UnitedCardists.com - The forum for Cardistry, Magic, Custom Decks and All Things Playing Cards.

sinjin7 wrote:

Conturbia wrote:There is a concept behind, the two “lady of Justice” differs to represent the two complementary concepts

I'm sorry, I just don't see the relationship. Perhaps there will be other details in the deck to support what your suggesting, but just from the back designs the concepts don't make sense. You have Lady Justice in her classic pose (blindfolded, scales raised above her head, sword held in lowered arm) on the Equality deck, not the Justice deck. That classic pose is always associated with Justice, therefor more appropriate on the Justice deck. Why would Lady Justice even be on the Equality deck anyways? The only differences in the poses between the two "ladies of Justice" is which arm is raised, with either the scales or the sword.

For arguments sake, let's just say you're equating the scales for Equality and the sword for Justice, so that's simply the reason why the raised scales is on the Equality deck and the raised sword is on the Justice deck. That would be a mis-interpretation of the symbolism of Lady Justice. The scales do not represent equality, they represent the consideration/weighing of judgement. The sword does not represent justice, it represents the power and authority of law. And the blindfold obviously represents impartial neutrality. All these symbols collectively represent Justice. Not Equality.

Equality and Justice are not complementary concepts, by the way. In fact, they are actually antithetical. Equality would make Justice obsolete. Justice only exists to address inequality. So if there is no inequality, or only equality, there is no need for justice.

Look, I realize I'm nitpicking here. But as an attorney who actually has a statue of Lady Justice in my office and are governed by these concepts every time I'm in the courtroom, these inconsistencies are more glaring to me. Most other people probably won't notice or care about any of this, so take my comments with a grain of salt.

Adonael wrote:
I have no idea on what figure could otherwise be used for the Equality deck, but according to google it should be Lady Liberty. I'm not from the US, so does that make sense? When I punched 'lady justice lady liberty' into images this is what I got:

466790-740x740-1383697398-primary.jpg

I mean, that looks like a strong argument to me!

ICantShuffle wrote:You could try a stab at doing an Aequitas deck. Take a step back to the roman ideal of justice and equality in one deck.

The other option is Veritas, truth. There's plenty of mythological material there, if you want a female personification of a complementary concept. Then you could just call the decks Aequitas and Veritas.

Conturbia wrote:Liberty has been ditched due to the similarities with existing decks. And.. Equality and Liberty are different concepts too..

JuFiN wrote:Not looking to debate the no doubt irreparable damage that seeing a tit would cause a child, but I do want to say that the jokers are one of my favorite part of this deck please do not change them!

Eric Lee wrote:As I said, it's not me nor the kids I'm concerned about, but the parents of the kids.

vasta41 wrote:Backed! Updated OP. I wish the black suits were black instead of green (looks a little Christmasy this way) and I wish the tucks were embossed. Embossing would look really nice on these tucks but alas, it isn't even a stretch goal

vedus wrote:I hate these courts. Like, a lot. Unreasonably so.

erniesthings wrote:Sorry, I wasn’t trying to start a debate on what is appropriate content.
Mostly wanting to know if the art would need to change to stick with current printer or if the art would stay the same and the printer would change.

Conturbia wrote:If the change is major (something like changing the printer - that I don't want to do) I will restart the campaign to be sure that no one is tricked in something they don't want to support.