The Lizard Meets Mark Wilkinson
Author: The Lizard
First published: January 2001
Mark Wilkinson and Fish are about to publish a book, Masque,
that runs through their relationship from the early days with Market Square Heroes right
up to Fellini Days. It includes a set of questions from the fans, as well as trying to
address all the issues that everyone wanted to know. So, the Lizard went to see the artist
currently known as Mark Wilkinson, and tried to ask questions that nobody else would have
asked. Not much of a challenge, you might think, based on the Lizards past history,
but lets see what happened.
I had a sense of needing to start at the beginning, so opened with a
subject covered in the book, namely how the relationship with Fish started? Mark repeated
the story of meeting Joe Morowsky of Torchlight, and getting the deal, which he stressed is all
covered in the book. As he says, I wasnt a big fan to begin with, which I
think is well known, but there was something there. I remember Joe Morowsky in the
audience, and he said to me Theyre going to be huge, and I said Really?
Ive got my doubts. But, three albums along the line, they were huge, so he was
right and I was wrong.
Mark became synonymous with Marillion, and then with Fish. I asked
how he saw the artwork fitting into the whole experience, and commented on
buying Misplaced Childhood, and sitting on the bus home, reading the lyrics and scanning
the cover to see what bits I could spot. I asked about the linkage between the covers and
the lyrics and whether he was aware of that integral nature of his artwork?
No, I wasnt, not at the time. Difficult one to answer! I
suppose I knew where Fishs lineage was Yes, Roger Dean, all that. And I was
quite surprised to get the gig, to be honest, because I thought that was the kind of thing
that a band like them would have gone for. And I dont think I do that kind of work
at all, never have. Although Im loosely described as a fantasy artist, its
much more realistic than the Roger Dean, Rodney Matthews type of thing. And Fishs
stories, and his briefs, for the album sleeves, were always routed in reality they
werent ethereal as such. There was always a strong underlying story of relationships
and childhood angst, trauma . So I suppose he wanted that reality that I could provide in
paintings, but which a surreal edge to it, and I guess I was right for that.
I think Joe Morowsky showed them three or four different
artists work and they were your typical science fiction artist, you know, much more
rooted in that kind of fantasy / spaceship type of thing. Which Ive done, not that
well I have to say, but possibly they saw something there that fitted that real / surreal
concept that theyve always had running through their albums and Fishs albums.
Although theyre sort of weird images, theres still a very recognisable person
there. Theres always a face behind The Masque, if you like! That was good, wasnt
it. Ive got to remember that.
I commented that the artwork is a crossbreed. There are the fantasy
elements the jester motif etc., but then theres a dark side to it. On Script
they introduced the jester motif, and then on Fugazi theres the jester again, but
out of his head. Its almost like he decided to accept the heritage of that sort of
artwork, but to put that twist on it. Was that deliberate, did that come out of Fishs
fairly dark lyrical themes?
Yeah, that was very conscious, Im sure, on Fishs
part, to want to do that. I wouldnt have been very interested in painting those
pictures anyway thats not what I do. Although obviously Fish art directs me
and gives me the briefs, its my interpretation as well. I dont know where all
the symbolism came about. Ive always been very keen on the Flemish painters and
neo-realists the fantasy art movements going back a few years! Im not that
huge a fan of fantasy art on album sleeves, as such I bought Roger Deans
Views like everyone else did, but I was never a huge fan. I used to like Alan Aldridge and
Harry Willock who did all the Beatles stuff , and Michael English, and people like that.
But I also used to like people like Neon Park, who did all the Little Feat covers and some
of the Mothers of Invention stuff. Stuff with a little bit of a twist to it. I didnt
really like the stuff that was just pretty for its own sake.
Its very interesting this line of questioning, because I
dont think anyone has ever asked that before, and its certainly not in the
book! Why we did try and make it dark, and why we did
try and put the symbols? I mean its in the book that the symbols are there, and
where the symbols are derived from, but why we did it? I dont really know. Its
probably because you dont want to lay yourself bare you want to hide it a
bit, you want to not be that direct, and I think its the same with the lyrics.
Superficially theres a song called Script for a Jesters Tear, but its
not really a song about a jester, its about someone that perceives themselves to be
the jester, and this is just a graphic way of portraying that. And yeah, its very
dark, and I think its very rooted more in reality than some of the other people that
weve been talking about."
To a degree, many of the songs are collages of ideas and there is the
same collage of ideas within the cover. Was that tricky, because theres almost a
checklist of elements: jester, poppy, magpie, wedding ring, etc..
