venicebard said:
Do you see now, LePendu, the damage done by even so small a 'violation' as having the trumpet up to the angel's mouth rather than simply held close at the throat (where man's internal trumpet resides, that is, what enables man to shout)? (If you ask me, it's the Noblet that has the most vampires in it, though their teeth don't always show... e.g. LE PENDV, and those zombiesque round eyes of LEMPERATRISE...of course I admit it is amplified somewhat by the pale flesh - do you know if it had more color originally?)
Hee hee.
As for the trumpet to the throat... I think you can guess my thoughts.. it's not the point of the card, but reading something into a detail that probably had nothing to do with the creator's intent. I just don't go along with thinking that the details in the cards represent deeper connections. Not to say that I'm not a detail maniac... I focus on them to trace patterns across time, to watch the **changing evolution** of the cards.
I also think it might be worth stating here and now that while I love the Noblet, I in no way think it is "THE True TdM"... as I don't think any of the decks we have reflect even near completely what the **possibly/probably** early patterns looked like.
For instance, the undated Heri deck is fascinating to me because it is the only deck I know of that has cards shaped and drawn similar to the Noblet. There are details in it that I would expect that are missing from the Noblet... like the faces on the shoulders of the Charioteer, Noblet missed this! But on closer inspection.. there are tiny details that Heri has that are not on Noblet, even though it is pretty clear that they were using a similar source. The eaglehead on the back of the chair of the Emperor for instance.
When I look at these things.. I'm not considering them for "meanings", I'm considering them from the evolutionary changes that occur in the patterns. I believe the Charioteer should have faces on his shoulders because of the overwhelming precedence of it as part of the iconography, not because the faces are.. say.. "Osiris and Isis" or "The Summer King and The Winter King".
On the other hand, there are things that I personally believe that may or may not be historically accurate. For instance, the penis on The Fool in Noblet. I absolutely believe that is a historical detail that has been lost. I believe it because it "just seems right" to me. It makes sense. It explains what the "dog" is doing. And it has connections to old painted cards which show the fool with his privates exposed and being tormented (by children). So in this case, even though Noblet is the only TdM with this detail, I accept it as correct... but not because of some esoteric explanation. But on the same card, the way that Noblet has colored the stockings doesn't seem quite right to me.. I think Hadar has done the best job of restoring how the stockings would have been originally... whatever that means.
As for the vampires... ; ), I agree that Noblet is probably the most ghoulish of all the TdM (with the exception of Vieville now and then if you are willing to include him in the party). The Popess is absolutely ghastly!
As for other/more color, what we have with the Noblet is what we have. But breaking another TdM fascination.. I'm not one who holds too much stock in the coloration of the cards. There are some "standards" that seem fairly traditional, but every deck has it's own use of color and I just don't believe there are deep meanings connected to them. I think the colors were chosen usually based on tradition, personal taste, availability, and harmony.. and of course.. the limits of using stencils to color with.
best,
robert
....Thought you had found this in your research 