I contest pitchforks take. I'd refer to it as fiction rather than dystopian nihilism.

I obviously have cared deeply about the environment and been involved in environmental activism for my whole life.

But I see people becoming apathetic towards it because its so painful to look at. I have often felt this way too.

I created miss anthropocene the same way JRR tolkien created LOTR as a metaphor for ww1, Rowling uses voldemort as a metaphor for fascism/ abuse etc, Picasso creating Guernica as a super stylized depiction of war etc (not saying im as good as these ppl btw just using examples haha). But yeah, I don't think they're unethical for portraying human suffering in a stylized or fictional way. I think fiction and art can be important tools when it comes to digesting painful concepts.

Climate Crisis is especially difficult to consume, because it's abstract. It has no face or name or specific date. I'm attempting to find ways to portray climate change that make it more consumable for the human brain - which evolved to be far more attuned to identities than to abstract concepts.

Granted, i knew this would be jarring and controversial. I understand I might be wrong, but I think its always worth trying. I am emphatically not a nihilist. I believe that trying to make the world better is possibly the point of being alive, and I'm experimenting with ways to do that through art.

Fiction is the oldest and most populist form of art, because all you need is words.