Did Waite supervise more than four cards? [previously discussed but some posts moved]

HOLMES

20-03-2005, 05:19

Did Waite supervise more than four cards?
Which did he?
Why did he (or not)?
Does it actually matter?
Does anyone really care, if so why?

i can say truthfully i do not know,
i like to think that he was concerned mainly with the major arcana trusting pamela inuition to the minor arcana. and while he didnt' directly supervise the rest of the cards he did oversee them in the sense that he gave the ok to all the cards.
and the one pamala didn't agree with was the one she didnt' sign.
heck how do we know she did that card since she didnt' sign it?

does it matter?
in this day and age,, to me ?
no for the wiate-smith deck symbolism is now close to a centuary old and so is worth studying..

but then again yes it does..
for smith deserves for the cards she totally designed herself more acclaim, respect even though she is passed.

and also
without questioning everything,, that is how stuff becomes gospels upon which people determine their universe from.
which is why we should care for 2000 year from now smith might casted aside and wiate could become the tarot prophet

Fulgour

20-03-2005, 06:17

Hi HOLMES :)
Of your favourite decks (witches, buckland, morgon greer,
robinwood, hanson-roberts, templar) do you see influence
by Waite or Colman Smith, and is it on more than 4 cards?

Rosanne

20-03-2005, 07:41

I was directed to a link, to consider the Pages of Pamela's Deck. I investigated further and have to say that I think the Pages were definitely hers alone. I have personal theories regarding her Art, but am unable,due to my limited knowledge, back them up. I am trying to gain the knowledge. Why does it matter? I started with Tarot via her deck and most of my collection is Rider Waite Smith. I would like to be able to attribute the Art work that guides me to her. In this I agree with Holmes. Give credit where credit is due.
I read that Pamela had visions so I asked a friend who is qualified in Forensic work to look at the deck and tell me if he could see an artistic signature throughout the deck. He is very busy but has had a cursory look at the Majors.He feels that Death,The Magician,the Chariot,and Wheel of Fortune are diferent from the other cards. It will be interesting to talk with him further. I am fascinated by the subject.~Rosanne PS I think Waite was a misogynist and it would have irked him to attribute to a woman..but I also need to be more informed about him as well.

Lillie

20-03-2005, 08:26

Personally I always assumad the art was all hers.

I mean, if someone says draw a man walking away from 8 cups, some are tipped over, you get as many pictures as there are artists.

The cards are obviously all drawn by one person and that is Patricia Colman Smith.

So, what is the question all about?

Wether she made up the content of the pictures, or was instructed as to what to put in them?

I don't know. I missed the first thread, I just wanted to know what the argument was about.

So far I have seen neither argument nor crucifixion. I'm dissapointed.

Where's Vincent?
He's always good for a discussion.

HOLMES

20-03-2005, 09:32

Hi HOLMES
Of your favourite decks (witches, buckland, morgon greer,
robinwood, hanson-roberts, templar) do you see influence
by Waite or Colman Smith, and is it on more than 4 cards?

hail fulgor.

well i dont' know from looking at waite deck who did what. i dont' have the artist eye. all that is for certain is all that is on the cards was done by pamela, so eve in the one that waite designed/supervised more in depth, pamela style would of been all over it for you cant change the touch of an artist right ? it is uniquely hers.

i would based on the decks you mentioned,
1 hanson roberts,
2. morgon greer
3. robin wood,
4. buckland
5. witches tarot
6. templar
these are the order in which i would say falls closest to the waite clones, though i kept putting robinwood and morgon greer interchangable between 2 and three.

as i read i put everything in my mind to an image of the waite tarot and then apply the variation.

i just can't discern with my mind whose influence is on what cards. I would suggest that with more symbols are definatly supervised by waite for he would want them place there.
so the one with the differnt shoe was also designed by wiate.

however what does supervised mean?
in the witches tarot by reed, the differences between court cards are minimal but the background. all that mattered to her was the landscape in which they were painted. and the artist said he didnt' make them much difference due to the lack of time given to him to make the cards.
so the artist was supervised in the sense given direction. but the rest came from him to do.

i think the hints would be more in wiate own books. i noticed in reviews of the book it appears he was describing a differnt cards for some of the minors
those are the one that pamela had a differnt take on for sure.
i can see it now.
yes here is the despription of the card which i sent to the book publisher.
and GOD ALMIGHTY PAMELA WHAT DID YOU DO TO THE CARD.
hmm that looks good though, umm ,
well it can't be taken back now.