To begin with. Certainly Script was pretty much made to order -
there was
a list! I put pretty much everything that was on Fishs list in that one, apart from
the rubber plant. I forgot that, for some reason. And I put one or two things in there of
my own, like Mr Punch on the TV. I dont know why I did that. I thought Id
spurred Fish on to write Punch and Judy, but apparently he wrote that before, so that was
just an amazing coincidence. But yeah, there was a checklist of things. As we went on, I
stood my ground a bit more and said Fish, that wont work or Thatll
look ridiculous and What about trying it this way, but Script was pretty
much a checklist of things he wanted the bedsit, the mattress on the floor, the
pre-Raphaelite painting over the mantelpiece, the fireplace. It just so happened that I
lived in a bedsit with a fireplace and I had a seedy mattress, so that lived-in room was
mine. It really was.
I think it got more symbolic as we went on. Script if you
take the jesters uniform off, that could just be a pretty realistic picture of some
guy playing a violin in a room. Obviously the chameleon makes it a little bit weird
I mean theres not a lot of fiddle players with a chameleon! But Fugazi was a lot
more symbolic, I think, and Misplaced Childhood that was far more symbolic. The
whole business of the rainbow, dark to light, the four magpies, which you had to know was
one for sorrow, two for joy, three for a birth, four for a boy or something. I
cant remember! Three for a girl, I suggested. Thats it, three for
a girl. So that was a lot more symbolic. I mean the whole business with the chameleon
being in the cage, and the magpie. Ive just been reading some of the final copies of
the book, just to reacquaint myself with some of the answers that I should give you,
Mark laughed.
Rather conveniently for another article in this very issue of ROBW,
Mark continued; Misplaced Childhood has very strong references to almost a
misogynist view of life. His wariness of women comes out a lot and that whole business of
the she chameleon being in the cage and the magpie holding the key, flying off for
freedom. You know, all of that is very symbolic of that, but I dont really know
there certainly wasnt a checklist with Misplaced Childhood. That was a
meeting with the band, and Fish, and they werent so sure of exactly what they
wanted. It was just that its called Misplaced Childhood, we ought to have a boy, and
Fish was very keen that it should be a drummer boy, because of the tin soldier connection
with childhood. And that was pretty much it. It wasnt can he be standing in a
room with a rainbow that all came from me. As I sent him sketches, he would
say Yeah I like that and What about adding this, so it was a real
mixture of ideas from that point on, but I think the first two were definitely a sort of
checklist. Am I rambling a bit here, or does that answer it.
It did, and it also led into another question. When Mark first
started working with Fish they were both young and fairly wet behind the ears, but as
things went on and they got to know each other better, how much did the creative process
change? Theres no recipe, if that is what you are implying. Its
different for every album, it really is. I mean, theres some projects (Fish the solo
years now), where he has a very clear idea. On Vigil he had a very acutely clear idea of
what he wanted, and that goes back to the checklist, which again is covered in the book.
Its quite interesting, because theres three chapters on Vigil. It was such a
pivotal album and it comes pretty much in the centre of the whole story, so we devoted
three chapters to it. The first one is, ironically, the last conversation that we taped
when it was supposed to be the next Marillion album. Its very interesting to
contrast that with the next conversation, which is the third part the middle part
is a step-by-step how I did it kind of thing. The third part was recorded ten
years afterwards. Its very interesting because we both looked back on what was the
initial brief and its two very different people Fish the solo Fish, and Fish
the Marillion Fish. That was supposed to be the next big album after Clutching. You know,
the whole meeting with Bob Ezrin, the American producer that was going to give them a leg
up to the next stage of conquering America, or whatever the whole corporate thing.
Nobody really knew where they were going. I dont think the band knew, I dont
think the management knew and I dont think the engineer, or the producer
Nobody knew where to take them. They were floating. They were ripe to go onto that next
stage and Vigil really does describe the attitude that Fish had to all that at the time.
And then the third part, the conversation ten years afterwards, its very interesting
his reaction to all this. What was the question again?
Even I couldnt remember, but I assumed he had probably answered
it somewhere in there. And anyway, I wanted to stay with Vigil, because it started as a
Marillion album, and then became a Fish album. The artwork obviously changed
No,
not really. It was pretty much set in stone. So Mark Kelly was always going to be at
the bottom of the hill, and Rothers Porsche was always in there?
