhu, Peter Nelson, Wu Chi-Yu
Curator: Fu Liaoliao
Venue：Gallery 6/ 7, 3F, HOW Art Museum, No 1, Lane 2277, Zuchongzhi Road, Shanghai
Serious Games, the current exhibition of HOW Art Museum Shanghai, is on view from August 2. The exhibition presents in the same time the writings of participating artists, intending to stimulate further the reflection and discussion on videogames and relevant topics. Today's release is about exhibited artworks DoD (Day of Defeat War Journalism)，World War II Redux of Kent Sheely and his article Modern Pacifism.
DoD ( Day of Defeat War Journalism)
&
World War II Redux
DoD ( Day of Defeat War Journalism), 2009-2012
Kent Sheely
Video
Courtesy of the artist
“I played an online World War II-themed game (Day of Defeat: Source) not as a combatant, but as a journalist, capturing photographs of the conflict instead of participating in the battles.
To become a journalist, I edited the game files to remove all stats, ammo counters, and other indicators from the screen, and made my weapon invisible. I also changed the control scheme so that I could not attack; pressing the “fire” button on the mouse would simply save a screenshot.
The grainy, blurred aesthetics of each photo pay homage to the work of the photojournalist Robert Capa, whose most famous photos of the D-Day invasion were blurred due to a lab technician’s error but became iconic.”
—— Kent Sheely
World War II Redux, 2009
Kent SheelyGame Screenshots: “Garry’s Mod” (Valve Corporation, 2004) / Adobe Photoshop
Courtesy of the artist
Famous photographs from the Second World War, re-created by arranging available objects in virtual space.
Modern Pacifism
Kent Sheely
Mittwoch, Februar 3, 2016 - 16:05
Originally published on videogametourism.at
Games can be more than mere entertainment. Intermedia artist Kent Sheely explores the ways video games can be played against their creators' intentions.
If you've never played any of the Call of Duty series, there are two details you should know. First, these games are typical first-person shooters, which means you will likely mow down a few hundred enemies before the credits roll. Second, they are presented as highly cinematic experiences, in which a lot of combat and action is happening around you at all times, most of which is tertiary to your character’s goals and is present only as atmospheric context. You are meant to feel like just an ordinary soldier within the ranks of a larger force. However, because you are the protagonist of the story, you’re expected to be on the front lines doing a lot of the dirty work yourself if you're playing as intended.
I recently sat down for the first time with Modern Warfare, the fourth sequential entry in the line and a favorite among fans. Though violent agency is a common thread in a vast majority of games in the genre, the ubiquitous presence of semi-competent, computer-controlled teammates in the Call of Duty franchise stood out to me as a compelling variation. What would happen if you chose to shirk your own "duty" and let your allies shoulder the responsibility of cutting through the enemy line that stand between you and victory? Would the game’s programming allow you to play as a pacifist? These were the questions that ran through my head. After completing the first mission without firing a shot, I realized my idle conjecture might actually have some merit, and I made it my own personal responsibility to see just how far I could push through the story without doing any harm to those around me.
The fact that this feat is even remotely possible is an interesting discovery in itself. This is a series whose very name insists that you, the player, are going to be called upon to fulfill your duty, to do whatever it takes to secure victory. By forsaking that responsibility you are essentially defying the entire purpose of the game.
I quickly developed various strategies for advancing the narrative of each level without directly engaging with the targets set up in front of me at each turn. Usually this would involve moving from one waypoint to another alongside the team until I found a hiding place, and waiting there until my companions finished clearing out all the bad guys from that immediate area. Sometimes I would need to run to the next “trigger point,” which would sometimes teleport my friends nearby and allow them to completely bypass entire firefights just as I had. These unconventional techniques usually worked flawlessly, as enemies were programmed to pop out at predetermined points of engagement for a quick firefight, and my comrades were likewise programmed to move along a route as my “support,” seeking cover & occasionally emerging to help out in the fight. The player is meant to be the star of the show, but when push came to shove, these minions have no problem pulling the trigger where you can’t (or won’t, in my case).
There were some parts of the run, however, that required more complicated maneuvers, such as manually pushing allies out into the line of fire in order to force them into engaging the enemy for me. Other complications came in the form of mission objectives that demanded I take specific action, such as planting explosives on an anti-aircraft weapon or firing rockets at a small team of tanks blocking the way through. I did a lot of practice runs on each level, trying to find the best route and the safest strategies for getting through to the end without dying or having to use a weapon. The solution in some cases was just a matter of finding the right pattern of movements to get around anyone in my way, but avoiding some of the scripted sequences proved to be a challenge that I could find no way through without taking an active part in the story. I managed to get through several missions before encountering such a roadblock, but as soon as it happened I decided I would need to craft a specific set of rules for myself:
I shall not harm infantry or vehicles. If I must use explosives or weaponry of any kind, I must do everything within my power to ensure that no enemy infantry are caught in the blast. I may only break the above rules if the programming will absolutely not let me proceed otherwise, and only after I have attempted to exploit said programming in order to avoid breaking these rules.
Incredibly, there were only a handful of points at which I was required to violate my hand-crafted code of ethics. For most of the game, I could simply allow events to play out by themselves without any direct involvement from me whatsoever.
After I wrapped up the campaign this way, I sat back in my chair and just stared at the screen as the credits rolled, molling over the implications of what I had just done.
