Under the Covers
Under The Covers: Britney

By: Todd Burns

Posted 02/01/2005 - 01:09:21 AM by theokcomputer:
 Where is the Greatest Hits cover? I would like to read an analysis of that very strange image.
Posted 02/01/2005 - 09:35:07 AM by :
 I chose to ignore it because it isn't a studio album.
Posted 02/01/2005 - 12:20:40 PM by janinedm:
 But if you're only dealing with visual presentations of the artist, it's relevant... no?
Posted 02/01/2005 - 03:14:36 PM by :
 There are an incredible number of singles, bonus tracks, and foreign versions of album covers as well. I chose to draw the line at studio albums.

Is it relevant? Yes.
Posted 02/01/2005 - 11:21:52 PM by rsablosky:
 Not sure what you mean by 'ingĂ©nue' in your comments on the first album. The composition is totally structured around that black triangle between Britney's thighs. It absolutely begs us to look up her skirt. If there is any innovation in this design, it has to do with the unprecedented shamelessness of promoting 99.44% pure pornography AS IF no one will notice so it doesn't matter. Don't get me wrong. I am not opposed to pornography, not at all. But I am very much opposed to slimy exploitation masquerading as children's entertainment. Britney is the perfect pop icon for the Reagan/Bush era, where you can say anything you want to and none of it ever has to be true and you can still charge people a million dollars to listen.
Posted 02/02/2005 - 01:29:07 AM by portnoy:
 This is a great concept for a column, but perhaps someone who actually understands semiotics and has interesting things to say should write it.
Posted 02/02/2005 - 03:43:58 PM by Snorfle:
 I just think she looks like shes waiting in line for the bathroom on cover #3
Posted 03/17/2005 - 04:53:12 AM by unsaunsa:
 Good on you Todd. Draw the line at studio albums. An LP is an artists vision at a point of time and is a whole. Greatest Hits albums are not and as such are not worthy of comment. In fact they are a cancer that need to be cut out.