Youve found me out. I have to say, for the record, and
this is the honest truth, that was my idea. It certainly wasnt anything
to do with Fish. I think it would probably discussed in a joke sort of way by Fish and me,
talking about the whole concept of whos at the top of the hill and whos at the
bottom. I can just imagine a little jokey reference in there lets put them at
the bottom of the hill. It probably came out of a drunken talk one night, but it certainly
wasnt a serious intention on Fishs part. When the artwork was delivered to
EMI, they were extremely worried about it. I think Fish missed it. I remember showing him
the artwork, which was a massive piece of work, a massive painting. He loved it, and he
scanned it, very quickly and he took the whole thing in, but he didnt go into
details. Because theres a lot of detail in that picture.
Ironically, that was the first album out of the whole Marillion /
Fish catalogue that I bought on CD as opposed to on vinyl. So you missed the whole
thing., Mark said. Everyone always asks cover artists about the problem of the
smaller space on CDs, but that is heavily discussed in the book, so we
discussed how the designs themselves have become simpler over the years, less cluttered.
Yeah. I think also a correlation can be drawn with Fishs lyrics. I might be
going out on a limb here, but I think his lyrics were
whats another word for
cluttered
involved. Hes trying to say too much. That, for me, was Fish in the
early years, trying to say too much with too many words. I think hes learnt as hes
gone on, as I have, as everybody does. I mean you try and get it all out, dont you.
When you first start in whichever artistic endeavour you wish to make, its bleurgh
the whole lot comes out. You think its the best thing youve ever done,
so you want to get everything in there. You want to cram that bag with as much stuff as
you can. Sometimes you can say a lot more with a lot less and I think Fish has learnt that
in his lyric writing and I think Ive learnt that with the pictures, as weve
gone on.
As well as Vigil being a pivotal point, it was originally when the
book was going to come out. Yeah that would have been the last chapter. It
would have been a much shorter book. But why didnt it come out then, and why
such a long time coming? The answer was very simple Because Fish left the
fucking band, thats why! Mark went on to tell the story in more detail:
We had two publishers that were going to go with it; Sidgwick
and Jackson (that published MSH) and Hamlyn Books both wanted it. It wasnt exactly a
bidding war were not talking Harry Potter here but they were both very
interested. And as soon as he left the band, they both withdrew. They didnt see the
market would still be there for this book, in such a way. They were nervous anyway,
because Hamlyn had released a book on U2, who were just about the biggest rock band of the
day, and it hadnt been successful, because you cant necessarily relate album
sales to book sales. 20,000 copies of an album is a relative failure, but thats
pretty good sales for a book. In fact thats very good sales for a book of this
nature, and they didnt sell anything like that. But we thought there was something a
little bit unique here with all the covers and the designs. Alright, Yes and Roger Dean,
etc. but there arent that many bands that have had this sort of relationship.
Anyway, they said no were just not interested.
We hawked it around and showed it to Dragons World,
ironically, and they were interested for a while. We took it a few stages further and got
mock-ups, but it takes a long time to put a book like this together and by the time we got
all the material ready, I think in the publishing world their star had been seen to wane a
little bit. On both sides Marillion and Fish. So they werent interested
either and it was dead in the water for years. But to a certain extent does it make
more sense to bring it out now? In terms of material, yeah.
A lot has been said about Marks move from airbrush to computer,
and he explained. Its easier, its quicker, you can get your ideas on
paper, or screen, a lot more effectively and its not one at the expense of the
other. If you look at the book [cover], that is a real mixture. All the figures are
airbrushed and all the background is done digitally. The foreground of the background, if
that makes sense, is actually an old, disused car breakers yard. Ive just
taken bits and pieces and collaged them together and coloured them up on screen. And the
background, the flames have all been collaged in there. But I hope it makes a seamless
picture, so that you cant tell where one technique ends or begins. That is what
interests me about computer-based art. I like what computers can do to texture, for
instance. With the foreground of this book, you can add texture, you can make it look as
though its been painted. Theres programs (Painter) where you can mimic oil
painting very effectively and you also use the airbrush facility. It is exactly the same
as using an airbrush: you build up layers of colour very, very gradually, because you can
turn down the opacity of what you are spraying to 10%. You can put a very minute amount
of, say, green over a blue, and get a sort of aqua colour, and thats exactly the
same as using an airbrush.
