{The Invisible Cards [continued(6)]}[10th July 1987]

[Redbook4:31-32][19870710:0855d]{The Invisible Cards [continued(6)]}[10^th July 1987]

19870710.0855

[continued]

It is not necessary to have a pack* with 80 printed cards in it, although to have 2 extra publishers/advertisement cards may be helpful. In the tradition of Tarot ambiguity, one might perhaps describe these two cards as 'Agents'.

I am uncertain as to how they could be individually named. I note that although the Joker [h]as historically been identified as developing from the Fool, the name Joker could well apply to aspects of +M** (although the appearance of the Joker strongly suggests the Fool)***. So, 'The Actor'? The other card might be a Publisher's record of his name and details – so 'The Record'?**** However, I do not particularly favour these names.

*[See 5 last previous entries (since [Redbook4:28-29][19870709:2358]{The Invisible Cards}[9^th July 1987].]

**{(cf.[2])}.

***{Of course, the Joker only appears in conventional games packs – not in full Tarot packs, where the Fool appears.}

****{or 'The Recorder'?}

{& see VI.270.}

{cf.[[Redbook4:250-253][19871221:1955]{The Tarot Pack}[21st December 1987],]p.253 – 2 Jokers per pack.}

[continues]

[PostedBlogger21072016]