Pixie Smith's Drawings: How do you like them colored?

[Logiatrix]

I've been enjoying a cursory study of the various RWS versions.
NOT the many "clones" available, wonderful--and numerous!-- that they all are...
I'm restricting my comparisons to Pamela Coleman-Smith's art, right now.
I'm currently aware of these versions: standard RWS in the yellow box, the so-called "Original Rider-Waite," the Albano-Waite, the Universal-Waite, the Diamond Tarot, the Illuminated Tarot, and the Golden Rider.
I'd like to learn of any I might have missed.
Also, I'm very interested to know what version of Coleman-Smith's art you all prefer...
Right now, I'm favoring the boldness of the Albano-Waite.
:)

[Rusty Neon]

I'm kinda partial to the one in the US Games 1971 version in a yellow box. It's nice holding history in your hands; esthetics and colour preferences stand secondary to that for me, at least. I understand that it (along with the US Games Giant Rider) is the closest colouring to the deck published by Rider in 1910.

[Le_Corsair]

I think of all of the decks you've mentioned, my favorite is the Universal Waite. The colors used by Mary Hanson-Roberts are more realistic than anything else out there, and the softness of colored pencil is a great change from the great splashes of ink used in the other decks. I would like the Albano-Waite better if the Pentacles were golden or silver in color, and the Swords were steel-colored (silver) instead of bronze-colored (golden). The deck US Games markets as "The Original Rider-Waite Tarot" is a good one, I like the colors in that deck; more pale than the current RWS, lots of aquamarine sky. The problem with this deck is the coloring of flesh: since it is a photographic reprint (as I am given to understand) the reproduction of flesh tones has that dotty look you see in newspaper photos.

Decks I don't think you mentioned include the Golden Rider and the Illuminated Tarot. Of the two, I have the first, and am disappointed with it, because the artist did a less-than-satisfactory job of coloring. Not that the colors are untrue, but straight lines in this deck aren't straight; Swords look jagged, and facial expressions are coarse. I don't have the Illuminated, but people that do have it tend to rave about it.

I'm not certain if the Hoi Polloi uses the drawings by Smith. I just scored a copy on Ebay (I think), and I'll be able to tell once it gets here. I'm looking forward to seeing this deck.

Bob :THERM

edited to add: I see that you did mention the Golden Rider. I should have paid more attention to your original post. Sorry!

[Galiana]

I like the colors in Universal Waite. I'm hoping to get the Diamond Tarot after the holidays. That looks like the best of all the RWS clones.

[Lee]

Don't forget about the new Radiant Rider-Waite! That one's my favorite. It's rather similar to the Hanson-Roberts Universal, but the colors are bold rather than being soft. I've been searching for years for a RW version that really satisfies me, and this one is it.

I think I would classify the Illuminated Tarot as something other than a differently-colored version of the RW. The light effects and abstract skies make it something else, I think. I like that one a lot too.

-- Lee

[Logiatrix]

Originally posted by Lee
Don't forget about the new Radiant Rider-Waite...
But is that the drawings of Pamela Coleman-Smith?
When I looked through it (I had it only briefly, then traded it to Faunabay), I got the impression that it is completely re-drawn, albeit inspired by the art of PCS.
I shoulda read the LWB...
:)

[Sulis]

Standard Rider-Waite in the yellow box.

Love and light

Sulis xx

[Emily]

I like the colouring of the Pocket Rider Waite. I don't have the standard size but this pocket version is nicely coloured - much better than the so-called 'Original Rider Waite' that I have ( this deck would probably win the 'Worst coloured Rider Waite Award).

The Universal is nice too, if you like the coloured pencil effect and the way some of the images have been redrawn. :)

[Cerulean]

with accurate color tones and the U.S. Games address of New York, New York marked on the bottom of the box... I like how the cards don't have the copyright symbol of the U.S. Games as well.

Tiny differences just let me know that my Rider Waite is a little different...

The 1971 with lamination is nice, though, especially since someone wrote once they have allergies to the old ink.

Mari H.