(i find waite book too wordy to read , and so is crowley eheh)

Cerulean

20-03-2005, 11:06

1. We might start from an essay of Stuart Kaplan's Encyclopedia of the Tarot which names some cards that have suggested connections to designs and previous works of Pamela Colman Smith.

2. If other people come across other sources of PCS designs and card art, then they can post what is known and documented to that thread.

3. I posted a link to the Cary Yale collection of Pamela Colman Smith's artwork in the "To All Believers" thread--hopefully the look at her art will help others determine their curiousity to the PCS designs.

That's my suggestion. I'm hoping to work on a general thread listing biographical info known on PCS with general art influences--hopefully these will be interesting and a general sharing--and so we can keep things straight, shall we try to cite our book, web or art references? My first source will be Melinda Boyd Parson's art catalogue "To All Believers" and I'll be checking Holly Voley's Pamela Colman Smith website and also Stuart Kaplan's biographical essay of P.C.S. in his Encyclopedia of the Tarot.

If we all can share our resources, I think we will enjoy the learning together...hope that the above suggestions help.

Regards,

Cerulean

Rosanne

20-03-2005, 11:25

Thank you Cerulean- I would for one would be very pleased with a specific thread. For people like me, who have not got access to Kaplans encyclopedia, would it be possible to place the Essay on the Thread? I have visited the sites on the web. Anything of P.C.S. would be appreciated. From Anybody?

Rosanne

20-03-2005, 11:43

Hi Lillie- I agree all the cards were painted by Pamela.It is said that Waite supervised her. My quest is to what degree was that supervision.(my feeling is not much supervision at all) Here is my reasoning. I paint and there is a marked difference in my work when left to my own devices and when supervised by a Art teacher; or when I try to paint a scene or idea from a book. If I am attempting to convey an idea belonging to someone else, my work takes on a different signature. Now there has been a suggestion that Death was taken from another Artwork and it shows as different from her other cards. That is where I am coming from. Does that make sense? ~Rosanne

Fulgour

20-03-2005, 12:11

Waite had his niche publishing occult tabloids for Rider & Son
and he mined the wealth of French books for his translations.
But you can't "translate" art and Waite saw an open window
of opportunity with an original Tarot being created so handily,
though we've all seen: 78 card descriptions barely fills a book.

What other books was he sending to the printer at this time?
It takes a lot of material to keep the penny-dreadfuls coming.

Cerulean

20-03-2005, 12:25

I'm hoping that other people with Stuart Kaplan's encyclopedia would be kind enough to look at the article and list the suggested designs in a separate thread.

Fulgour, did you see the lists of Waite's works? Here's about 35 that Amazon/Kessenger will print on demand:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/search-handle-url/index=stripbooks:relevance-above&field-keywords=arthur%252520e.%252520waite&search-type=ss&bq=1&store-name=books/ref=xs_ap_l_xgl14/104-0840366-2673504/aeclectic/

I'm already working on the other PCS thread and links (her biography and artworks online, etc., with resources listed). In a few weeks, if no one has time to look at the Stuart Kaplan bio of PCS, I'll start another thread and link from here.

Thanks

Mari

Emily

20-03-2005, 23:38

I don't think we are ever going to find out just how closely supervised Pixie Smith was but I get the feeling that the artwork is very much her own.

I remember snippets of Vincent's posting in the original thread about a letter? that was written by Waite in which he mentions Pixie Smith - in this letter he describes her as a 'Draughtswoman' who didn't really understand or want to understand what the Golden Dawn was about. It just didn't ring true. She was proud enough to put her signature on each card.

Also the Pictorial Key to the Tarot - even by todays standards its a very sketchy book - you'd have thought that Waite would have gone to alot more trouble describing his cards with more than just the few words he did.

Lillie

21-03-2005, 01:53

Thanks Rosanne.
That has helped me understand why people are so interested in this question.
You are so lucky to be an artist. I wish I had that talent.

I would also agree with Emily.
There is hardly anything useful in Waites book.
If he spent as much time on the cards as on the book then the answer is obviously 'hardly any'.

The one thing I like about this deck is the style of the art. And that is hers.

To be honest, and this is stupid confession time, I saw a picture of the magician when I was about 18. Ohh. I thought, what a beautiful man!
Now I am older I look at the card and think, ohh, what a beautiful boy!
Then I wonder if I am weird.

jmd

21-03-2005, 14:53

Moderating note:
this post will be deleted in the next couple of days.

