The US has a pretty strict policy on the 'decency' of album covers compared to most other countries. Have you ever seen an album cover and wondered how the hell it got pressed?
I think it's funny how even though it's a illustration, bare boobs are not tolerated, yet this is perfectly fine:
"Tomb of the Mutilated - Cannibal Corpse"
http://img835.imageshack.us/img835/669/folderuc.jpg
I remember browsing through the CDs at FYE one day when I first saw this, I couldn't believe it. I happen to like this kind of thing, but I was just very surprised. I'd seen Butchered at Birth, but this just seemed like it crossed the line.
I know there are much worse album covers that are on obscure labels that big distributors don't carry, but I'm talking about an album you can walk in and buy at something like Best Buy.
Difference is that this is pretty much art. It is a drawing, and being extreme metal anything extreme and shocking goes. Thats the point. Though I do have limits, when the cover crosses the line of being artistic shocking and creepy drawing to being just attention seekingly disgusting, I object. Just look at the album covers of Disgorge. This isnt a comment about their music though, just the idea behind the covers.
Wait... you can buy Cannibal Corpse at best buy!?
*edit* Misunderstood the thread. Yes, dual moralism (sort off) is quite common in the US culture. Blood and violence are OK, tits are not. But that doesnt explain how albums with covers like that, which has both blood and tits, can be bought from massmarkets? Unless of course its the artistic drawing aspect that makes it allright?
Edited by MaZa - 10/8/10 at 10:55am
