ashjey Posted June 22, 2019 Posted June 22, 2019 How important are card backs for you when choosing/buying/ reading with a tarot deck? I personally like more simple card back designs. To me, there's something about complex backs that distracts from the card meaning. There is always a bonus in reversible back designs. Readers can choose to read with reversals or not!
Raggydoll Posted June 22, 2019 Posted June 22, 2019 Definitely important. I dislike card backs that let a deck down. (But sometimes the card back is way more promising than the deck itself. It’s such a bummer when that happens!! 😂)
Flaxen Posted June 22, 2019 Posted June 22, 2019 Horrible card backs put me off using them...I’m think of the Haindl in particular - that eye! Some of the early LS decks also have very bland backs as does the Druidcraft. I can live with them but they feel out of kilter with the artwork of the actual deck.
Decan Posted June 22, 2019 Posted June 22, 2019 (edited) The card backs are important for me, and an ugly back can ruin a deck! But sobriety is as well important for a back; it's difficult to find the right back for a particular deck, and very often it's not fit. It should allow to read reversals, wether we whish to read reversals or not. Edited June 22, 2019 by Decan
katrinka Posted June 22, 2019 Posted June 22, 2019 (edited) The backs are a very secondary consideration, so much so that they don't figure in my decision to purchase or not. I generally don't read reversals, and when I do, I don't look when I'm riffling. But, that said, some decks have some truly horrid backs. I have a perfectly lovely reproduction of the Faustino Solesio Sibilla. However, while LS has not put wonky translations or black title bars on my copy, they have chosen to do this: A much as I love the card faces, those backs are derpy. I wish they'd put regular card backs! Edited June 22, 2019 by katrinka
Decan Posted June 22, 2019 Posted June 22, 2019 (edited) @katrinka yes, poor Sibilla della Zingara, even with this edition! And, if a card from this deck was an idea for the back (I don't think though), I would choose Superbia/the peacock because this one is a talisman. Well, I should open a dedicated thread to ask prayers and a lot of candles too (also the black ones they are selling at Lucky Modjo for the hopeless cases concerning this matter particularly, lol). Otherwise, I'm restoring for my own use this Sibilla because I don't think someone will do it for me, so... DIY! Edited June 22, 2019 by Decan
McFaire Posted June 22, 2019 Posted June 22, 2019 Some backs are a real turn off. Down with PLAID! Ugh. Whose idea was that???? I would rather have a plain back like DruidCraft rather than an ugly back that doesn't match at all. Also, I agree it's nice for the backs to be reversible, even if you don't use reversals. But not a deal breaker for me, if I love the deck.
Raggydoll Posted June 22, 2019 Posted June 22, 2019 28 minutes ago, McFaire said: Some backs are a real turn off. Down with PLAID! Ugh. Whose idea was that???? I would rather have a plain back like DruidCraft rather than an ugly back that doesn't match at all. Also, I agree it's nice for the backs to be reversible, even if you don't use reversals. But not a deal breaker for me, if I love the deck. Yes. It has taken me a really long time to accept the plaid backs on the vintage RWS decks. (And I am still just at the point of acceptance, I do not love or like it). I just cannot fathom why they would have chosen such ugly backs. Especially compared to the roses and lilies pattern!! Vintage playing cards usually have the most gorgeous backs, and the backs are often way prettier than the fronts.. in my opinion!
gregory Posted June 22, 2019 Posted June 22, 2019 I prefer the blankest, plainest backs out there. Fancy ones detract rather. I want to clear my mind; if the backs are too lovely, they don't help with that.
Nordica De Spell Posted June 22, 2019 Posted June 22, 2019 (edited) If they’ve given the effort to create a beautiful back, I get the subliminal message that since they show respect for their own deck, then maybe that deck is worth my respect as well... so, it sometimes makes me take more than one look at that particular tarot deck to see whether it’s for me. But while I definitely prefer beautiful backs, it isn’t a requirement. As long as they’re not totally hideous it isn’t a deal-breaker. (Neutral backs, like plain or plaided, are also ok.) (The colours chosen for the backs and edges, when put together though, and especially if the borders are involved too, has sometimes deterred me from a deck, or a version of a deck.) Reversible, well is convenient to me, but not necessary. I can do reversals with another deck, or look another direction while I pull the cards, or some other technique. Edited June 22, 2019 by Nordica De Spell
Raggydoll Posted June 22, 2019 Posted June 22, 2019 I have a couple of decks (mainly oracles) that don’t have any backs, in the traditional sense. They tend to instead feature an illustration on one side and then list facts or meanings on the other side. In the beginning I struggled with them and was unsure how to shuffle them, but as I’ve started doing intuitive readings I have begun to zoom out when shuffle so I basically don’t notice what the cards look like until I deliberately zoom back in when they are laid out in front of me. Sometimes I shuffle with my eyes closed but more commonly I shuffle with my sight turned inward, so to speak. So for that purpose the backs shouldn’t matter much. But I do like to sit and study the images or meditate with my decks and that’s when the backs feel like an important part of the experience.
