Banned album covers - Forever Delayed

malmessi · #1 04-09-2014, 10:52

"Corriere della sera" website (the most important italian newspaper) posted an article about the most famous banned/censored album covers in music history...

http://www.corriere.it/foto-gallery/...63c6635c.shtml

Go to slide 16/17 !!!! The manics !!!!!!!!

malmessi · #2 04-09-2014, 10:53

PS1
You can also scroll back to reach 16/17 faster

PS2 (translation)
The cover of "Journal for Plague Lovers', Manic Street Preachers (Welsh alternative rock band) was instead boycotted by some brands for distribution in the UK who saw the bloodied face of boy image too strong and violent. The cover (shockingly touching) was edited by Jenny Saville

Dac X Lee · #3 05-09-2014, 01:02

I didn't find Faster. O_o

Anyway, yeah, an interesting article. Surprised Crass weren't mentioned though. I can't give an example of a censorable cover of them, but the band itself kinda had a lot of stuff the mass media would want to be hidden from the eyes and ears of the public.

malmessi · #4 05-09-2014, 06:05

or F.U.C.K (V.Halen)
For Unlawful Carnal Knowledge
Pic in the cover was nothing, but the title itself.....

Dac X Lee · #5 05-09-2014, 06:53

Well, the article is about covers the actually WERE censored, not the ones that COULD be afterall. And I was surprised Crass weren't censored. But that doesn't mean there aren't covers that are so censored that they didn't even get a mention in that article.

Returning to the Manics, they did censore themselves right since Generation Terrorists by replacing their Piss Christ idea with Richey's tatoo.

Geranium Terrorists · #6 08-09-2014, 18:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dac X Lee

Returning to the Manics, they did censore themselves right since Generation Terrorists by replacing their Piss Christ idea with Richey's tatoo.

I believe it was more that they could't afford to use it. Though the label probably didn't like it either.

Dac X Lee · #7 09-09-2014, 01:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by Geranium Terrorists

I believe it was more that they could't afford to use it. Though the label probably didn't like it either.

Yeah, maybe, but I think I read somewhere they thought it was a little too much or something simmilar, I really don't remember now. However, on Wikipedia it says the following (with the slight warning that a citation is needed):

Quote:

The cover was originally intended to be Andres Serrano's Pisschrist,[citation needed] a Jesus figure inside a tank of blood and urine, but Sony wanted to avoid any religious controversy; also, the royalty demanded for the piece was deemed excessive.[citation needed]

If that's it, then you might be right in the sense they couldn't afford it (not in terms of money, though) and I would be right that it's about censoreship (not the case where the author censores themselves, though). So we'd both be partially right.