Georg is on a plane this afternoon. It's just a short flight for a weekend vacation. But still, it feels weird.
Okay, okay, you're reading this to find out what's up with the deck, not to hear me complain about my personal neuroses. So here's what's up. I talked to Joanna on the phone yesterday. I think this is the first time I've actually spoken to anyone at Llewellyn, except for meeting Barbara Wright at the Chicago conference a couple of years ago. Everything else has been handled through email or postal mail.
Anyway, we talked about the spot illos for the book. It looks like she's going to use either a portrait of Victoria or a "God Save the Queen" decoration from the Jubilee the open the court cards section, and the flying monkey heads for the section on readings (yay!).
She wanted to talk about what to do for the majors and the minors. It looks like for the minors, I'm going to make a simple collage featuring the four suit symbols. For the majors, we discussed using an image from one of the cards, but we both agreed that isn't a good solution. For one thing, it leads the reader to expect all the other chapters to begin with a card image. Which they don't, so it could be confusing.
Another problem: I think that highlighting one card like that sends a message about that card being the focal point of the deck. I have to admit, there are a couple of cards that do embody the tone or purpose of the deck to me. But maybe I shouldn't impose my interpretation onto everyone else. So we let the majors a bit "up in the air." I said I'd think about it over the weekend.
In other news, there isn't room for all four "Amazons of the Bow", but Joanna is going to use one with the colophon at the end. She asked me why I like them so much, to which I didn't have a good answer -- they just caught my eye I guess. She also asked why, since I like them so much, I didn't use them in the deck. I do have a more rational answer to that: I didn't find them until I was just about done, and I couldn't think of a good place for them in any case. There were actually a lot of wonderful images that I wasn't able to work into the deck. I should put a "Didn't-Quite-Make-It Gallery" somewhere on this site.
Also, we talked briefly about using a source image for the appendix on collage (an example of removing an image from its original context and creating new meaning for it). The two suggestions I sent her were the Temperance Angel, originally a society lady doing party tricks for her children, and an image from the theater that yielded figures for 3 cards: 7 of Cups, 3 of Coins, and 7 of Coins.
Joanna felt, and I agree, that the original Temperance is a more interesting image. However, she's a bit concerned about the faces in the background being blurry. I think that might be an effect of the photocopier, not the original art. So I'll be making another trip to the library this weekend to see if I can't get a clear scan. (Unless Georg took his laptop with him, in which case it will have to wait until he gets back.)
On a pragmatic note, Joanna mentioned that the proofs of the book may be a bit later than October 8. She says that we'll get extra time if we need it, and it won't hold up the release date. It sounds like our proofs are going to be printed from the Quark files, with most of the art in place and etc. That will be really neat, to see what the pages are actually going to look like.
In other news, I talked to Valerie and she is fine about being credited in the acknowledgement rather than the table of contents. So I sent the letter on for her to initial.
Oh, and I heard back from Dover (surprise, surprise!). They said they are "investigating" the status of the books I asked about and will get back to me. I have no idea whether this will pan out or not, but at least now I have the name and email address of an actual person there.
I thought I didn't need that many, but I just went through the deck and counted, and there are actually over 20 cards with no "notes on sources": 11 from Women, 9 from Men, and 2 from Music. That doesn't include the aces, which I don't know what to do about. They're all pictures of hands! How are we ever going to get interesting information about a picture of a disembodied hand.
Well actually, now that I think about it, the Ace of Coins is kind of interesting. It must have come from an ad for walnuts, because the giant hand was originally holding a giant whole walnut. I cut the walnut away and slipped the pocket watch in between its fingers. But that's only 1 ace. The rest are just plain old hands.