I know that theres a lot of people out there that
seemingly prefer the airbrush style because they think its more human, perhaps. But
the middle section of the Vigil chapter is a step-by-step and you can see what a
painstaking technique it is. In the old days, when the record companies had the money, you
could afford to spend months on a record sleeve. You cant do that any more. I mean
theres not many bands that have got that sort of money. But even if they have
Ive been working for Iron Maiden and they have got the money I would still prefer
to work with a computer, because the effects are that much more instant. I do say this in
the book, but it is very true of any artist I think the most important part of
doing a picture is what you see in your head. What you see on the paper is always a
disappointment, because it is never as effective. And Im sure thats the same
for a poet, or an author, or whatever. Its the idea in your head that is perfect. It
should be irrelevant whether you do it with collage or you paint it with oils or you do it
with an airbrush or you do it with a computer. Its the idea in your head, not how
you get it on paper: its the finished result, the look of the picture. But for the
artist, how you do it is not important, I dont think.
I compared this comment with those of Storm Thorgerson, who shuns
computers, preferring to set covers up and actually photograph them. Take Momentary Lapse
of Reason as an example it must have been tempting to say hang on, theyre
beds, theyre identical! Take a picture of a bed, a picture of the beach, put The Bed
on The Beach over and over again and nobody would know.
He did the same thing with Elegy by The Nice. He flew to the
Sahara with a photographer and film crew and everything, and put all those red balls on
the dunes, and that picture was exactly how it appears in real life. My answer to your
question would be that Ive met Storm, hes a nice guy, but I think thats
bullshit really. If youve got the money behind you to do that, wonderful. I would
love to have set up a scene for the cover of Masque and had all the models dress up, make
up people, got three jets to fly by at exactly the right moment Id love to do
that, of course I would. That would be all part of the artistic dream, wouldnt it?
But in reality, how many people could afford to that? Luckily he can.
To people reading this, Mark is intrinsically linked with Fish, but
he has worked with many other people. Iron Maiden we already mentioned, and Mark pointed
out he was currently working with Judas Priest. So how differently does he work with
different people? Fish gives him a lot of ideas, and they know each other very well, but
what approach does he take when he is given an open brief?
Well, its very different for somebody like Iron Maiden
basically you are dealing with a franchise. Youve got to deal with Eddie, and
I think poor old Derek Riggs, he just had enough! I dont really know why Derek didnt
work on the last three singles. I think he was just exhausted with the theme and sometimes
it takes somebody new to bring a new sort of insight onto the whole thing. I dont
know that sounds a bit grandiose for old Eddie. With Iron Maiden it was a case of
the Wickerman, which was supposed to be the album sleeve, not the single. I was very
disappointed that it ended up as a single, and that was all down to problems on the
Internet. Apparently somebody leaked the title and the band were extremely upset, because
theres a lot of secrecy around that band and what they do. So they said right, were
going to change it and were not going to tell you what the albums called. Of
course, meanwhile Id done the album sleeve and been paid for it as an album sleeve.
So I was happy from that point of view, but it was a shame that it came out just as a
single sleeve. Anyway, the Wickerman was quite easy in terms of the brief. It wasnt
easy to do, but the brief on that was the Wickerman movie, 1973, Christopher Lee, burning
effigy. They didnt really know if Eddie should be inside the Wickerman tearing out
or whether he should be the Wickerman himself. So I had to try different ideas and that
again was a mixture of illustration and photography and touching it up on the computer.
This took us back to the issue of budgets again, and his earlier
comment about Pink Floyd. Id just love to work for Pink Floyd. They were THE
band for me and, I say this in the book, I was fan club member number 425. I was there
right at the beginning. I caught them at Alexandra Palace when Syd Barrett was in the band
and they were just so unique. I dont care what anybody says, I think from start to
finish they were completely different. And that for me was the perfect relationship
Hipgnosis and Pink Floyd. Im not a huge fan of Hipgnosiss other stuff, but for
Pink Floyd they were perfect. And I dont buy that from Storm Thorgerson. I mean Ive
got that book, about the Pink Floyd stuff [Mind Over Matter]. You cant tell me that
tree, for instance, thats in the shape of somebodys head
Storm did not
get Edward Scissorhands to cut the exact shape. I dont buy that, and I do not buy
that with the naked figures coming out of the water, with the spiralling water. Nah, come
on Storm, youre being a bit disingenuous there you got that done by computer.
But I understand what he means, or I imagine this is what he means there is that
perception by the public that if you use a computer youre cheating. I think they
think that theres a Surreal button on the computer that you just press.
