Radical Wirth
Forum Library > Tarot Decks Threads By Month > Radical Wirth
| Lee |
20 Aug 2002 |
|
Originally posted by Diana
Aaaarrggghhh!! Blasphemy!! :mad: (only half joking here).
Why blasphemy? :(
-- Lee :)
|
| jmd |
21 Aug 2002 |
|
Originally posted by Lee
Why blasphemy? :(
-- Lee :)
The link you gave is not to a 'true' Oswald Wirth, but a radical departure :)!
|
| Lee |
21 Aug 2002 |
|
Originally posted by jmd
The link you gave is not to a 'true' Oswald Wirth, but a radical departure :)! Ah, but if you look at pictures of the actual Oswald Wirth deck(s) as actually painted by Oswald Wirth, you can see that the borders (and probably the colors as well) of the USGames version are not faithful to the original. So I actually doubt if the USGames version can be considered any more "true" than Carol Herzer's. So there! :D
-- Lee
|
| Jeannette |
22 Aug 2002 |
|
I'll admit upfront that my historical knowledge of tarot is insufficient to offer an informed opinion on such things as the "authenticity" of the Wirth (or just the general "worth" of a reinterpreted Wirth, no pun intended). But if anyone's interested, here's K. Frank Jensen's comments on Carol Herzer's Radical Wirth deck, as published in Manteia, no. 3, p. 44:
"Carol does not mention which edition of the Wirth deck she has used as the foundation for her colouring. These are not the illustrations used in Oswald Wirth's own book Le Tarot des Imagiers du Moyen Age -- at least, not those illustrated in the 1927-edition I have, neither is it the Swiss 1960-edition by George Alexander or the deck reproduced in Palmer-Halls Essay on the Book of Thoth (L.A. 1929). There are several minor differences in the deck Carol Herzer has used (unless her colouring has covered many details in the basic deck, changed face expressions, etc.). Wirth's characteristic signature is also missing on Carol's deck; instead, we find her copyright mark and signature on most of the cards.
While the two editions mentioned above (the illustrations in the book are in black & white) have very subtle tones and a soft gold background (George Alexander's deck is printed with a mat-gold background), Carol Herzer Abrams' colouring is strong and heavy. Not un-agreeble, but it gives the deck and air of quite another age than where it originated. Not that this is wrong in itself, but the Wirth deck is not just another tarot deck, but one of the milestones in the history of tarot. Another trait that brings Carol's version away from being a Wirth deck is that she has omitted the titles of the cards, and not the least the Hebrew characters. You can not do that to Wirth, Carol! Wirth was the first one to create a tarot deck meant exclusively for esoteric purposes (teh deck was published first time in 1889 in a limtied edition of 350) and his aim was to free the tarot from the 18th and 19th century's influence from fortune-tellers like the Etteilla. The Herbrew characters are an irrefutable mark of Wirth's work. 'Radical Wirth' -- well, so much radical, that Wirth is almost lost...
...It might be right to do a new colour version of an older deck, just to see that the colouring could have been done otherwise. But is it really worth it? If the basic deck is a well known pack that has passed its test, is there really any idea in trying ot imporve it? Wouldn't it be better to use the energy to do something, that has not been done before? It's like remaking a famous movie; the new version seldom lives up to the original. I by far prefer the colourings Carol has done of decks not previously coloured -- Guido Gillabel's The Cosmic Egg and Suzanne Kloster's Le Tarot Revele, plus of course Carol's own concepted decks."
Admittedly, Mr. Jensen is a scholar and a bit of a purist, and the copy of the Radical Wirth he was reviewing was a copy from 1989, and may have some differences from the current edition. But I thought people might find it interesting to read a commentary on Ms. Herzer's "Wirth" deck from a noted authority in the field.
-- Jeannette
http://www.tarotgarden.com
|
| Lee |
22 Aug 2002 |
|
Originally posted by Diana
Lee, are you trying to get the last word in here? ;) Absolutely not, the more discussion the better.Where is all the symbolism that he spent so many years studying? Where's it gone? These cards look just like pictures in my local art gallery. Wirth studied history, mythology, Kabbalah, mathematics, astrology, religion, ..... I'm a little puzzled here. I haven't actually compared the decks, but from the scans on her website it looks to me like she's included everything in the pictures that was in the USGames deck, just colored differently, except, of course, for the titles and Hebrew letters, as Jensen points out (thanks, Jeannette, that was a very interesting review). Or are you saying the pictorial elements are there but don't make the same impact? If that's the case, that's a subjective judgment and I certainly can't argue with that.