P.S. The University Books edition about 1971 has brighter, softer coloring and seems to have the same line quality of the two 1971 editions by U.S. Games and also lacks the copyright symbol on the face of the cards.

[Le_Corsair]

Originally posted by Mari_Hoshizaki

P.S. The University Books edition about 1971 has brighter, softer coloring and seems to have the same line quality of the two 1971 editions by U.S. Games and also lacks the copyright symbol on the face of the cards.


No blue plaid backs on that one, either! I just got a copy, and I can live with the pale rose/ankh combination.

A lot of old pre-US Games decks are available on Ebay, I have a set from B. Shackman & Co. of NYC, printed in Hong Kong that has what the Holly Voley website (http://home.comcast.net/~vilex/index.html) calls the Merrimack back, sort of a sepia-toned mosaic. The colors on this playing-card-sized deck are very deep and true, although the cardstock is a trifle thin and not as heavily coated as a modern deck. (There are also strange interpretations at the bottom margin of each card.) :laugh:


Bob :THERM

[Moonbow*]

Does anyone know a link where you can see all these to compare? I'm looking for one and don't know which to go for?

M*

[Le_Corsair]

Originally posted by Moonbow*
Does anyone know a link where you can see all these to compare? I'm looking for one and don't know which to go for?

M*


Moonbow, just click on the link in my post immediately preceding yours. Holly Voley shows examples of The Fool from the various decks, and also the backs. To see The Fool comparison, scroll down the the "Ship of Fools" link (lots of images, it takes a long time to load), and for the backs, click on the "Card Backs" link.

Bob :THERM

[Lee]

Originally posted by Tauni
But is that the drawings of Pamela Coleman-Smith?
When I looked through it (I had it only briefly, then traded it to Faunabay), I got the impression that it is completely re-drawn, albeit inspired by the art of PCS.:) Yes, that's true, the drawings are either redrawn or traced. But the same is true for the Hanson-Roberts Universal, the Golden Rider, and the Illuminated. Also, the "Original Rider Waite" has drawings which are different than the ones on the US Games Rider-Waite.

If I understood correctly when I read an article by Frank Jansen about how they actually produced the original deck, I think what happened was a craftsman etched in Pixie's designs onto the printing blocks. And at a certain point those blocks wore out, so another craftsman etched them in again, which accounts for the differences between the first edition and the "Original Rider Waite" edition, which came later. So (again, if I'm understanding it correctly), it seems as if none of these decks, not even the first edition, could be said to contain Pixie's actual drawings, which I suppose are lost in the sands of time.

However, if one wanted to settle on the first 1910 edition as the standard, then I think the only decks using those drawings would be 1) the ones Rider published until the blocks wore out and a different craftsman created the "Original Rider Waite" drawings; 2) reproductiions by various publishers (like the Merrimack one) before US Games bought the copyright; 3) the US Games Rider-Waite deck; and 4) the Albano-Waite. I think the Diamond uses Pixie's drawings too, but I no longer have that deck so can't say for sure. The Radiant and Universal decks are redrawn, as Tauni says, but in a way so as to be fairly faithful to the 1910 edition drawings. The Illuminated and Golden are completely new paintings which are less faithful, containing less detail.

-- Lee

[Logiatrix]

Originally posted by Lee
However, if one wanted to settle on the first 1910 edition as the standard, then I think the only decks using those drawings would be 1) the ones Rider published until the blocks wore out and a different craftsman created the "Original Rider Waite" drawings; 2) reproductiions by various publishers (like the Merrimack one) before US Games bought the copyright; 3) the US Games Rider-Waite deck; and 4) the Albano-Waite...
-- Lee
So, if I understand correctly, an easily accessible RWS deck with Pixie's drawings will be the one in the yellow box called "THE RIDER TAROT DECK," or the Albano-Waite?
And all the others are not original?
Wow...

