"But the label loved the original shot of Spencer and went with that." he's a well-hung kid for a four-month-old, you know? I didn't know if the label would go for it. I thought, "Man, it's such a dick shot!" His unit was so prominent in the picture. "But when I looked at it more closely I had some doubts. That's the thing about old-school photography-as a pro, you have to know that you've got it before you leave. Weddle said he was concerned Elden's prominent penis in the image would mean it would not work for the record label, and went to a swim school and took an image of a 10-month-old girl as an alternative.
![nirvana nevermind cover illegal nirvana nevermind cover illegal](https://www.nydailynews.com/resizer/WXPymfExD-i1Mg7sHItEunLSPo0=/1200x0/top/arc-anglerfish-arc2-prod-tronc.s3.amazonaws.com/public/PLDUPD5YT5G5GQXYLRNZNS5RFI.jpg)
"Despite this knowledge, defendants failed to take reasonable steps to protect Spencer and prevent his widespread sexual exploitation and image trafficking."Įlden was four months old when his picture was taken, with photographer Kirk Weddle behind the iconic image. In the lawsuit, via Deadline, Elden claims Nirvana and the defendants in the lawsuit "knowingly produced, possessed, and advertised commercial child pornography depicting Spencer, and they knowingly received value in exchange for doing so. Copyright 2021 Siobhan Fitzpatrick.Read more The 35 Most Recent Rock & Roll Hall of Fame Inductees Deemed “too graphic.”Īll Rights Reserved. Let’s all be thankful the photographer nixed Kurt Cobain’s original idea from the album-a photo of an actual water birth.
#Nirvana nevermind cover illegal full#
The fact that all any of us can remember of that cover is Spencer’s genitals were in full view may mean he does have a point. Among other things, there needs to be a lascivious exhibition of the genitals as the focal point of the photo. A photo of a naked child alone is not the definition of pornography under federal law.
![nirvana nevermind cover illegal nirvana nevermind cover illegal](https://www.nydailynews.com/resizer/hjGqTLFQ3RlrlInqTM0OwqqwgKU=/1200x0/top/arc-anglerfish-arc2-prod-tronc.s3.amazonaws.com/public/XX33BSRVZLQ3XEQXC27COJC4S4.jpg)
While we can all agree that the photo was tasteless and exploitative, whether it’s actually “child pornography” will be up to a judge to decide. He’s recreated the photo (clothed) several times and has the word “Nevermind” tattooed on his chest.īut he’s also well aware that most people in the world have seen him naked. It’s clear that Spencer has a complicated relationship with the photo that’s made him famous. Spencer is suing everyone involved in the making of the album claiming they “knowingly produced, possessed, and advertised commercial child pornography depicting Spencer and they knowingly received value in exchange for doing so.” No surprise, Spencer has received a lot of attention over the years for the role he played in rock history. Heck, I even put my babies to sleep to lullaby renditions of Nirvana.
![nirvana nevermind cover illegal nirvana nevermind cover illegal](https://www.nydailynews.com/resizer/lBVBJsHLTT4E-IyPgMlpbYCFqq8=/1200x0/top/arc-anglerfish-arc2-prod-tronc.s3.amazonaws.com/public/AODOFYOEDEQHAZYXQKKMYUDXVM.jpg)
I was in high school when the album came out and remember being too creeped out by the cover to buy it. Yes, Spencer was the baby featured on Nirvana’s Nevermind album, drifting naked in a pool, seemingly reaching for a dollar bill dangling on a hook.Īnyone who’s ever experienced a “Code Brown” during a toddler swim class knows just how crazy a naked baby in a pool really is. Or at least how they looked when he was a baby. You may not remember his name, but you certainly will his genitals.