38 posts have been removed. To assist in the overall discussion, and as this area has been a major time consuming one for a number of moderators, please try and contribute by remembering that this is more like a discussion than journal 'critique and editing and for-the-record-I'm-quoting-you-in-case-you-change-what-you-wrote' point-by-point debate.

Perhaps the easiest way to contribute and encourage others (and I say this realising that my own posts do not always encourage others, and probably put some members off) is to reply by explaining the point being made. In most cases, this can be done without a need to directly refer to preceding posts, which the astute reader can read for themselves - after all, it's in the same thread!

HOLMES

21-03-2005, 16:45

i still feel sadden then waite work in his book at the time wasn't as detailed as say robin wood tarot book.
but perhaps it was, and not just getting it due to the veil he put around the words.

is it a case of just a sign of the times? the grammar today is decidely lesser quality then that of the age in which waite wrote. (i guess i have to get a dictionary and sit there one day and force myself to through his book)

does the few wordy inteprations of the waite book make the case that he didnt' supervise in depth, or more of the cards.
I cant' say, i still find myself saying the rider waite instead of the smith-waite deck.

they are now on equal terms as it is called the smith-waite deck. and soon i hope thoth tarot get called crowley harris tarot.

Fulgour

21-03-2005, 19:43

reference: The Pictorial Key to the Tarot 1910 by A.E.Waite

Three Very Different Summaries of the Major Arcana

Pages 12 to 31
(19 pages of unillustrated text)
Waite's first set of descriptive meanings.
Note: The Fool is placed in position 21. The World at 22.

Pages 72 to 159
(87 pages but only 43 pages of text: 22 one-sided picture pages)
Waite's second set of descriptive meanings, differs from first set.
Note: The Fool is placed in position 21. The World at 22.

Pages 283 to 287
(4 pages of unillustrated text)
Waite's third set of descriptive meanings, differs from both others.
Note: The Fool is placed in position 21. The World at 22.

At what point can we take anything written by A.E.Waite as definitive?

Fulgour

21-03-2005, 23:25

I saw to it therefore that Pamela Colman Smith should not be picking up casually any floating images from my own or another mind. She had to be spoon-fed carefully over the Priestess Card, over that which is called the Fool and over the Hanged Man. (Shadows of Life and Thought, 1938)29 years after Smith published her Tarot, in one of his last
collections of ramblings, Waite tried to give the impression
that he was among the secret elite who knew the ultimate
truth about the hidden meaning of the cards by suggesting
they blocked the mystical truth from their minds in order to
keep this from her, lest she unknowingly reveal any details.

Moongold

22-03-2005, 00:23

There is an interesting discussion in this thread: http://www.tarotforum.net/showthread.php?t=34304
about Pameal Colman Smith's art.

It is well known that Pamela probably used the Sola Busca as an inspiration for her Tarot artwork.

Dstar, an artist member of this forum, suggested that Pamela may well have gotten inspiration for XIII Death and other cards from the work of Durer. If you have a look in the reference above you can see the Durer images and you might agree with Dstar's comments.

DStar, as an artist, also wondered whether Pamela had not traced some of Durer's work, and possibly that of other artists artists. Given that some of Pamela's drawings are oddly proportioned that is a reasonable suggestion.

As Frank Hall pointed out in the same thread, Tarot is a constant revisioning of images and archetypes, so none of this matters very much in the wider scheme of things. Pamela was responsible for drawing the deck. Whether she got her inspiration from the Sola Busca, from Durer, from Waite or any other sources is only perhaps of academic interest. Many artists, writers and poets gain inspiration from external sources - of course - but it is the final product which matters and the purpose of the work.

There is enough of Pamela Colman Smith's original work and vision in the RWS for her to be given primary credit. I believe that anyway, for what it is worth, and I will always hold her in the greatest esteem :).

Cerulean

07-04-2005, 13:15

in Kaplan's extremely long discussion of PCS in the Encyclopedia of the Tarot, Volume III. Kaplan may have received some of these observations from the graduate work of Melinda Boyd Parsons and her professors. (They all had some interest in PCS as the artist that Stieglitz sponsored in his photographer's gallery.)

Perhaps good artistic observations (in the linked thread) might be judging her print-making for the cards as a "limitation" of the design direction while she was active in the Golden Dawn. After it's split from the Yeats group--she followed Arthur Waite and his Catholic leanings of those times.

Perhaps instead, may I suggest that she might be following more than one design convention for cards and printmaking in terms of iconography, Catholic or otherwise?