It seems to me that Herzer was intrigued by the Wirth cards from an artistic perspective, quite apart from any esoteric content. I guess it all depends what one wants from one's Tarot decks. If one is looking for standard titles (or any titles) and Hebrew letter attributions, then I agree the Radical Wirth is too radical.
Again, I think it's important to point out that the USGames version is not 100% faithful to the original cards which Jensen mentions. My impression from what he wrote is that Herzer was looking at the USGames version, which would account for the differences he notices. I think it's a reasonable supposition that Jensen would find the USGames version (which he appears not to have seen) to be too radical.
The question is, how purist are we going to get? Should we all throw away our USGames versions of Wirth because they're not totally accurate? Should we throw away our Lo Scarabeo Visconti Gold decks because some liberties were taken? How about the Universal Waite (Mary Hanson-Roberts's recoloring)? How about the Rider-Waite deck itself? From what I understand from what Jensen has written, the colors and even the lines of the Rider-Waite deck as published in 1910 are not necessarily those of Pamela Colman Smith herself but probably of an employee of the publisher who took her drawings and made the plates from them.
Obviously, we can make an esthetic judgment that the Radical Wirth does not appeal. It just seems strange to me to castigate a deck for being a not-entirely-faithful adaption, when we are in an environment where the field of decks out there is in a constant state of adaption and evolution. Decks are created all the time which are newer versions or adaptations of prior decks. Why is it not allowed to do that with the Wirth? Unless, of course, one feels that no decks should be tampered with. But then the Wirth, I suppose, would not have been created in the first place. :)
-- Lee
|
| Molly |
22 Aug 2002 |
|
<<<< Decks are created all the time which are newer versions or adaptations of prior decks. Why is it not allowed to do that with the Wirth? Unless, of course, one feels that no decks should be tampered with. But then the Wirth, I suppose, would not have been created in the first place. >>>>
Okay, this was what I was thinking but didn't know how to phrase it so consicely, so I wasn't going to bother responding... LOL. Thanks Lee - you took the words right out of my head. ;-)
|
| catlin |
22 Aug 2002 |
|
Ok, I see, the O.Wirth's deck is climbing higher on my wish list.
|
| Lee |
22 Aug 2002 |
|
I suppose I should ask Diana , which Wirth deck do you have in mind when you speak of the Wirth deck? Is it the USGames version, or is it the illustrations in Wirth's book? If it's the book, does it use the cards which Jensen mentions for the illustrations? If it's the USGames deck, then my point is that Jensen himself would probably not consider that a "true" Wirth (I'm merely speculating, of course, with all due respect to him).
I guess what I'm trying to find out is where one would go if one wanted to see whatever it is you consider to be the "true" Wirth.
By the way, let me just note here that the Minors in the USGames version are truly horrendous. Stuart Kaplan commissioned an artist to create them in order to make it a 78-card deck, and the artist didn't do a very good job. The Wands and Swords are modeled after the Visconti deck, and the Courts are modeled after the Marseilles, and they're all quite ugly. The Cups and Coins aren't too bad.
And I still don't see what the big deal is about the Radical Wirth. She didn't rearrange or leave out symbols. All she did was color it differently, for Pete's sake! :)
-- Lee
|
| Lee |
22 Aug 2002 |
|
Originally posted by Diana
Now, Carol did not "just colour the deck differently". She painted over some important esoteric and symbolic meanings by doing this .... In any course one takes on Marseilles decks, one of the first things one learns is the importance and meanings of the colours. And this goes for the Wirth deck as well. Ah, this was what I wanted to know, thank you. Not having read Wirth myself, I hadn't realized that there was important significance in the colors.
-- Lee
|
Forum Library > Tarot Decks Threads By Month > Radical Wirth
Originally posted on the Aeclectic Tarot Forum on 20 Aug 2002, and now part of the Forum Library. Take part in active threads about Tarot Decks.
|