[Lee]

Originally posted by Tauni
So, if I understand correctly, an easily accessible RWS deck with Pixie's drawings will be the one in the yellow box called "THE RIDER TAROT DECK," or the Albano-Waite?
And all the others are not original?
Wow... Yup! :D

By the way, it's also unknown to what extent the colors on the 1910/US Games decks are true to what Pixie had in mind. Did she produce completely-colored originals which the Rider company was faithful to when it printed the first edition? Or did she supply black and white drawings, and simply indicate what areas of the cards should be what color? Or did the Rider publishing company determine the colors without Pixie's input?

This is why I don't mind using decks like the Radiant or the Illuminated, because when we actually try to pin down what's most faithful to Pixie's original art, the whole thing gets very murky. I think that all the editions, including the first 1910 edition, are simply fingers pointing at the moon!

-- Lee

[Moonbow*]

Thanks Le-Corsair, I'm looking right now. Difficult choice though, unless you see them in the flesh!

M*

[Lee]

I need to correct something I wrote above. Inspired by Pagan X's recent post, I unearthed my copy of the Manteia article by Frank Jansen which was my source for info about how the RWS was originally printed. What it actually says is, Pixie could have prepared the original plates, either by carving the drawings into the stone plates or by drawing them onto paper which is specially prepared to transfer ink, which paper in turn is attached to the stone plate. And if she didn't, then a craftsman would have copied her drawings, in which case the deck doesn't contain drawings done in her hand. We just don't know what happened in 1909. We do know that there was original artwork which she had possession of, because there's a letter from her to Alfred Stieglitz offering to sell him the originals. So, the two possibilities are 1) that she copied her own drawings, either etching them into the stone or drawing them onto transfer paper, or 2) a craftsman copied her drawings using one of those two methods.

One thing I think we can be sure of, that the person who created the plates for the deck which was used for the "Original Rider-Waite" deck was not Pixie Smith, since it's obvious, I think, from the line drawings that someone else tried to recreate her drawings (and didn't do a very good job).

Personally, my gut feeling is still that it was a craftsman who created the drawings for the first edition, copying Pixie's originals. But we just don't know.

-- Lee

[Cerulean]

For a short while, I had six issues of the Green Sheaf, which was a small edition print run by Pamela Colman Smith, bound in a green ribbon. The line quality was not delicate, it was an eighth of an inch, sharply done and then she hand-colored them herself. Her paper was not today's cheap newsprint stock and her impressions were crisp and clear. Pristine, as good as some of the impressions of older Japanese printmakers I saw in a class once. There are some line breaks, but her style is crisp impressions, clean registration.

She did this in 1903 and 1904 and this was her second experience putting out a quarto-size magazine.

My assumption may be pure conjecture, but I thought her work as an artist and printmaker, as demanding as it would be, might be to oversee perhaps at least one or two sample impressions in a print run. (At least in the one printmaking class, the teacher called this stage "the reward" and she had us all carving to this end.)

Given her association with Arthur Waite,
and his attachment to his sacred texts, it is my guess that she did oversee at least the quality the impressions going out. In my opinion, it does make it her work. The sheet music and illustrations of books printed from her line drawings are attributed to her...I do see it as her work.

(Please forgive me for super-imposing impressions from another hand-done work that I've actually seen of hers with my opinions of what happened to those drawings which were 'a lot of work for very little money.')

You are exactly right to state no one seems to have seen the original plates--could be a jewel in a secret collection or as people surmise, lost.

I realize she did not oversee the Rider Waite Smith coloring, because from what I read, it was line drawings that she submitted.

From what I recall of the Green Sheaf,
She added a clear wash of watercolor afterwards, one light coat, her preference for green predominating. The text was wistfully childish, but as an artist and printmaker, she probably would be highly valued in a teacher nowadays.

The sheet music that you see illustrated on Holly Volley's site had the same quality. By the way, the print impressions of the Green Sheaf are with Holly, reunited with some of Pamela Colman Smiths other work...


Mari H.

[Lee]

Mari, your observations are always fascinating and valuable, and even more so in this case as you've actually seen some of her printmaking efforts. You make some excellent points.

