Question about LOVEppears

[SummonerXI]

I have a couple questions regarding the cover.

1. Did Ayu ever give any reasoning or deeper meaning behind the reason to go topless for the cover?

2. What was the public reaction at the time for her decision to do so?

[Aderianu]

about first question

Originally Posted by tenshi no hane

Q: The album cover is also surpising.

“That was my idea. We were discussing what I should wear this time and I thought about simply wearing nothing. There’s no intention behind it. It’s simply me as a product. I simply felt it would be cute.”

[Evan Odinson]

"It’s simply me as a product. " kinda sad, that's how she felt back then.

About the second question, it was a controversy, Japanese people are pretty conservative, especially when it comes to female artists, also Ayu was really young back then, so it was like a shock to everybody, I read somewhere that the cover received "bad reviews" but that it didn't affect the album sales.

[SummonerXI]

Okay, thanks a lot!

[pedronekoi]

What about the "appears" cover? Any reason why she's black in that cover?

[SummonerXI]

Originally Posted by pedronekoi

What about the "appears" cover? Any reason why she's black in that cover?

It was supposed to be "white ayu" vs "black ayu." That much I knew

[attractive nausea]

Queen of going against japanese expectations of women

LOVEppears and appears were released on the same day, maybe this explains why the covers are so similiar except for her skin color and some details, maybe it was just a way to distinguish the two

[Evan Odinson]

^^ Yeah, that makes sense, she looks good in both covers

[EndOfTheWorld]

Things online say that the topless cover was controversial but I don't think I have ever seen someone have a problem with it or say anything bad about it.
I believe the appears cover was supposed to be a light vs dark Ayu. I can't remember where exactly I read/heard that sadly.
When hitomi released her album Love Life and was also topless it caused slight backlash because it was similar to Loveppears, which was relased only a year before.

[Party_King]

Originally Posted by attractive nausea

LOVEppears and appears were released on the same day, maybe this explains why the covers are so similiar except for her skin color and some details, maybe it was just a way to distinguish the two

I think the same goes for SURREAL and Duty...

[visionfactory]

Originally Posted by Aderianu

about first question

Whoa. Thanks!!

[Aga-chan]

Originally Posted by EndOfTheWorld

Things online say that the topless cover was controversial but I don't think I have ever seen someone have a problem with it or say anything bad about it.

It strikes me as weird indeed. We're talking about a country with a quite shady idol culture and gravure magazines being sold in convenience stores, not to mention otaku culture. Compared to some photobooks of other female singers and actresses the LOVEppears and appears covers are really tame. There's actually nothing really sexual about them, because her pose and everything is neutral.
Wasn't Ayu also the first female artist who released a photobook without her being half-naked? I think I read something like that back then.
I'd say the Sunrise/Sunset ~LOVE is ALL~ covers are more controversial. LOL

Originally Posted by EndOfTheWorld

I believe the appears cover was supposed to be a light vs dark Ayu. I can't remember where exactly I read/heard that sadly.

When she was on that one TV show she said that she had a complex because of her pale skin, so she decided to go with a darkskinned look or something.

On a sidenote, I've also read that she considered the Duty look for LOVEppears at first or something along those lines.

[rusuke]

I really like that album art than her too-much-pouting lips, I-am-so-cute covers. hehe