Little Baron
I don't think anyone has mentioned her [unless I missed it] so I will add
Isobel Radow Kliegman for her approach to the cards via Kabbalah.
LB
Isobel Radow Kliegman for her approach to the cards via Kabbalah.
LB
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
International Tarot Award: Lifetime Achievement Award
Teheuti
If we're adding those who've already passed on then this becomes far more complicated. In addition to those mentioned and all the "classical" tarotists, I'd add Brian Williams. If the candidates need to still be living then you need to subtract Sallie Nichols who died soon after her book was published.
There are lots of dedicated people out there who rarely get publically recognized because they are only known in their own neck of the woods:
Thalassa - who has put on the San Francisco Bay Area Tarot Symposiums twice a year for about 15 years.
Barbara Rapp - who has been putting on the Los Angeles Tarot Symposiums and other tarot events.
Janet Berres
Diane Wilkes - webmistress of TarotPassages.com
Jeannette Roth of TarotGarden.com
Bonnie Cehovet
Solandia
These are people who do great service to the Tarot community but are not well known outside of their own spheres of influence.
Because the selection committee is world-wide it tends toward people who have written definitive public, international works that are referenced and/or collectable. Those of us on the internet tend to favor people whose work is best known here.
Oh - one more person I think could be added for her involvement in at least three decks and several books - Juliet Sharman-Burke. She also fills the Jungian slot nicely.
And, how about Hajo Banzhaf?
To narrow down the list I think you'd have to start establishing some specific criteria.
Mary
There are lots of dedicated people out there who rarely get publically recognized because they are only known in their own neck of the woods:
Thalassa - who has put on the San Francisco Bay Area Tarot Symposiums twice a year for about 15 years.
Barbara Rapp - who has been putting on the Los Angeles Tarot Symposiums and other tarot events.
Janet Berres
Diane Wilkes - webmistress of TarotPassages.com
Jeannette Roth of TarotGarden.com
Bonnie Cehovet
Solandia
These are people who do great service to the Tarot community but are not well known outside of their own spheres of influence.
Because the selection committee is world-wide it tends toward people who have written definitive public, international works that are referenced and/or collectable. Those of us on the internet tend to favor people whose work is best known here.
Oh - one more person I think could be added for her involvement in at least three decks and several books - Juliet Sharman-Burke. She also fills the Jungian slot nicely.
And, how about Hajo Banzhaf?
To narrow down the list I think you'd have to start establishing some specific criteria.
Mary
caridwen
I agree that Solandia should be on that list because of her work on AT which has brought such a huge bunch of tarot fans together. Some of which have gone on to create decks of their own and write books and organize seminars.
I don't agree with the criteria for the list - it is very male biased. As far as I know Tarot is not solely about history but reading and furthering our understanding of how to read as well as research. I also don't agree that women don't have time to contribute as much because of time commitments. I think that women contribute in a different way to men and that is not being recognised here.
I don't agree with the criteria for the list - it is very male biased. As far as I know Tarot is not solely about history but reading and furthering our understanding of how to read as well as research. I also don't agree that women don't have time to contribute as much because of time commitments. I think that women contribute in a different way to men and that is not being recognised here.
Mimers
caridwen said:I don't agree with the criteria for the list - it is very male biased. As far as I know Tarot is not solely about history but reading and furthering our understanding of how to read as well as research. I also don't agree that women don't have time to contribute as much because of time commitments. I think that women contribute in a different way to men and that is not being recognised here.
I disagree. There are people who have no time and there are people that have lots of free time. It has nothing to do with their gender. I don't think anyone is trying to be unfair here and I think if we try to make it gender balanced we detract from it's purpose. I, as a woman, would not want to win any award if I knew that my gender was one of the reasons I was selected. People are people. not women, or men or black or asian or whatever. These are all people that are very deserving to be on the list.
Sometimes I feel that by trying too hard to make things fair, we end up making them unfair.
caridwen
Mimers said:I disagree. There are people who have no time and there are people that have lots of free time. It has nothing to do with their gender. I don't think anyone is trying to be unfair here and I think if we try to make it gender balanced we detract from it's purpose. I, as a woman, would not want to win any award if I knew that my gender was one of the reasons I was selected. People are people. not women, or men or black or asian or whatever. These are all people that are very deserving to be on the list.
Sometimes I feel that by trying too hard to make things fair, we end up making them unfair.
And I in turn disagree.
Please then explain why, in a field of roughly 90% women, there are three on the list.
Mimers
Why does everything have to be justified? Why does it have to match % wise?
It is that way because those are the persons they felt were the most qualified. That's all. It has nothing to do with gender.
It is that way because those are the persons they felt were the most qualified. That's all. It has nothing to do with gender.
caridwen
Mimers said:Why does everything have to be justified? Why does it have to match % wise?
It is that way because those are the persons they felt were the most qualified. That's all. It has nothing to do with gender.
Then we will have to agree to disagree.
le pendu
caridwen,
Who is missing from the list?
What name can you offer, regardless of sex, that has in your opinion made a greater lifetime contribution to tarot than Dummet, Greer, Pollack, or others already on the list?
Who is missing from the list?
What name can you offer, regardless of sex, that has in your opinion made a greater lifetime contribution to tarot than Dummet, Greer, Pollack, or others already on the list?
caridwen
le pendu said:caridwen,
Who is missing from the list?
What name can you offer, regardless of sex, that has in your opinion made a greater lifetime contribution to tarot than Dummet, Greer, Pollack, or others already on the list?
What is your criteria for the list and I will come up with some names.
jmd
'Criteria' will alter in part depending on our own values - which is why we are NOT setting criteria other than 'award for outstanding contribution to tarot' - for which there will only be ONE recipient in 2007 (heck, we still haven't even raised the necessary funds yet!).
For the record, most names were submitted and added by women, and did not ask their criteria, only that they thought the person should be considered as recipient on a par with others mentioned.
For the record, most names were submitted and added by women, and did not ask their criteria, only that they thought the person should be considered as recipient on a par with others mentioned.
