Talk:Waite-Smith Tarot

From Tarotpedia

[edit] Title of Deck

The deck has familiarly been called by a number of names, including 'Rider', 'Rider-Waite', 'Waite-Smith', 'Rider-Waite-Smith', and 'Waite-Colman Smith' (and variations and abbreviations of these!).

When US Games took over publication of the deck, it registered the title 'Rider-Waite', and from this packaging and marketing decision, many publications from many authors have referred to the deck as such.

Frank Jensen, I believe, was one of the early and strongest supporter in using a more generic name for the deck, honouring also its artistic creator, Pamela Colman Smith. In Manteia, Jensen says:

"For the last couple of years I have worked on identifying different early editions of the so-called Rider-Waite tarot, which I prefer to call Waite-Smith to let Pamela Colman Smith, the artist, get her due respect. After all, the English publishing house Rider has only been responsible for a minor part of the total number of packs of this best selling tarot, published continously throughout the past 90 years."

In one sense, this has had a terrific and important consequence: others have taken his lead and quickly adopted the more appropriate titling of the deck in general (rather than the specific imprint published by one publisher) and using the hyphened names of its creators.

Problem is, he unforunately oversimplified Pamela's surname, and that for no good reason that I can see. Pamela herself has signed (or rather initialised) her cards with the three initials: PCS. Her surname being 'Colman Smith', it stands to reason that the deck created by Waite and herself is, despite thiry years of different usage, better universally rendered as 'Waite-Colman Smith' (or "Waite and Colman Smith"; "Waite/Colman Smith").

--Jmd 03:31, 6 February 2006 (PST)

[edit] Referring to the Rider deck itself

In the tarot literature and in discussion forums, RWS has become an ambiguous term that has come to refer not just to the Rider deck itself (i.e., one particular member of that family with its particular colour scheme first published by Rider, known for a long time as the Rider deck and now published by US Games as the Rider-Waite deck) but to the immediate family of RWS decks (e.g., Rider Tarot, Universal Waite, Radiant Waite, etc.).

Even if one were to use the appellation 'Waite-Colman Smith' (or "Waite and Colman Smith"; "Waite/Colman Smith"), there remains the aforementioned ambiguity. This raises the issue of how to refer to that one particular member of that family with its particular colour scheme (i.e., the Rider deck which is now published by US Games as the Rider-Waite deck) to distinguish it from other decks in that family (e.g., the Universal Waite, the Radiant Waite). It is arguably ambiguous to have a sentence which reads that Waite and Colman Smith "created the Waite/Colman-Smith deck". They created the Rider deck but they didn't create the Universal Waite, Radiant Waite, etc. In my view, the appellations Rider deck, Rider Tarot, Rider-Waite deck, Rider-Waite Tarot still have a place as a reference to the colour-schemed deck style that Waite and Colman-Smith created in 1909-1910 and currently published by US Games as Rider-Waite. Perhaps the better general reference to that colour-schemed deck style would be the Rider Tarot as a way of encompassing decks of that colour scheme printed both before US Games and currently by US Games. --Aquarius Rising 07:35, 6 February 2006 (PST)

There is only one deck created by Waite and Colman Smith, the others, such as the 'Universal Waite' etc have their own special names, and are all linked via the Tarot Decks Family: Waite-Colman Smith style decks.

We are nearly reaching a stylistic decision on this, after many long discussions and taking what also appears to be your own preference.

--Jmd 18:36, 7 February 2006 (PST)