I always sort of assumed that the original 1909 printing plates simply wore out, and they probably simply threw them away when they made new ones. And then there's the question of what happened to her original drawings. Can you imagine, if someone found them in their attic one day? Oh boy, that would be some e-bay auction! :)

-- Lee

[Rusty Neon]

Originally posted by Lee
By the way, it's also unknown to what extent the colors on the 1910/US Games decks are true to what Pixie had in mind. Did she produce completely-colored originals which the Rider company was faithful to when it printed the first edition? Or did she supply black and white drawings, and simply indicate what areas of the cards should be what color? Or did the Rider publishing company determine the colors without Pixie's input?


Some suggest that Pixie had done colour drawings (rather than black-and-white drawings) for the deck that were approved by Waite.

http://www.tarotforum.net/showthread.php?s=&postid=139979#post139979

http://www.tarotforum.net/showthread.php?s=&postid=140111#post140111

[Pagan X]

I recall reading that Smith must have made at least two sets of images, one for the deck and one for the accompanying book written by Waite. Later decks were made from the book's illustrations.

I too think that she must have had input in the printing of her cards. She was a practicing occultist, printer and artist, how could she not have?

[Cerulean]

I finally was able to locate the reference, written by Arthur Waite in Part II: The Docterine Behind the Veil and Section I Tarot and the Secret Tradition.

Thanks for the correction! Am I wrong in asking if anyone saw an edition of cards with coloring of Pamela Colman Smith's work, outside of Holly Volley's site? I only have seen the Green Sheaf with her handcoloring and it wasn't as complex as some of PCS's paintings that I saw long ago online in a defunct website.

The only edition of cards that I saw that claim accurate color tones is the 1971 Rider Waite edition by U.S. Games before they printed the copyright notice on the cards they published.

Mari H.

[Pagan X]

From Clive Barrett's site:

http://www.mythographica.fsnet.co.uk/t/rw/print.htm
.......................................................................................
Essentially there are three versions of the original artwork produced by Pamela Colman Smith - A, B and C.

Why this should be so may be hinted at in a letter from Pamela Colman Smith, quoted by Kaplan (vol. III). In it she appears to have had her doubts about the quality of the printing, prior to seeing the finished cards.

The 1909 (A) printing did prove to be inferior and was improved for the second printing. From inspection of the 1910 (B) deck, it would appear that this was not as good as it might have been, so it is possible that a decision was made not to use the black plate from B for the Pictorial Key (C).

There is some evidence that this may have been the case as the Pictorial Key (C) illustrations are superior to those of the 1910 (B), and the errors of the copyist interpretation have been corrected.



The cards were printed with line blocks (solid colour) rather than halftone blocks (graduated colour). The colours used were black, red, blue, yellow and grey.

To quote from Modern Printing, J. Southward, London 1913 -
" A line block cannot be made from a photograph or wash drawing without first making a pen and ink drawing (extra cost)."
If one assumes that Pamela Colman Smith's original illustrations were in colour, (line and wash), then of necessary tracings would have been made - for both the cards and the Pictorial Key illustrations.

The method as follows:-
First a tracing of the outline is made, from this tracing a negative is produced from which a zinc plate is etched. Using the same negative bichromate prints are made on zinc for each colour, after a slight etching they are painted with lithographic ink where colour is desired, (tints may be added when and where desired).

Errors occur on several of the 1910 (B) cards which were corrected for the Pictorial Key (C). Some are minor such as on the Sun, one of the sunflowers does not have a stork, others may be more significant. For example:-

Fool - The eagle which some see on the Fool's bag cannot be seen.
Magician - Loses snake belt.
Hierophant - only one of the circles on the floor has a cross, instead of all four.
Chariot - The symbols on his cloths are confused and indecipherable.
Death - The fallen kings crown is distorted and barely recognizable as such. The child's flowers are unclear.
King of Cups - The fish pendent is not recognizable.
That the two are copied from the same original artwork may be seen by close inspection. The split pen stroke caused by increased hand pressure, which occurs in other of Pamela Colman Smith's illustrations is to be found in the C illustrations but not in B deck. However in many examples of Pamela Colman Smith's work a characteristic line ending (the line is terminated by an elongated comma), may be seen. This may be found in B but is absent from C.