Some of the reprinted books and designs about tarot from 1889 through 1910 that I've read seem to lean heavily to the Continental Tarots design that was based on old Italian Milanese/Marseille crossovers as well as some Egyptian fascination (Papus Tarot Divanitaire/Etteilla).

The commentary about PCS following Durer might suggest to others--well it does to me, an Italian art fan--that Durer was influenced by contemporary and earlier Italian printing/proportions/paintings--he definitely was. PCS designs could have also followed Italian Milanese/French Marseilles proportions and Catholic iconography, as all these things have been prevalent in tarots for hundreds of years.

On Italian art and Durer:
http://horse-in-art.com/b_du.htm

The Visconti tarocchi designs are referred to as Gothic in style--and Ferrarese tarocchi/Mantegna engravings/etc and art have been called "Gothic" in their conservative designs. The Sola Busca noncolored engravings are thought to be Ferarrese in origin.

Sorry, meandering now to the other point...I've seen some of PCS prints and hand-tinting up close--the original work done in the Green Sheaf that she produced--so yes, I agree she did original work when she was not under the design direction of others.

I still think her designs and influences also certainly take into account--at least in my eyes--her experience in stagecraft and her teachers' fascination with Japanese prints from her training at the Pratt Institute in Brooklyn.

I've linked to Holly's Tarot site and the Cary Yale library collection of her designs in other threads--so I'll hush now and enjoy reading more of this discussion! But hope some of the notes posted here lead others to check out earlier tarot designs and Kaplan's Encyclopedia articles.

Cerulean

Fulgour

11-06-2006, 14:26

An another thread, it was pointed out that we do not have direct evidence of Waite supervising more than a few cards.

I suppose must of us just assume that he supervised or dictated the entire deck, however, is there fact evidence of this in the written record?Hello :) firemaiden! I would love to know what you've decided
about all this~ "The least of Tempests in the last of Teapots!"

firemaiden

17-06-2006, 17:12

Well, my dear Fulgour, I am looking forward to reading K. Frank Jensen's
" Story of the Waite-Smith Tarot" soon to be published by the Association for Tarot Studies - Perhaps that will answer some of our questions?

job

18-06-2006, 00:36

If I had to choose between:

a) Waite's descriptions
or
b) Pamela's preparatory sketches

I would always pick b.

Because another artist would have interpretted Waite's instructions differently, and in Pam's work there are key details that I find hard to believe another artist would do in the same way.

Imo the important thing is the placement/arrangement of the objects/symbols on the page (ie. composition). This skill is what elevates Pamela head and shoulders above even some of the most technical of artists.

There is simply not enough information on her and that is the truly sad part.

Fulgour

19-06-2006, 19:22

There is simply not enough information on her and that is the truly sad part.Hello :) job! I wish you could read Melinda Boyd Parson's booklet:
"To All Believer's ~ The Art of Pamela Colman Smith"

One of the most refreshing things about it is how Pamela is
viewed as an artist and the focus is on her carreer which
was much more successful than many people realise...

Artists are a unique group even amongst themselves,
and there is where you will see Pamela achieving her
greatest accomplishements, in the eyes of her peers.

If more people knew how much she actually did...
and she was very hard working and ambitious ~
I think it would show how her Tarot is even more
amazing than many imagine. She was a "Marvel" :)

Fulgour

19-06-2006, 19:27

I would always pick b.
"job" ~ you have a PM (another!) ...please check your mailbox. ;)

job

26-06-2006, 00:15

Yes, thank you. I um... didn't really check my pm's! I have no excuse!

I don't want to downplay the contribution of Arthur W. Because if the two did not meet then there would be no tarot deck!!!

But there is obviously something special about Pamela C, who has been able to draw back the curtains and render that which has always been before our very eyes... in a beautifully uncluttered way.

tarotgirlfl

05-07-2006, 09:59

...and the one pamala didn't agree with was the one she didnt' sign.
heck how do we know she did that card since she didnt' sign it? ...

Which card did Pamela not sign? (I've looked but have not figured it out yet.)

Fulgour

05-07-2006, 12:38

"The ;) Fool"

Teheuti

11-07-2006, 03:17

Which card did Pamela not sign? (I've looked but have not figured it out yet.)
Some people feel that the Fool is not signed, but it you turn the card sideways (clockwise) you can see her signature in the shading lines of the cliff. Look at the Giant Rider-Waite where it's quite clear.

