John Russell is a London artist working in a range of media, whose diverse output shares a hallucinatory intensity & a mordant sense of humour. Recent works include an 8x4m backlit digital print - a highlight of group show Dark Monarch at Tate St Ives & Towner- plus a 20-minute animated film, Vermillion Vortex - commissioned by Art Review. Mono. did the following Q&A via email.

Mono. Some people reading may not have seen the film yet. If you had to do an elevator-pitch for 'Vermillion Vortex'- what would you say?
John Russell: It is an animated film where the trajectory of events is cut off by an ending which has no narrative connection to what happens previously. It just ends. So "The End" is like the character in a horror movie (a psycho, monster or supernatural force) who kills everyone. On the other hand the end might point to a beginning (of something else). Like a revolution – it is the end for one set of people and the beginning for another.

M. Your opening, which describes Zarvyn's breakdown, is especially gripping. What is it about madness that fires your imagination?
JR: It's based on a someone I know indirectly. What interests me is the idea that if you make one mental jump or 'leap of faith', in Zarvyn's case the idea that the media is talking to him, then after this everything is entirely logical. That is, if you have decided to believe that the media are talking to you then you will be able to find patterns & codes within advertising which logically prove this. You just have to make the first jump & the rest is totally understandable/logical.

M. A caption in 'Vermillion Vortex' tells us this is a story about people "without class". Is that a good thing or a bad thing?
JR: It's neither. It's a condition. Or a fact. Or a claim. Or a performance. But I guess it's a condition people disapprove of generally. It's seen as being in the wrong position. Cash rich without the necessary markings and affectations of class (cultural capital). That's why people send their children to private/public school.

M. Beside material success, what has brought about the hegemonic displacement of Tony & Jane?
JR: That's all … money.

M. We are told they are cash rich but info poor, what info might have saved them from the apocalyptic ending?
JR: Nothing. No information. They have no connection or control over the ending. The logic of the ending exists outside of the logic of the situation in which Tony & Jane are living. It's an event. It just happens. Like a revolution. This can only be made to have chronological or historical sense posthumously. The story is about something which 'just happens'.

M. The film appears to be about damnation, but as you say also about revolution. How do the two connect?
JR: As with revolution (above) damnation is always a positive thing for one set of people. I included a quote in the film from Thomas Aquinas: "The blessed in the kingdom of heaven will see the punishments of the damned, in order that their bliss be more delightful for them."

M. Are we all insects drenched in Christ's blood, or were those quite specific insects in your last show?
JR: The insects will be the people who form the revolution.

M. The film evolved from a written text. Can you tell us something about the writing process?
JR: My initial idea, was a story I thought of ages ago – the idea of a reverse werewolf. Rather than a man who turns into a dog who does 'bad' things, there's a dog who turns into a 'man' and does bad things. I thought this had various interesting cinematic potentials. But then I became interested in this idea of The End.

M. The project has since become an installation and a book. Are there further possibilities?
JR: I'd like to do a live version of the film. I envision it as a prog rock spectacle - 'War of the Worlds' meets 'The Wall' meets 'Godspell' without the budget. But it means getting about five people together, two of whom (Rose Kallal & Mark Beasley, who did the soundtrack) live in New York. It nearly happened actually at the ICA in London in May. But then they got their budget slashed.

M. Vermillion Vortex is told through more or less still images. What advantages do they have over full speed animation or moving image?
JR: In fact, most feature films (live action or animation) are constructed from a series of set piece images, through a series of episodes or scenes which are themselves broken down into a series of images. For instance, cuts between close ups of faces during a conversation, establishing shots, etc. The movement in these scenes is largely non-essential & primarily required to continue the illusion of reality. Films like 'Le jettée' – composed of a succession of still photos – or Manga films use of static imagery. In both these examples the narrative in the films proceeds as seductively and unproblematically as any other film. You forget you are looking at still images. I was also interested in the idea of a still – within the context of a moving film – as something that is suggestive of movement.

Vermillion Vortex can be viewed on Vimeo

John-Russell.org

Words: Mark Sheerin