Generally the artistic quality of the B is poorer than C, but strangely the reverse is the case with the Empress, the detail, especially the decoration of the cushions, is much clearer on the B than C. A printer might well have more than one person capable of copying in his employ, which may account for this.

So, it is assumed that both C and B were traced from the missing artwork. This being so, then the copyists errors in B would suggest that the C version was a truer representation of Pamela Colman Smith's designs.



The printing plates for the Rider Waite Tarot Deck were 'lost' during World War Two, (this is a euphemism for melted down for the scrap metal). So when the Pictorial Key to the Tarot was reprinted in 1972, it was a photo-lithographic reprint of the 1910 edition. At the same time a deck was produced by adding colour to the Pictorial Key's illustrations. The colouring being done with reference to the earlier edition of the deck. This also was printed by offset lithography, in five colours - black, cyan, magenta, yellow and grey.

A further point, the printed cards both B and 1972 (D) have flat solid colours (with the occasional added tint), Pamela Colman Smith's illustrations would have had a more varied and natural colouring. Unless the original artwork is discovered the true appearance of the cards can only be imagined.

I have not had a chance to examine a set of 1909 (A) cards and unfortunately due to the small size of Dummett's reproductions little can be said about them, however, the line of the right hand border has been moved inwards making the cards narrower than either B or C.

From the above observations it would appear that of all the editions of the Rider Waite Deck, the 1972 (D) deck (and susequent reprints) is the closest we have to the artists original intention.



The above is based on the works mentioned and also Gilbert's A.E.Waite: A Bibliography, Aquarian Press 1983.
....................................................................................................

Storks on the Sun card? What storks? I don't see no steenkin storks. Maybe he meant stalks.

1909 deck from Holly Volley's collection:
http://www.sacred-texts.com/tarot/pkt/img/ar19.jpg

Comparisons of the Sun 1910 1931 1937 and unknown. Be sure to click on the images to see them BIG!
http://home.comcast.net/~vilex/SunComparison/main-Sun.html

As for all them Fools, it looks like the "new" RWS of US Games System not only has changed the font, but has had a Tangerine Attack! Look at the color change.

http://home.comcast.net/~vilex/ShipofFools.html

[Cerulean]

Now I see why I have two C versions.

Mari H.

[Lee]

Here's a question... if Pixie had indeed been involved in the printing, would she have said in her letter to Steiglitz that the cards would be printed probably very badly ...?

Frankly, I think that those people who are quoted as saying that she drew and colored the cards are simply assuming that she did. I also believe Happy Hardy (in the thread Rusty Neon linked to above) may have been mistaken when saying that he or she has heard tarot authors discussing having seen the originals. I don't believe anyone alive today knows where the originals are (or if they do, they're not telling!).

-- Lee

[Cerulean]

Hi Lee, I don't know about other tarot authors,

but Arthur Waite in his text did write down that Pamela Colman Smith drew and colored the cards for an 'enlarged' edition of his book "Key to the Tarot".. The quote and online link to the exact text (courtesy of many fans of the historical Golden Dawn) follow...so there is one author reference.

The Tarot cards which are issued with the small edition of the present work, that is to say, with the Key to the Tarot, have been drawn and coloured by Miss Pamela Colman Smith, and will, I think, be regarded as very striking and beautiful, in their design alike and execution. They are reproduced in the present enlarged edition of the Key as a means of reference to the text. They differ in many important respects from the conventional archaisms of the past and from the wretched products of colportage which now reach us from Italy, and it remains for me to justify their variations so far as the symbolism is concerned.

http://www.sacred-texts.com/tarot/pkt/pkt0201.htm

[Pagan X]

Hm. Some very strange things here.

In Volume III of his Encyclopedia, Kaplan states that Smith made watercolors for the original artwork for the cards, thus, would have selected the colors employed.

Waite does not specify color when he describes cards. Is it possible that he was color blind? One out of six men are. I find it odd that a practicing ritualist does not mention colors, but maybe that was a Golden Dawn secret correspondence.