The first thing I realized upon reviewing the footage of my run was that there were innumerable cases where I could have prevented a lot of death with a single bullet, if I’d been willing to put it through the head of just one enemy combatant. So many times I watched helplessly as my compatriots ran valiantly forward, only to be cut down by the same gout of automatic gunfire. Was I responsible for these deaths, or did I still have the moral high ground by refusing to actively take part in the bloodshed?
At some point I had a flashback to Freshman Philosophy 101, remembering Immanuel Kant and his insistence that murder is always wrong, regardless of how much goodness we perceive to be the result. This was the mantra to which I chose to adhere, refusing to justify violence by speculating on its results. From the antithetical Utilitarian perspective, though, these hypothetical killings would have been morally justified, because they would have saved countless lives.
As I considered these two opposing moral frameworks, I felt like I was once again in the front row of that early-morning class, scrabbling for bullet points I’d scrawled down from last week’s lecture and desperately attempting to defend my position, to justify my inaction that had cost so many lives. Even as I write these words, I feel poorly equipped to make such a judgement.
I quickly reached another disturbing realization, that despite refusing to pull the trigger I was still very much a mechanical component of the massacre. Just by moving from one location to another I had caused my allies to surge into harm’s way, forcing them to kill in self-defense and often to die in my stead as I ducked behind nearby cover and refused to let myself be a target.
Other times I was directly involved in coercing them to act violently against others, by pushing them into a position where they had no choice but to react with lethal action. Not only did I refuse to shoulder this burden, but I was actually the one who manipulated them into taking lives on my behalf. In a way, some of my strategies for avoiding murder were actually far more vile than if I had simply gone along with what the game wanted me to do, if I’d just drawn my weapon like a good soldier and pulled the trigger.
Again, there were times when I was forced to act in a way that directly caused the deaths of enemy troops, and those compromises should be addressed. I accepted these moments grimly at the time, realizing that if I was going to finish this trial I would have to bend my own rules. At the time I chose to just keep pressing on for the sake of completing the run, but what if I had simply refused to go any further? I could have ended the experiment at the first junction that required lethal force on my part, and declared the task to be impossible.
My fear of stagnation won out in the end, though, and rather than accept defeat I chose to make exceptions, to make excuses. I wanted to stay the course with the knowledge that I was still doing my best to avoid taking lives. I still had the moral high ground, in my own opinion, because it clearly wasn’t my fault I had to blow up that tank. It was the game’s fault for pushing me into a corner, for shoving the rocket launcher into my hands and saying “take this, we need you to do this one thing for us so we can keep moving forward.” There was no alternative. But...what if I’d just stopped playing?
By the end of the game, I had neutralized about thirty people (if you count the ones I ended up shooting in the leg or arm so the game would count them as a “kill” during parts of the game in which I couldn’t proceed until I’d dropped a requisite number of enemies). I still might make another attempt and see if I can reduce this number even further, as there were some places where I could have set off an explosive at a better time, or used different strategies to to avoid certain sections entirely.
I’m still not quite sure whether my efforts to preserve life in Modern Warfare would be morally justified had they taken place in the real world; I suppose the verdict rests on how we would individually answer those age-old questions of morality, how we weigh our actions and inactions against their consequences. What began as a superficial challenge in a game otherwise intended for escapism turned into a deeply philosophical experience for me, and I think the end result is worth scrutinizing. I refuse to accept that there is any form of interactive media that is not worth exploring and pushing to its limits, even if that means taking the exact opposite approach and just stepping back to let things play out as they will. You can decide for yourself what to make of the results.
About the artist
Kent Sheely is a California-based intermedia artist who operates at the intersection of video games, art, and pop culture. Working primarily with 2D digital composites, game modifications, machinima, and interactive works, he dissects the way video games and the Internet influence our ways of thinking, and documents the things that come back with us to the real world.
昊美术馆（上海）
HOW ART MUSEUM (SHANGHAI)
昊美术馆（上海），图片©昊美术馆
昊美术馆（上海）是具备当代艺术收藏、陈列、研究和教育功能的全新文化机构，坐落于上海浦东，共有三层展览和活动空间，总面积约7000平方米，于2017年9月正式对外开放。昊美术馆首创“夜间美术馆”的运营模式，常规对外开放时间为周二至周五下午1点至夜间10点，周末及节假日开放时间为上午10点至夜间10点。此举能让更多观众在工作之余前来美术馆观展，昊美术馆也举办“国际策展人驻留项目”、“户外电影节”、“雕塑公园”等国际交流项目和户外活动，以此建立全新的艺术综合体和浦东新地标。
昊美术馆（温州）
HOW ART MUSEUM (WENZHOU)
昊美术馆（温州），图片©昊美术馆
昊美术馆（温州）延续昊美术馆（上海）的“夜间美术馆”运营模式，是浙江省首家"夜间美术馆"，常规对外开放时间为下午1点到夜间10点，周末及节假日开放时间将向前延长为上午10点至夜间10点。昊美术馆（温州）将持续为公众呈现丰富的公共教育及户外艺术项目，引领融合艺术、设计、科技的全新生活方式。
正在展出 Current
昊美术馆（上海）
HOW ART MUSEUM (SHANGHAI)
昊美术馆（温州）
HOW ART MUSEUM (WENZHOU)
昊美术馆（温州） 特别项目空间
HOW ART MUSEUM(WENZHOU) Special Project Space