The fog of war hangs thickly around artistic agency. Where is the agent—a photographer, say—between the unthinking finger spasm releasing the shutter of a point-and-click camera and the pervasiveness of invisible editorial AIs that automatically improve the shot, or that generate images from words like “photo-realistic”? Must we prise apart or more fully entangle the relations between artistic agency and the work of art, and what tools should we use? These are contemporary examples of long-standing questions that emerge from the ongoing relationship of art and philosophy, one that has generally encouraged greater attention to aesthetics on both sides. Yet with one breath, an irreversibly sweeping One, François Laruelle dispels the smoke and mirrors that cement our servitude to philosophy and its authorities. The problems of agency, art and philosophy are inherent to relations as such, each serving as ground of the other in a chiasmatic structure Laruelle refers to as auto-grounding. In Laruelle’s work, the “non” neutralises (and neuters) these relational problems in favour of a uni-lation prior to any re-lation. Through non-philosophy, non-aesthetics, non-photography and non-art, the authority of artistic agency is obliterated, along with the mutually constitutive relations between subjects and objects that are its condition. All that remains is what was prior to them, an indifferent One without relation, the radically immanent and foreclosed Real. Laruelle leads a war against the aesthetic, but the war is over before it begins: a non-war of the One stands entirely apart from the squabbling of philosophy and art. These squabbles are permanently frustrated, and animated, by their inability to reverse the One’s determination-in-the-last-instance. In its radical immanence, the One cannot be displaced as there is no point of leverage for philosophy and art to grasp. This notion of immanence therefore requires a theory of artistic agency divorced from its intentional and determining commitments, a theory we will sketch here in terms of non-photography, which views the work of art as a utopian ideality on which neither philosophy nor aesthetics can gain any purchase.