On Holly's site (http://home.comcast.net/~vilex/RoseLily.html) is a detailed description of her opinion of the "Original" deck. Her conclusions are very interesting:

*That is was a test print run, and tres yucky in terms of coloration and paper. The blue roses and lilies back art may have proven problematic in terms of cutting. The B&W art is that of the "A" series, 1909.

*What is now known as the "A" series must have been the model for the 1971 Yellow Box deck in terms of colors and line art. Yay. We know we love it.

*The "Original" deck issued in 1993 uses B&W lines most like the "C" edition, not the "A" edition. It is therefore a modern creation of a deck that never existed. A closer fit would have been the yucky colors with "A" art and the floral back.

Which raises some questions for me:

Why did US Games make an inferior recreation?

I think (I don't have the book in my office) that the new introduction to Waite's book included with the Original claims that it is a reproduction from photographs of Waite's personal deck that he used. Holly's comparison's do not corraborate this account .

In fact, if Holly's scenario is correct, what is being sold as the "Original Rider Deck" is actually the "Originally Rejected As Inferior Rider Deck".

It's possible that Waite did keep a copy of the "first first" edition, for sentimental reasons.

[Pagan X]

This brings me back around full circle.

If the 1993 deck is a Frankendeck, that is, a 1993 created coloring of the C art, then the coloring errors (http://www.tarotforum.net/showthread.php?s=&threadid=19699)that bother me were introduced in 1993!

[firestorm]

All I know is, what I want first and foremost in a deck is that it performs well enough to make the most of my readings TODAY.....as in 2003. I like historical, original, old...whatever, decks, but they'd better BE better. I just bought the Universal Waite last week and I was completely astounded at all the imagery that I never noticed using my original RW due to the coloring. I have the supposed Original Rider Waite in the yellow box from US games 1971. Whether that is really the original or not, I dont' know. What I do know is that my readings with this deck seem incomplete do to everything I've been "missing". The universal is good, but the coloring in the Radiant is more to my liking, and I'm considering buying that one.


PaganX:......Frankendeck....that's funny!

[Pagan X]

It wasn't in the Waite books that I read that the "Original"was a photoreproduction, it was this review by Butler. (http://www.aeclectic.net/tarot/riderwaite/review.html)

In the first chapter of Volume III of the Encyclopedia, Kaplan says the 1971 Yellow Box edition is designed with reference to Waite's personal deck. At that time, it was not known that the "Rose and Lilies" back design existed.

[The 78th Fool]

Originally posted by Pagan X
It wasn't in the Waite books that I read that the "Original"was a photoreproduction, it was this review by Butler. (http://www.aeclectic.net/tarot/riderwaite/review.html)


I did indeed write the above mentioned review/article. Unfortunately, it was before I discovered the excellent Holly's Rider Waite site and other related resources - and I got my information completely wrong!

The 'Original' is in fact a photo reproduction of an original deck, but not of the first edition. Reading other peoples posts on this thread alone explains the situation more clearly than I could have done. My apologies in the meantime! - as and when I have the time I will be re writing the review.

Chris. xx

[Emily]

I've only just got round to reading this thread - I have the so called 'Original Rider Waite' and always wondered why it looked so inferior in both colouring and artwork to my pocket Rider Waite. And now I know. Its not the original artwork at all but a version that would probably never have been published.

[Vetch]

Oh, ok, so the 'Original' is not the original after all...
But I still like it best. Why?
If I could tell... it has some gilded flair. The colours of the other decks are clearer, but also more crude to me. I like the little dots and lines of the 'Original'; they add something; some magic, some peculiar dimension.

I have seen some pictures of cards from the Universal and I can tell that this is much to sweetly coloured for me; and I don't like their 3-dimensional look...

This might seem as if I'm contradicting myself. But that's the strangeness of taste; and my lacking capability with the English; and that thing about the magic of pictures and how we receive them, which cannot be put to words.

Just felt like adding this, because it seems I'm the only one who loves the 'Original'.

[JonMAblaze]

I have the yellow box, and I like those colors, but I think I might prefer the Universal Waite. I don't know. I like both.

