University Press RWS deck

rwcarter

I have 3 University Press RWS decks (well, technically 2 UP and 1 Carol Publishing who bought out UP) and none of them contain LWBs, which likely explains the gap in each of the boxes....
 

Chiska

Did the 1959 2-part Red Box have a Lwb? No suspicious gap in the one I have.
 

rwcarter

Did the 1959 2-part Red Box have a Lwb? No suspicious gap in the one I have.
Mine doesn't have a LWB. I'd have to go pull that out again to see if there's a gap in it. The two tuckbox decks definitely have a gap in them.
 

Chiska

Mine doesn't have a LWB. I'd have to go pull that out again to see if there's a gap in it. The two tuckbox decks definitely have a gap in them.

I am home now and in looking at mine, I would say that there would have been no LWB. There just isn't any room!! The 78 cards plus the title card saying that deck is to be used in conjunction with the full-color plated book fits VERY snugly.
 

Ruby Jewel

Writing on backs

I just bought this deck from an estate sale, and the backs have been written on with a ballpoint pen. Would anyone happen to know how I might be able to remove the writing?
 

RichardG

Yikes!

Would be very frightened that anything you might use to remove the ink would also dissolve the waxy matte finish on the cards too. What a dilemma! \
Maybe this current deck is 'to have and to hold' until another University Books Inc deck comes along....
I have found I develop a strange attachment/fondness for damaged decks that come my way...
 

rwcarter

I just bought this deck from an estate sale, and the backs have been written on with a ballpoint pen. Would anyone happen to know how I might be able to remove the writing?
~5 years ago I bought a pre-copyright USG Rider Waite from eBay. The deck was in great condition except that the previous owner (friend of the seller) had written the Arabic equivalent of the Roman numeral on each of the Minors 2-10 in blue ball point pen in the upper left white border of the card. (Strangely though, no similar changes were made to the Majors.) As I knew that the RWS images aren't all the same size, I knew not to trim the deck. So I blackened all the borders with Sharpie paint pens. And since I was making a change to the deck anyway, I went all the way and pimped the deck completely. Pictures can be seen in the "Pimp my Rider!" thread in Talking Tarot.

That likely won't help you here, but you could try either shelf liner to recover the backs of the cards or you could "paint" over them with markers. You would then have to use spray varnish on them to seal in your changes so that they don't bleed onto the fronts of the cards.

Rodney
 

Ruby Jewel

Hi RichardG and rwcarter, Thanks so much for your thoughts. I like your idea of allowing the imperfections to become endearing. As they say in Buddhist language, they are "a precious jewel" meaning an opportunity to learn to let go of my perfectionism. In a way, it is an authentic expression of the previous owner as what they scribbled were their definitions.

Still, I have a small something I plan to try. I'm a painter, and some of my old brushes from the 70s are irreplaceable...you can't buy the same quality anymore. I bought some paint dissolver from an art supplier and cut the tin ferule back on them leaving old hardened paint that had accumulated over the years exposed. This remover is so gentle they claim that you can use it on clothes, skin,...whatever. Anyway, it worked. I was just amazed. If that doesn't work, well I shall just accept what I can't change and be a happy camper.
 

GloriaScotti

2 intro cards are correct

My second red-box set came with two different Introduction cards!
Ugghhhh...University Press decks - they'll be the end of me!

There is nothing wrong with it: my deck is the same and those two intro cards you are showing are correct. One advertises the DECK and the other one the BOOK. Just please read what the text reads...on each of them.