Mary

Teheuti

11-07-2006, 03:55

I'd like to direct those who are really interested in Waite's involvement in this deck to my article in Llewellyn's 2006 Tarot Reader where I show the exact stories that Waite used to delineate each of the four suits in the Minor Arcana. Someone touched on this when they asked earlier in this thread about what books Waite was working on at the time that he and Smith did the deck.

In _The Hidden Church of the Holy Graal_, which was published the same year as the Tarot deck (duh!!!), Waite pointed out that the sacred objects or symbols of Celtic lore mirror the four symbols sacred to Christ’s Passion and are central to the Grail legend. He declared that the “Hallows, under a slight modification, . . . are in the antecedents of our playing cards—that is to say, in the old Talismans of the Tarot.” These are, of course, the Minor Arcana.

The Minors are undeniably based on the Grail myths as Waite tells us when he says the Ace of Cups is “an intimation of that which may lie behind the Lesser Arcana,” and later tells us that the Knight of Swords is Galahad.

The suit of Cups is based on Robert De Borron’s _Metrical Romance of Joseph of Arimathea_, in which Joseph carries the Graal Vessel and “knowledge of the Secret Words” out of Israel.

The suit of Wands is based on the _Longer Prose Perceval_ first told by Chrétien de Troyes, the second of the great Grail narrators, and completed by a variety of authors. Waite tells us that the tale has “the touch of Nature [the sprouting wands?] which takes us at once into its kinship.”

The suit of Swords is based on Malory's _Galahad Quest_, with additional references to the general loss of the deeper meaning of the mysteries within the traditions that were meant to carry it forth.

The suit of Pentacles tells the story of the erection of an external building veiling a divine mystery. In _The Encyclopedia of Freemasonry_ and _The Secret Tradition in Freemasonry_, Waite describes how “the degrees of Craft Masonry have as a main object the building up of the Candidate into a House or Temple of Life.” When the Master Builder of the Temple of Jerusalem perished, the plans for an externalization of doctrine in the world was lost. Waite believed that Masonry was one of the last remaining places where the true symbolism was still maintained (though losing ground daily).

I think I prove all this rather conclusively in my article - although more work can certainly be done on the subject (heh, I can only read so much Waite before getting totally burned out!).

This is not to denigrate Pamela Colman Smith's role in the creation of the deck. She was trained as a book illustrator (that is, to accurately illustrate someone else's story) and did an amazing job of integrating many contradictory sources that Waite wanted subtly depicted in each card -
1) the speciific scene in that suit's Grail legend
2) Etteilla's meanings
3) traditional playing card meanings
3) Golden Dawn/astrological/Kabbalistic references

This was a heroic task that, to my mind, no one else could have accomplished nearly so well. It was precisely the coming together of these two people that created such an extraordinary deck!

Mary K. Greer

Fulgour

12-07-2006, 02:12

This is not to denigrate Pamela Colman Smith's role in the creation of the deck. She was trained as a book illustrator (that is, to accurately illustrate someone else's story)...Pamela Colman Smith was a graduate of the Pratt Art Institute,
the first female to achieve that distinction. She was an artist...
Walter Crane illustrated books also~ someone else's stories too.

That word "trained" is not lost on me. I don't like the implication.

firemaiden

12-07-2006, 04:03

I'd like to direct those who are really interested in Waite's involvement in this deck to my article in Llewellyn's 2006 Tarot Reader where I show the exact stories that Waite used to delineate each of the four suits in the Minor Arcana.

Mary, this is totally fascinating! I had absolutely no idea. Wow, thank you for this fascinating post!

Teheuti

12-07-2006, 09:00

Pamela Colman Smith was a graduate of the Pratt Art Institute,
the first female to achieve that distinction. She was an artist...
Walter Crane illustrated books also~ someone else's stories too.

That word "trained" is not lost on me. I don't like the implication.
I didn't mean the word to be perjorative but rather to indicate that Smith's art background was more than just study. She had practical training in professional illustrative and reproduction techniques - not just fine art. She also had practical experience in theatrical set and costume design. As a former professional graphic designer who later took college art classes, I've seen fine art students who, when they try to enter the design profession, have no idea how to work with a client's needs or commercial reproduction methods. A good illustrator is usually illustrating someone else's material. That's an art in its own right. I don't think that training makes anyone less of an artist, but its practical aspects can make someone more professional in dealing with clients in a work-for-hire situation. And we do have Smith's own words for this being work-for-hire when she says that she just completed a big job for very little cash.

