The Smiley Smile Message Board

When I was a kid, and used to play my brothers copy of the "white album" I used to have a desire to make my own cover art on it.  I never did because my brother would have killed me, and I never actually owned a copy of the vinyl myself.  I have always kept a look out though for old/used copies where someone may have done this.  Never found one though.   It kind of amazes me what with all the artists out there - no one has done this?  I always thought, it's almost like what the Beatles were saying was, "Here's a complete album jacket with all this white space - go and make your own album cover!"   I'm not saying this was actually part of anything they had in mind, and in fact not one of them ever said or indicated anything in this regard (least to my knowledge) - but still, you look at all that white space and...well, you could paint a cover, do a collage, pen and ink, sharpie drawings, a water color....
So anyone else ever thought this?  Anyone ever do it?  Know of anyone who has? 
and if this is a crappy topic, sorry, I thought of putting it in the thread for insignificant topics, but wasn't sure.  So if mods wanna move this or  REmove this  :p  I won't take offense.  Especially since, I know, it has to do with those crummy Beatles!   :lol   
I just started thinking about this idea again and it's been zooming round my head ever since like a gnat!  :)

..... You know, I never thought of it that way. There's a book deal in that for you if you can swing it...  :lol

I'd love a book like that, and if I was the author - well all the better  ;)
I was thinking about the poster and pictures included with the album - one could cut those up and use them to make a collage on the cover and inside, or if they wanted to keep them they could make photo copies of them and use that, or just do something else......I really dig the idea actually, would love to be an art teacher and have enough money to buy my 20 to 30 (or more) students all copies of the album on vinyl and assign this as a project.    It would be preferable too if it were the original "The BEATLES" embossed in white on the cover.  

http://stores.thebeatlesbutchershop.com/~stores/426900_preview.jpg

I have seen this actually, and it's good as an alternate cover idea, but what I'm talking about is literally using the physical album cover as the canvas, which I don't think this one does.

Could be a cool promotion they could do for their 50th.  Make it a contest to raise money for funding for the arts or something.  
Of course this wouldn't be to usurped the original austere cover (which is as iconic as any of their other album covers).

Well the "White Album" originally was to feature a beautiful full color illustration by John Byrne featuring all four Beatles (with Yoko Ono in the inset) surrounded by an array of wild animals from pumas to rabbits to butterflies.  The artwork was later used for the 1980 compilation entitled "The Beatles Ballads".  There is some thought that the Byrne illustration was designed with the original title for the album ("A Doll's House") in mind.

(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3103/2893978982_fb8f4c5011_o.jpg)

Also scrapped was this interesting cover which seemed to draw it's inspiration from Mt. Rushmore with perhaps a twist of the "Yellow Submarine" concept thrown in for good measure?:

(http://rememberwhen.gazettelive.co.uk/white%20album%20blog.jpg)

Wow! This would've been way cooler

No way, those are horrible. They really made the right decision....

One of the record shops in Brighton has a sh*t-ton of Beatles albums that are essentially worthless because they're old rough copies and there are so many of them - they must have 20+ copies of The White Album alone. I'm getting an idea....

Do it!  Do it!!!    :-D

I agree the plain white jacket was the right decision but the second album cover I posted is pretty neat and I wish it would've been used for something.  Honestly because it was The Beatles if they had used it we'd probably be talking about "The Four Faces On Rushmore"album cover  the same way we talk about the four Beatles crossing Abbey Road today.  If they had used that second one I have no doubt it would have become an iconic album cover.

Yes, the second one is good but they look like 1967 Beatles and it would be hard for me to reconcile that.

I like the first one actually (John Byrne?).    I remember seeing that as the cover for the Beatle Ballads album, which I never purchased.   Good cover though. 

The cover is  a horrible cop-out and as pretentious as some of the music found within.

No.

Yes, no.

Pretentious?  No.   At least not to me.
At the time Rubber Soul was released McCartney made a comment about it being sort of their comedy album.  In his estimation there was a lot of humor on Rubber Soul, and I guess there is in some ways, but honestly I feel that comment suits this album far better.  Nearly every song on the white album is, in some way, tongue-in-cheek, snarky, parody-ish. 

I have never seen those possible White Album covers or heard that it might be called A Doll's House - what does that even mean?


I have always wanted Mono British/Parlophone copies of the Beatles albums. All I see over here are Capitol/US versions with altered tracklistings up to Pepper.
Is a decent copy of Revolver/Parlophone easy to come by in the UK?

Are you familiar with the play of the same name by Ibsen?  The Beatles were never really good at coming up with titles for albums.  "Revolver" was going to be "Abracadabra", "Abbey Road" was to be "Everest" and "Please Please Me" was going to be "Off The Beatle Track".  I think one of their other records might have been called "The Sacred Circle" or something like that but I can't remember which one.

I can't call the White Album pretentious and I'm really sensitive to that.  If it was, I'd admit it... I honestly don't think the Beatles took themselves very seriously, at least on that album.  They took themselves seriously, in their relationships with each other of course, but musically?  I don't think any of them thought they were doing anything important on that album.  I guess you could rightfully claim 'Glass Onion' and stuff like that was pretentious, but John's solo stuff was much, much more self-important.  Nearly impossible for Ringo or George to be pretentious considering how they were back-burnered so long... Paul's pretention usually revolves around how he has the best lover in the world, nothing wrong with that.

Glass Onion is a as good an example as any of the albums overall humor bent.  I think people who see it as pretentious are missing the joke.  It's a song John wrote in the same vein as I'm The Walrus - to f***k with those who read too much into the songs and lyrics meanings (in essence, anyone who was taking it too seriously). 

Wow, I never saw those before. I like them both a whole lot!

You can read all about the album cover art of the original UK albums by the Beatles here (http://www.norwegianwood.org/beatles/english/albumcovers.html).
I guess that's also where these pictures come from.
 

It would have made The Beatles seem very behind the times to have had a floridly illustrated cover in late 1968, nearly a year after the simplicity of John Wesley Harding, etc. Even Dylan's painting on Music From Big Pink has a very honest simplicity. The cover of the double album kept the band on the cutting edge.

Nope.

I agree with you, but I think people see THAT as pretentious.  That he was so self absorbed to even comment on his own legend and fame. 

I'm with you though, I think it was just John having a joke and obviously so.  Many many interviews with him proved to me that he didn't take himself very seriously, even at the height of his Yoko period, he never represented himself as more than 1 person, if you know what I mean.  That was kind of the whole POINT of doing weird sh*t like that... that he chose not to be violent, not to interfere with others, to live his life peacefully with his wife as he saw fit, no matter how strange.  The suggestion of course being that others should do the same.  Live & let Live.

He was an opinionated man, but he only represented his opinion as 1 man's opinion.  I never saw John as a hypocrite and I see a lot of hypocrisy in a lot of public figures.  I don't agree with all of John's beliefs, but I admire the balance he struck between walking the walk and talking the talk.

You were robbed!

http://www.dustandgrooves.com/rutherford-chang-we-buy-white-albums/

https://soundcloud.com/dustandgrooves/white-album-side-1-x-100

I like the whole 60's thing where art didn't have to mean anything, I don't think they necessarily meant anything at all with making the cover white, just that it would be different.  It allows you to interpret it however you want, too, and with the idea to decorate it how you see fit, I think that fits in with that self-interpretation vibe. 

Kind of like VDP's lyrics.  They leave a little bit to self-interpretation.  .... and we're back on topic.