3 ms·
Might be a regional thing. I suppose in Europe, the nudity could denote innocence, but in the US, my immediate takeaway of a nude prepubescent child on the cove
by AdmiralAsshat 6y ago
Might be a regional thing. I suppose in Europe, the nudity could denote innocence, but in the US, my immediate takeaway of a nude prepubescent child on the cover of an album called "Virgin Killer" would suggest that she was a victim of sexual violence before being murdered (particularly since the broken glass is right over the genitalia). So I'd probably argue it's simply in poor taste.
- ce4 6y agoIt's bad taste especially that it was used as a means to drive controversy and the song was basically constructed around the title also. But it is not about killing, instead one of the band members stated that "Virgin Killer is none other than the demon of our time, the less compassionate side of the societies we live in today—brutally trampling upon the heart and soul of innocence." [0]. Apparently the Band regrets it today and there's more background info and apparently there was a big Wikipedia shitstorm in 2008 about removing the artwork or not which led to some sort of edit ban in the UK [1]. [0]: https://web.archive.org/web/20100509235302/http://www.roadrunnerrecords.com/blabbermouth.net/news.aspx?mode=Article&newsitemID=50508 https://web.archive.org/web/20100509235302/http://www.roadru... [1]: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virgin_Killer#Artwork https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virgin_Killer#Artwork
- AdmiralAsshat 6y agoAs I said, though, there were any number of other ways you could have visually portrayed childhood innocence. The same model wearing early-childhood styled clothing, or barefoot with a flower garland around her head, would have conveyed the same message. The band was either naive or willfully blind to the use of nudity purely to be "edgy".