Mary

Teheuti

12-07-2006, 09:28

Hi :) Firemaiden! We here in the Rider Waite Smith
Study Group Forum have all heard LOTS about this!
So far not a single person has directly supported, contradicted or criticized this information. Should I keep quiet about it when it is relevant to a discussion and no one else bothers to mention it? I find this suggestion both disappointing and discouraging. Do my revelations offend you in some way? Do others feel that I should shut up about my discovery and let it fade away until some more auspicious time when someone else can 'discover' it?

I'd much rather discuss the material rather than justifying my right to talk about it. I'm really not trying to slight anyone (PCS included). I've spent 38 years studying the RWS deck and believe I've made a significant contribution to one aspect of its origins that I think others can find both interesting and helpful (am I wrong about this?). What I say about one aspect does not discount other influences, which I believe are many. I think it took two extraordinary people's coming together to create this deck. There is far more historical, tangible evidence about the probable contributions of one person. I don't have access to much original evidence regarding PCS and so, rather than focusing on suppositions about her involvement, I've looked for other evidence that I can substantiate. What exactly is wrong with my mentioning it?

Mary

Umbrae

12-07-2006, 09:35

I thought it was good stuff...

Fulgour

12-07-2006, 14:43

René Bull (1872-1942) was a MAN and achieved recognition
from Edwardian society at many significant levels, seen in
this biographical sketch:

Born in Dublin on 11 December 1872, Rene Bull began his varied and illustrious career as an artist after meeting the humorous illustrator Caran d'Ache in Paris. Rene joined the staff of the Black and White news magazine, and quickly became known as one of Britain's most talented and prolific war artists. Like Dulac and Goble, Rene Bull was greatly influenced by Oriental art. His travels to the Middle East provided expert knowledge of Arab customs and costume, which led to his greatest and most admired book illustrations, The Arabian Nights (1912) and The Rubdiyait of Omar Khayydm (1913). As a prominent member of the London Sketch Club, Bull was a close friend and associate of fellow members Cecil Aldin, John Hassall, Phil May and Edmund Dulac. His Edwardian book illustrations included jean de la Fontaine's Fables (1905) and Joel Chandler Harris's Uncle Remus (1906).

*

Pamela Colman Smith (1878-1951) was a WOMAN and though
cherished by her peers, was not invited to tea with the boys.

kwaw

12-07-2006, 18:56

So far not a single person has directly supported, contradicted or criticized this information.

Mary

It sounded interesting enough to me to order the 2006 reader, just for this article. For those in America if interested Llewellyn on line bookstore currently have it on special offer for $2.25 here:

http://www.llewellyn.com/bookstore/book.php?pn=J675

- no good to me though as the cost of international postage provided by airmail only sent it up to $18.95. Found an English source for £2.55.

Kwaw

job

12-07-2006, 20:00

"In 1688 Christopher Wren designed a magnificent town hall for the city of Westminister. The mayor, however, was not satisfied; in fact he was nervous. He told Wren he was afraid the second floor was not secure, and that it could all come crashing down on his office on the first floor. He demanded that Wren add two stone columns for extra support. Wren, the consummate engineer, knew that these columns would serve no purpose, and that the mayor's fears were baseless. But build them he did, and the mayor was gratful. It was only years later that workmen on a high scaffold saw that the columns stopped just short of the ceiling.
They were dummies. But both men got what they wanted: The mayor could relax, and Wren knew posterity would understand that his original design worked and the columns were unnecessary."

"The 48 laws of power"
Robert Greene, Joost Elffers

Alta

12-07-2006, 23:16

So far not a single person has directly supported, contradicted or criticized this information. Should I keep quiet about it when it is relevant to a discussion and no one else bothers to mention it? I find this suggestion both disappointing and discouraging. Do my revelations offend you in some way? Do others feel that I should shut up about my discovery and let it fade away until some more auspicious time when someone else can 'discover' it?

I'd much rather discuss the material rather than justifying my right to talk about it. I'm really not trying to slight anyone (PCS included). I've spent 38 years studying the RWS deck and believe I've made a significant contribution to one aspect of its origins that I think others can find both interesting and helpful (am I wrong about this?). What I say about one aspect does not discount other influences, which I believe are many. I think it took two extraordinary people's coming together to create this deck. There is far more historical, tangible evidence about the probable contributions of one person. I don't have access to much original evidence regarding PCS and so, rather than focusing on suppositions about her involvement, I've looked for other evidence that I can substantiate. What exactly is wrong with my mentioning it?

