VII Pents: Shoo Sighs?

Fulgour

SEVEN of PENTACLES

Why do you suppose that there's one "pentacle" on the ground,
and what about his shoes being different colours ~ see saw city?

*

"The Turning Point" is my nickname for the Seven of Pentacles:

Long tedious hours have blunted enthusiasm, dulling anticipation
as imagination fails. The season's labours have come down to a
single, decisive moment of truth. Whether to labour further for
the fruits so nearly at hand but still requiring prudent husbandry,
or forsake as sour grapes such profits in favour of the pleasures
of the immediate gratification available from a too early harvest.
 

Moongold

The characters in VII Pentacles and VII Wands each wear mismatching shoes.

Both of these images reflect unhappiness, dissatisfaction in a way. Seven is the seeker. The VII Pentacles character has been creating something for a while and now he realises that it is not what he wants to do with life. The shoe doesn't fit in any more. It's no longer right and he no longer wishes to go on with the job. That is why the Pentacle is on the ground. He can't finish. No longer wants to.

Notice how he is holding a kind of wand? Flip to VII wands and here we see someone else who is trapped in a way of reacting to the world. It's called conflict, or a siege mentality and sooner or later if we want to get on with life we have to change that attitude. His shoes are a complete mismatch.

For both of these characters, the shoe no longer fits. They will next be seeking change. Your phrase The turning point is apt. This character has one different shoe on already, as if he has subconciously made up his mind to walk a different path.
 

Vincent

Moongold said:
The characters in VII Pentacles and VII Wands each wear mismatching shoes.

...The shoe doesn't fit in any more...

... His shoes are a complete mismatch...

...For both of these characters, the shoe no longer fits. They will next be seeking change. Your phrase The turning point is apt. This character has one different shoe on already, as if he has subconciously made up his mind to walk a different path.

Certainly the figure in the Seven of Wands has mismatching footwear, but the Seven of Pentacles is less clear;

http://www.ardis.co.uk/tarot/celtic_cross_example.htm

I think this scan is probably from the 'Original' RWS, and as you can see, there is no mismatch in the footwear.

Tom Tadfor Little says of this deck that;

"This edition is unusual because of its coloring. The publishers went back to some old cards that were printed before the original plates were lost in World War II. These cards are supposed to be closer in appearance to those originals... "

Frank Jansen says of RWS decks, in his Manteia article, that;

"Of lesser importance for the identification is the color density since these often vary within the same print run. Besides, it has not been possible for me to view all the listed early editions in the original, and color copies tend to distort the colors in a variable degree"

So, while it is possible that the authors intended something significant with the possible mismatch of colours, it is by no means certain. It is at least equally possible, and even more probable, that the mismatch is due to a printing error.

Not as much fun of course, but at least we have the enigma of the Seven of Wands' mismatched footwear.


Vincent
 

Emily

I've just checked on the so-called 'Original Rider Waite', blue tudor rose box and the boots are the same colour on there but on my pocket Rider Waite the boots are two different colours. I've never noticed this before.

Edited to say:-

Just checked Vincent's link and that is the Original Rider Waite 7 Pentacles - the deck looks very appealing online but the colours are alittle harsher in real life.
 

Emily

This is slightly off topic, but in these two versions of the same card can you see how the slight re-drawing of the faces has created two expressions? In the Original Rider Waite he is looking down on the pentacles with an air of wonder and achievement, a proud expression on his face - Now check out the later version and his expression is different - no smile playing around his mouth, an altogether more sad expression. Just thought I would share. :)
 

Fulgour

Hi Emily

Thanks for your thoughtful comments and insights!

Here is a link to the "1971" version of this card:
http://www.learntarot.com/bigjpgs/pents07.jpg

We each of us have the advantage of our own opinion
as to the intention of the Artist. There is no mention by
Waite of any particular colour scheme, except when he
was sat there trying to describe Pam's cards for his book.
Most of the time, he seems confused by what he sees...

Why then suppose a printer's error, since Pam did the
actual paintings ~ she is the Artist of record and note.
 

Vincent

Fulgour said:
There is no mention by Waite of any particular colour scheme, except when he was sat there trying to describe Pam's cards for his book.
What exactly did Waite mention in regard to "any particular colour scheme"?
Fulgour said:
Most of the time, he seems confused by what he sees...
How so?

I don't think he is the one that is confused here.
Fulgour said:
Why then suppose a printer's error...
There are a few reasons we might suppose a printer's error. Read my previous post and see what Tom Tadfor Little and Frank Jansen have to say, as well as some other reasons outlined below.

Now, what reason do we have to suppose it is intentional?

Then we can compare evidence and see which appears more likely.
Fulgour said:
since Pam did the actual paintings ~ she is the Artist of record and note.
This appears to be an answer in search of a question.

Let me clear up any confusion.

No-one is disputing that Pamela Smith was the original artist. What is in dispute is whether the different colour of the shoes is intentional or the result of a printer's error.

If all RWS decks had the same colours, then there would be no discussion on any colour mismatch. Unfortunately, that is not the case. In some decks they are wildy different, in some there is only a slight difference, and in others there is no difference at all. It doesn't matter which deck we believe to be the 'original' one because the mistake, if there is one, could have occurred on the very first printing.

The only thing that would really clear this up, apart from talking to the artist herself, would be to look at the original painting, and this apparently no longer exists.

Other reasons I believe it to be a printers error is because there is a history of printing errors within this deck specifically, and in printing Tarot decks generally. Also, I believe that if the author wished to make a mismatch in footwear significant, they would have done so in a far less subtle manner, but this is simply an opinion.

Of course, none of this rules out the possibilty it was intentional, but it certainly casts doubt around it.



Vincent
 

Penelope

If the shoe fits...

Why don't we simply look at the cards where the boots
don't match and talk about the symbolic possibilities
found in that interesting fact, and not worry about it?

On all of my decks, the boots are coloured differently.
I've always seen this as a part of this card's meaning.
 

AmyV

I hadn't noticed the different colouring of the shoes on the Seven of Pentacles, though recently I noticed the different footwear on the Seven of Wands and was intrigued by it because I had always seen the guy in the card as knowing where he was going and working toward it..

But anyway, my take on the issue of the colouring - whether it reflects Pamela Colman Smith's original artwork - is this: even when cards look exactly the same, everyone interprets them differently; certain cards have certain meanings for certain people. I believe that the cards (or whoever/whatever directs them) know how we will interpret them, that's why those particular cards come up, and that's why beginners can give accurate readings. If a different person laid cards on the same theme then they would get the same answer from different cards - the cards that symbolise that meaningto them.

In light of this, I would say there's no reason in the world to worry about whether the difference in colouring of the guy's shoes in the Seven of Pentacles was intentional or not - whatever way your card shows the situation (same colour/different colour) is how that card gives you the message you receive from it, and your take on the card is worth as much as Pamela Colman Smith's (I hope that's not blasphemy!!!).