Joe Jackson: Look Sharp
Posted by Ash on 2 October, 2007
| |
 |
My knowledge of Joe Jacksons music doesn’t go further than having “Is she really going out with him” in my 80’s mix. Which shows how much I know, as the song was released in 1979.
The cover photo — a dramatic study of Joe Jackson’s shoes — was a happy accident. “I think we just wanted a photo of my Denson’s shoes,” says Jackson, “because I’d just bought them the day before. Brian Griffin took maybe one or two shots of them as part of an entire day spent doing more typical portrait shots.” One of those portraits — with Jackson punkishly pointing a finger at the camera — was used for the album’s back cover. “The shoe shot certainly wasn’t planned or intended to become the cover,” says Jackson, “but when we saw the contact prints, everyone liked the image.”
So what became of the shoes? “The art director borrowed them for marketing purposes,” says Jackson, “and I never did get them back.” In the name of investigative journalism, Rolling Stone has located the shoes — size 8 — in the office of Paulette Rapp, executive assistant to label chairman Jerry Moss. Source: SuperSeventies.com.
The image of Joe Jackson’s shoes was also reused multiple times for other singles which already had their own artwork. I’m not sure why as artwork was already created for these singles.
A&M Records also made these fancy metal pins. Not many other album covers would translate well to a pin.
There’s little info on the art director Michael Ross however the photographer Brian Griffin seems to still be active behind the camera.
Note: it’s “Brian Griffin” the photographer not “Brian Griffin” the dog from Family Guy.
Joe Jackson is also still kicking it in the recording studio with a new album due out in Jan 2008. He also seems to be really hung up on ANTI-smokers. Check this diatribe on his site. Sounds like a holocaust denier.
Is it just me or does he look like the boss villain from a vampire film?
Joe Jackson: Look Sharp
Pete:
I agree with the comment about his looks but you can’t go from being anti-anti smoking to holocaust denial. That is ad hominem.
Pete (who remembers buying that album)
# 09 Nov 07 at 3:52 am
Ash:
hey Pete
i think I did go a little overboard with the denial statement. But I couldn’t think of a better example?
Suggestions?
# 09 Nov 07 at 2:08 pm
Pete Best:
I love Joe’s first half-dozen albums. One day in the early 90’s I was working in a record store in the French Quarter in New Orleans. Joe Jackson bought a used vinyl copy of his Big World album (also cool artwork)from me. I tried to engage him in a converation, but he was a dick. Oh, well.
# 15 Nov 07 at 11:37 am
Bob Campbell:
Not too sure if I buy into it 100%, but there is some really good evidence that none of the ’second-hand smoke’ studies are really conclusive. Everyone agrees that primary smoking is deadly to the smoker now, but the evidence seems inconclusive still on second-hand smoke.
I’ll not be putting that to the test anytime soon, but I guess if there is a lack of hard evidence then people should tone down their arguments. Science only works when you accept all the evidence, not just the stuff that supoorts your specific argument.
# 27 Dec 07 at 6:31 am
Ash:
Hey Bob Campbell,
ask a waitress or a dealer at a casino before they banned smoking if second hand smoke is a killer. Being next to a smoker at a restaurant ruins your meal but wont kill you. But being around them constantly in your place of work is a a real fucker.
I like to imagine it as farting in someones face. Thats the equivalent of blowing smoke if someone’s face. Farting next to someone eating is pretty bad too. Sadly you can’t see a fart :)
Thats my rant anyway
# 27 Dec 07 at 8:28 pm
Down10:
I, for one, feel the “holocaust denier” view is apt. The zealous rant of Jackson’s (and it *is* a rant, because he’s pleading from a moral low point) jumps around various defensive statements and citations of obscure studies, but they all circle back to the position that “they” (the anti-smokers/Jews) are simply out to get “us” (the smoking advocates/holocaust deniers). I can understand his frustration, but the more he throws around figures and bemoans our lost civil liberties, the deeper he digs what I see as a losing argument: placing personal destructive behaviors ahead of public health. …Maybe it’s a bit closer to defender of the public’s right to own assault rifles.
It’s a shame, too, because his first batch of albums are really, really great and I highly recommend them.
# 28 Dec 07 at 7:21 pm