MaryNothing is wrong with it. You have a great deal of support for sharing this information! Marion

le pendu

13-07-2006, 02:31

Hi Mary,

Thanks so much for your posts, I found the information fascinating. I look forward to the book and learning more about these connections.

best,
robert

baba-prague

13-07-2006, 02:35

Yes, I also rushed straight off to my Tarot Reader for another read! There is some interesting work here and if you're going to develop it further I would be excited to read more.

What you say about the Grail story connections makes a lot of sense - the research seems very sound and could open up some wonderful further study.
Many thanks for your persistence in drawing it to our attention - I'm only sorry that you felt you had to be so patient and persistent in order to be properly heard.

Fulgour

14-07-2006, 00:19

And we do have Smith's own words for this being work-for-hire when she says that she just completed a big job for very little cash."Work For Hire" is a completely fictitious translation of the actual words
written by Pamela Colman Smith in a 1909 letter to Mr. Alfred Stieglitz.

She mentions creating her Tarot cards, and receiving money in return~
and bemoans that it was not a lot of money (she's asking Stieglitz how
things are money-wise with him in New York?) but she has also offered
to SELL her original Tarot art to Stieglitz, so...she professes ownership!

NOT a work for hire, by any legal standard or fictitious translation. :grin:

coredil

14-07-2006, 04:08

As a composer working with co-authors (they write text for the songs I compose) I have tons of letters (or e-mails) between us because I always have a quite precise idea of what should be the content of the songs.

On this link:
http://www.hermetic.com/crowley/crowley-harris.html
one can find letters between Crowley and Harris regarding the Thoth Tarot designs.

Such a joined work needs a lot of communication between two people.
To me there must be traces of such a communication.
Are they any letters or correspondance between Pamela and Waite about the making of the cards?

Teheuti

14-07-2006, 05:55

Thanks to everyone who found my thesis of interest. I see it as a work in progress and that there can definitely be refining on the exact references of many of the cards - especially in the Wands and Swords suits. I'll probably get back to it sometime in the future but would welcome insights from other readings of Waite's Grail and Freemasonry books. I don't think I would have seen Swords as Malory's Mort de Arthur if Waite hadn't identified the Knight of Swords as Galahad (a seemingly odd choice).

The important thing regarding sources for the Minors is not the stories themselves but Waite's retelling of those stories. He may have summarized them in letters to PCS but, to my knowledge, very few of her personal effects - other than artworks and published writings - have survived.

I haven't compared Waite's summary with the original of Robert de Boron's Joseph of Arimathea story - but it's relation to the suit of Cups is unmistakable. The most relevant parts are found in _The Holy Grail_ from the middle of page 146 through 147.

Mary

Lee

14-07-2006, 20:54

He may have summarized them in letters to PCS but, to my knowledge, very few of her personal effects - other than artworks and published writings - have survived. Since Pamela became a committed Catholic soon after the deck was published, we might conjecture that she perhaps destroyed all her personal effects relating to the Golden Dawn, including her correspondence with Waite...

-- Lee

coredil

14-07-2006, 21:39

The important thing regarding sources for the Minors is not the stories themselves but Waite's retelling of those stories. He may have summarized them in letters to PCS but, to my knowledge, very few of her personal effects - other than artworks and published writings - have survived.

Since Pamela became a committed Catholic soon after the deck was published, we might conjecture that she perhaps destroyed all her personal effects relating to the Golden Dawn, including her correspondence with Waite...

-- Lee

But what about Waite?
Isnt he the kind of person who would carefully keep correspondence?

Fulgour

15-07-2006, 03:02

Since Pamela became a committed Catholic soon after the deck was published, we might conjecture that she perhaps destroyed all her personal effects relating to the Golden Dawn, including her correspondence with Waite...I think the words Pamela chose to express her enthusiasm
for the Catholic celebration of the Mass says all needs be.
And this was the same view she applied to the 'goings-on'
at the meetings of groups now lumped up as golden dawn
as she used the same words to sum up her appreciation...

"It's fun!"

Fulgour

15-07-2006, 03:08

But what about Waite? Isnt he the kind of person who would carefully keep correspondence?

If I were to hold a mock investigation of the related facts
there are only two significant documents I would review...

The 78 Tarot cards created by the artist, P.C.Smith,
and~ A.E.Waite's booklet wherein he describes them.

Waite's booklet reveals a substantial ignorance
of the designs, and so therefore what we have
is Pamela Colman Smith, sole creator of the art.