Venus Rising Posted June 28, 2019 Posted June 28, 2019 On 6/22/2019 at 1:04 AM, Raggydoll said: Definitely important. I dislike card backs that let a deck down. (But sometimes the card back is way more promising than the deck itself. It’s such a bummer when that happens!! 😂) Yes, this!! hahaha. On 6/22/2019 at 2:28 AM, McFaire said: Some backs are a real turn off. Down with PLAID! Ugh. Whose idea was that???? I would rather have a plain back like DruidCraft rather than an ugly back that doesn't match at all. Also, I agree it's nice for the backs to be reversible, even if you don't use reversals. But not a deal breaker for me, if I love the deck. The backs on the Robin Wood Tarot are painful for me. So loud. I wish she would reissue that deck with new backs, so I could buy it LOL 😄 And plaid. go away. I'd rather plain backs than ugly patterns.
katrinka Posted June 28, 2019 Posted June 28, 2019 The card backs I like best are "busy", but they don't compete with the faces or scream for attention. You don't really notice them that much. I like these old playing card backs: https://www.vecteezy.com/vector-art/100498-old-card-back-vectors
Raggydoll Posted June 28, 2019 Posted June 28, 2019 42 minutes ago, katrinka said: The card backs I like best are "busy", but they don't compete with the faces or scream for attention. You don't really notice them that much. I like these old playing card backs: https://www.vecteezy.com/vector-art/100498-old-card-back-vectors Love those!! They remind me so much of when I first started reading cards. I could not get hold of a tarot deck so I was gifted my grandfathers old pack of playing cards. I did cartomancy style reading for two years before I finally was gifted a tarot deck by a relative (I was 12 when I stared reading so I had no money of my own to purchase a deck, but at the age of 14 I got one for Christmas!).
katrinka Posted June 29, 2019 Posted June 29, 2019 I think they're overdue for a revival. Quick question re: Those plaid backs virtually nobody likes - I read back in my early teens that it was called a "Tarotee" back, and was pretty standard at one time. But I really don't see plaid backs on old cards often at all. Google got me a lot of sites selling the USG blank deck, and this: http://www.tarotforum.net/showthread.php?t=194368 It seems it was fairly common with old Tarocks, but not really a Tarot thing. So why does USG cling to it so? Since 1971?
Raggydoll Posted June 29, 2019 Posted June 29, 2019 14 minutes ago, katrinka said: I think they're overdue for a revival. Quick question re: Those plaid backs virtually nobody likes - I read back in my early teens that it was called a "Tarotee" back, and was pretty standard at one time. But I really don't see plaid backs on old cards often at all. Google got me a lot of sites selling the USG blank deck, and this: http://www.tarotforum.net/showthread.php?t=194368 It seems it was fairly common with old Tarocks, but not really a Tarot thing. I had an old tarock deck and it had a gorgeous back. 14 minutes ago, katrinka said: So why does USG cling to it so? Since 1971? Tradition? 😬😆 Maybe Stuart Kaplan was the one who thought of it and really really loved it and no one has dared to tell him it’s not all that great? 😅😅😅 But no, seriously, I believe the plaid backs predate him (did he not simply reprint a pre-existing 1JJ Swiss deck as their first product for US games? So it might truly be an act of nostalgia/tradition. Because that deck had a plaid back too, just a brown one - arguably even worse than the RWS backs!)
Decan Posted June 29, 2019 Posted June 29, 2019 Maybe it was for saving money. This way if the standard is "plaid" they don't have to pay more for a design work. Well, maybe, I don't know really however because it would be penny-pinching, and not US Games only used extensively the plaid backs, but Grimaud too here!
Decan Posted June 30, 2019 Posted June 30, 2019 Below a pic of the back of the Grand Jeu de Mlle Lenormand (Astro Mythological by Mlle Lenormand). Not to everyone liking, maybe, but very classy and one of the best that I have.
Raggydoll Posted June 30, 2019 Posted June 30, 2019 56 minutes ago, Decan said: Below a pic of the back of the Grand Jeu de Mlle Lenormand (Astro Mythological by Mlle Lenormand). Not to everyone liking, maybe, but very classy and one of the best that I have. Gorgeous!!
katrinka Posted June 30, 2019 Posted June 30, 2019 I love that one. There's another one out there I've seen images of, the same design but all in shades of blue. It reminds me of Delft china. I also have an older copy, late 60's-ish. The backs aren't plaid, they're one of Grimaud's nondescript dull blue check designs. But some of the corners bear the imprint of puppy teeth - one of my dogs who has since grown old and died. And the stock is fantastic - so I prefer that one, it has a fantastic vibe. Sometimes backs aren't everything. But my ideal Grand Jeu would be old stock and blue flower backs. It doesn't exist, but I can dream!
Recommended Posts