But all I really want is an Aquatic Tarot (http://www.aeclectic.net/tarot/cards/aquatic/).

[Vetch]

Heh, that one glows! :)

[Queen of Disks]

Hey, I like the so-called "Original" with the green skies too. I'm not sure why, but I think they are beautiful and different in its own way. It has a nice old fashioned feel to it, and has some grit to it. And most importantly, it works. A deck can be beautiful and wonderful and nicely made but if it doesn't work, then I don't want it. And I like my decks with an edge to it...

The Universal Waite and the Radiant Waite are beautiful, but they bored me after a while. And I hate the standard issue Yellow Box RWS because the colors are too grating and they are hard to stare at. I don't have the Golden Rider but I would like to get it at some point.

I do like the Albano Waite, even though I rarely use it. The crazy colors are awesome. The deck screams "60's acid trip" and the deck has a rock and roll feel to me. It's also mysterious, since we don't know much about Frankie Albano.

[WolfyJames]

I prefer the Radiant version, I love the deep, vibrant and dark bold colors. The Universal is too fluffy bunny for me, the artist even put smiles on people who don't smile on the original, which is utterly fluffy bunny. At least the Radiant keeps the serious expressions.

[Vetch]

Hey, I like the so-called "Original" with the green skies too. I'm not sure why, but I think they are beautiful and different in its own way. It has a nice old fashioned feel to it, and has some grit to it. And most importantly, it works. A deck can be beautiful and wonderful and nicely made but if it doesn't work, then I don't want it. And I like my decks with an edge to it...
Agree wholeheartedly; and am also relived. I really really thought I was the only one... and, aww, I don't care what others like... but somehow somewhere in one layer of insecureness around my core I was beginning to wonder if my taste was twisted... feeling better now. :D

"in one layer of insecureness around my core" ... oh wow! Perhaps that makes sense when translated to my native German; but I won't try, because perhaps it won't.


Edit: and 'fluffy bunny' is so added to my vocabulary! It says so much more than 'sweet'. :D

[SolSionnach]

Agree wholeheartedly; and am also relived. I really really thought I was the only one... and, aww, I don't care what others like... but somehow somewhere in one layer of insecureness around my core I was beginning to wonder if my taste was twisted... feeling better now. :D

"in one layer of insecureness around my core" ... oh wow! Perhaps that makes sense when translated to my native German; but I won't try, because perhaps it won't.


Edit: and 'fluffy bunny' is so added to my vocabulary! It says so much more than 'sweet'. :D

Add my vote for the so-called "original". After using the Universal, suddenly it started to look sickly sweet. I also prefer many of the expressions of the faces in the "Original" - like the Empress. Much nicer. I'd like to have a look at the yellow box RWS, but I'm afraid that I'd end up with the plastic lamination.

BTW - "in one layer of insecureness around my core" makes *perfect* sense to me, FWIW.


I do like the Albano Waite, even though I rarely use it. The crazy colors are awesome. The deck screams "60's acid trip" and the deck has a rock and roll feel to me. It's also mysterious, since we don't know much about Frankie Albano.

I've never heard it mentioned that way - I'm going to have to have a look at it! I love period pieces (even though I just traded away my fantasy showcase - for an older copy of the Original RWS!) And I'm looking for another copy of Hoi Polloi in good condition - I just traded away one that wasn't up to snuff.

[Queen of Disks]

The Albano Waite is one of those you either love or you can't stand it. It looks like the RWS on acid to me (go figure, it's from 1968 :bugeyed:). The deck to me is loud, probably because the colors are loud. I open the box and I swear Jimi Hendrix music starts playing in my head. The back is not reversable (that may or may not bother you.) Also the deck is not plastic coated to within inches of it's life (at least my deck isn't.) Plastic coating doesn't bother me, but I know some people don't like it...

[three.sword.fool]

The RWS deck I had was in the yellow box and I really enjoyed its odd and bold colouring. A friend of mine had one which was coloured in very softly, but it didn't speak to me as much... Its odd, I just enjoy how bold and symbolic the colouring is... I figure its just personal preference.