Teheuti

15-07-2006, 07:01

Examining only Waite's book on Tarot to determine his involvement with the RWS deck ignores the breath of his knowledge. In many of his other works Waite demonstrates the depth of his knowledge and concern with symbolism that directly relates to the cards. For instance,

“The Rose in its highest understanding is the Divine principle operating in humanity and in you, so that since which are scarlet may become whiter than snow and that the whiteness of your purified life may be incarnadined by Divine Fire. How is that Fire communicated? It is by the operation of the Secret Doctrine, the students of which are compared in our tradition to roses in which sense the Rose is the Israel of God. More generally, the Rose is also the Elect and the thorns are that world of humanity which is without the Sanctuary of the chosen ones. The five petals correspond to the five virtues which lead to perfection; these virtues are mystic paths; and they are five manners of wounding by which the Adept is crucified to himself and to the world for the manifestation of the Divine within him. The Rose is also a chalice, and its Mystery, the Mystery of the Ruby Rose, is that of the Chalice of Salvation. It is lastly the Cups of Benedictions; and these modes of interpretation, with many others, their seeming divergence notwithstanding, are one at the root, as a rose with many blossoms springing from a single stem.” Waite’s version of the Portal Ritual. p. 164-165, The Secret Inner Order Rituals of the Golden Dawn, Zalewski.

and, concerning the Death card,
"There is a reference to this symbolism [the so-called rose of silence] in the Grade of Rose-Croix. But it is more correctly the White Rose which is so attributed. . . . And so finally it [the White Rose] was taken for a funeral symbol, the last episode in the grand reserve of humanity, being that which takes it into aeonian silence." Encyclopedia of Freemasonry, v.2, p.371

regarding the 12 flames on the right hand Tree in the Lovers card:
"A word must be added concerning the Trees of the Garden . . . . The Tree of Life is identified with the [Secret] Doctrine . . . it is the Holy Law, which offers aspects of truth in all its interpretations. The fruits of this Tree subsist for ever and give life to all; it gave life in particular to the twelve tribes who issued therefrom." Waite, _The Holy Kabbalah_.

This kind of detail can be found throughout Waite's works and demonstrates that he has a deeply integrated vision involving the symbols that appear most strongly in the Major Arcana. With certain exceptions I think a good case can be made for Smith's having devised the illustrations for the Minors herself - based on an integration of materials given her by Waite and, possibly, others (Yeats? Farr? Arthur Machen?). See Waite's Manuals of Cartomancy and Occult Divination (written under the pseudonym 'Grand Orient') and well as the other sources I quote in my Minor Arcana article.

I haven't heard of any of Waite's private letters as still being in existence, but I'll be seeing R.A. Gilbert (author of several works on Waite and archivist of much GD and Waite material) later this summer and I'll ask him.

Mary

coredil

15-07-2006, 07:11

I haven't heard of any of Waite's private letters as still being in existence, but I'll be seeing R.A. Gilbert (author of several works on Waite and archivist of much GD and Waite material) later this summer and I'll ask him.

Mary
Thanks for considering this.
Any trace of correspondence between Waite and Smith could indeed give some enlightment on this subject.

TemperanceAngel

15-07-2006, 15:44

This is a really interesting thread and thank you so much, Mary, for posting about your own research/findings/writing you have conducted. Very muchly appreciated here :D

Teheuti

16-07-2006, 07:56

This is a really interesting thread and thank you so much, Mary, for posting about your own research/findings/writing you have conducted. Very muchly appreciated here :D
I'm glad to share what I can. There are several others who have done quite a bit of research into the sources of the RWS deck.

Holly Voley's site, devoted to PCS is a must:
http://home.comcast.net/~vilex/

James Revak compares the major sources for the RWS interpretations at
http://www.villarevak.org/td/td_1.htm

A. Grinder provides typescripts of Waite's major articles as well as photos and information at http://www.adepti.com/adepti.orig/

Bob O'Neill, with help from A. Grinder and others, details sources for the RWS symbols:
http://www.tarotpassages.com/old_moonstruck/oneill/index.htm

K. Frank Jensen has a book coming out any day now on the history of the RWS deck - which should be excellent.

Unfortunately Robert Place's recent book is unreliable. Robert is very knowledgeable about Tarot history but not this deck. He includes too much rumor and supposition into his commentary (depending far too much on David Allen Hulse's _The Key of It All, Book Two_). Place's description of the techniques used in the original printing is completely wrong. The easiest detailed source for how the deck was produced can be found in the 1910-11(?) edition of the Encyclopedia Britannica under Lithography, if I remember rightly.

Mary

BemusedJourney

09-01-2007, 02:13