I had this when I was at art college, using the airbrush. For
all you purists out there, the airbrush was considered to be anathema that wasnt
real art. For Gods sake, you dont even touch the paper! Its got to be
the artists idea in his brain, it transfers to his hand, you touch the paper with
the paint dripping off the paintbrush. For Christs sake, youre using an
airbrush and youre getting an instant
For all the artists out there, its
bloody hard to get that effect , because you have to use a fan brush and all the rest of
it to get that gentle fade from one colour into another, then you have to wait for the
paint to dry, you know it takes weeks. An artist like Patrick Woodruff, for instance, who
did stuff for Pallas, could never take his paintings into the record company because they
were always wet! So they were photographed and he took the photograph in. Then, about five
weeks later, the painting finally dried. Theres a lot of weird perceptions out there
about what is real art and what isnt, but when I was at art college I wheeled out
the compressor for the airbrush and everyone groaned. I was at college when punk was very
big and it was all collage and quick stuff and people like Jamie Read, they were the
heroes of the day. And there I was and they said Oh youre going to do Mott the
Hoople covers are you.
So who would Mark have liked to do stuff for that he
hasnt? Apart from Pink Floyd
Oh God I havent really thought about
it. It is a good question, and I was asked something like it at the convention a few weeks
ago. I said Radiohead, purely off the top of my head, because I do like Radiohead.
But Thom Yorke does his own covers. Yeah, Im not very keen on their covers.
The question then
was which covers, of bands you like, do you not like and you wish you could do. And I said
Radiohead, because I dont like their covers very much, but I love their music. To
answer the question, though, Id like to do Wire. I used to go to college with Colin
Newman and he started off being a Todd Rundgren fan. Overnight he threw his greatcoat
away, cut his hair and suddenly he was spitting everywhere, and was down the Vortex
pogoing, and I thought Good God. But I think they turned into an amazing band
very, very influential and Id love to work for a band like that. But it
certainly wouldnt have been anything like the stuff I did for Marillion.
Coming back to Marillion, Mark must have his own favourite cover
what is it? Well, in the book I say Script, because it was the first and I
didnt like it at the time. I dont really like any of my stuff at the time.
Theres nothing Ive done I think, apart from one - the Chocolate Frogs thing
for Raingods as soon as Id done that I really liked it. I put it up on the
wall and to this day thats the only thing of mine Ive got up on my wall at
home. It really means something to me, that picture. But anyway, Vigil, I think - the
hill, rather than the front cover picture. Again, I didnt like it that much to begin
with. I appreciated the amount of work that had gone into it, but it grew on me by
stealth, because it took so long to do. I can only see the mistakes, thats the
problem, especially with the airbrush years. Script is far enough back now for me to
forget about the mistakes - I look at it and
its not me thats done it, in a way. Vigil I can remember so well because it
took so long to do six months I think, solid work on that, which is ludicrous. If I
was doing that now, Id use a computer, and it would probably be six weeks, probably
less.
Its well-known that Mark wasnt happy with the cover of
Clutching, because of the rush to finish it. Its terrible. Back covers
not so bad, but the front covers awful. I hate that one. I think the concept is
great the original concept from Fish was to have all these writers and musicians
colliding with the walls and each other in this bar. Its like the great bar in
heaven, where Jim Morrison is chatting with Tony Hancock, bizarre as that may seem, and
wouldnt that be a great place to be. And nothing like that is conveyed by that cover, at
all. And this whole thing about the patron saint of drinkers being at the end of the bar,
actually I think that was my idea. I just grafted it on at the end because I just said
that there was something that was missing. The timing got ludicrously slashed that
was down to, I think, having to have a simultaneous release in America as well as Britain.
Again, that was this whole thing that was going on at the time where do we take this
band now? This is EMI weve got them so far, now they need this big push for
America. I dont know if they ever would have worked in America. That wasnt the
album to do it with, though, because of the subject matter. Everyone was very nervous
about the subject matter on that. Nobody really knew how to market that album, certainly
not EMI. And as far as the picture is concerned, they look like four, five, six figures
stuck on a photograph. I could do a much better job with it now. If he had the
computer technology available today, he means? Well, the technology existed then,
but it was hideously expensive, prohibitively expensive. Pink Floyd could afford it
Whereas now you buy a Mac, hook it up and off you go? Yeah.
Yeah, thats right. So before you know it, well all be doing album
covers? I was rather surprised when Mark agreed: Yeah I think thats the
way that people think its going to go, unfortunately. Well all be downloading
stuff from the web, and well all have our blank CD cases, which will probably only
be two inches square, and well do our own pictures. That is the way it is going to
go, Im sure. So youre talking to a dinosaur.
Dinosaur he may be, but a nice bloke nonetheless, and quite a
talented chap. He never did tell me who the five people on the front of Thieving Magpie
were, though.