sixdegrees Posted August 2, 2020 Posted August 2, 2020 For the last year or so I've been developing my method for reading the Tarot de Marseille, and in the process I took a detour to rework my understanding of the RWS (which you can read here). In studying the Marseille, I've realized that there are a number of pip decks that I would like to read with but that won't work in relation to the system that I've developed. My system for the TdM relies partially on the visual arrangement of the foliage and the "looks" of the human figures on the cards, so beautiful decks like the Prediction Tarot (which have quite spartan minors and many figures that face outwardly) really won't work. What follows, then, is a system that I'm developing to read minors in pip decks that do not adhere to the Marseille imagery. It is provisional and only lightly tested, and I would be interested in hearing others' ideas in order to refine it. It begins by flipping conventional understandings of suit and number interactions. Many people who read pip decks though a combination of suit and number give primacy to the suit: The suit indicates an arena of life, and the number indicates a descriptor within that arena. So, from this vantage, Cups may refer to "feelings or relationships," and fives might refer to "upset," so the Five of Cups refers to "upset feelings or relationships." What I am proposing grants the numbers greater primacy and understands the suits as descriptors. This idea came to me in part through contemplating the work of Vincent Pitisci, a popular YouTube reader who largely disregards suits when it comes to reading the minors. In other words, Twos in a reading indicate "choice" no matter the suit symbol, and Pitisci only only utilizes suit correspondences (i.e. Swords = mental life, Coins = physical life) when it seems pertinent. I thought: What if I do the same--what if I pay attention to number more than suit and allow the suit to indicate secondary qualities rather than an arena/context? I came up with the following set of meanings for the numbers. I based it in part on the numerical correspondences of Kelly from the YouTube channel The Truth in Story, since hers seemed immediately sensible to me, but I augmented her work in places to match my own understandings of the numbers and qualities of the numerically-associated major card. I also borrowed ideas from Lenormand and Sibilla traditions in thinking through what forces commonly operate in human life, as well as from Enrique Enriquez's dynamic understanding of the pips in order to try and capture the widest variety of shifting circumstances in human endeavor. - ACES upright indicate BEGINNINGS and reversed indicate ENDINGS. - TWOS upright indicate COOPERATION and reversed indicate CONFLICT. - THREES upright indicate GAIN and reversed indicate LOSS. - FOURS upright indicate STABILITY and reversed indicate INSTABILITY. - FIVES upright indicate OPPORTUNITY and reversed indicate OBSTRUCTION. - SIXES upright indicate COMMUNICATION and reversed indicate MISCOMMUNICATION. - SEVENS upright indicate CHANGE FOR BETTER and reversed indicate CHANGE FOR WORSE. - EIGHTS upright indicate BALANCE and reversed indicate IMBALANCE. - NINES upright indicate INTEGRATION and reversed indicate SEPARATION. - TENS upright indicate SUCCESS and reversed indicate FAILURE. In terms of the suits-as-descriptors, rather than the elements or some other grafted association, I decided to generate adjectives based on the most common materials of the objects themselves. This decision seemed prudent, especially because I wanted a method that worked across a wide variety of pip decks, and elemental associations are not at all consistent in this subsection of the tarot community (I think of Trevisan's Crystal Tarot). - SWORDS = STEEL - BATONS = WOOD - COINS = GOLD - CUPS = GLASS It struck me that Swords and Batons are affiliated not because they represent Air and Fire, but because of their shape: Both are long and pointy. Similarly, Coins and Cups are affiliated because they are stout and curved. To keep up a sense of balance and polarity, however, I also decided that Swords and Coins should be opposed and Wands and Cups should be opposed largely on the basis of their materials and my sense of the objects themselves (though I realize that this also aligns with the oppositions of the elements most commonly associated with the suits.) I then attempted to generate descriptors that made sense with the above meanings of the numbers. For example, WARM and COLD might describe a situation or force, but I didn't feel like that contrast worked consistently with the above numerical ideas (what, after all, is Warm Success or Cold Instability?) BATONS/CUPS Batons cards represent forces or situations that are NATURAL, while Cups represent ones that are ENGINEERED. While there is some naturally-occurring glass in the world (like fulgurite, when lightning hits sand), most glass objects are wrought purposefully by human hands. Sticks, conversely, occur abundantly in natural spaces. In addition, Batons cards can indicate situations/forces that are ENDURING, while Cups represent ones that are FRAGILE. The Sequoias in California demonstrates that wood lasts for a very long time, whereas everyone knows that glass can be very brittle. Finally, Batons cards signify situations/forces that are well-known or RECOGNIZED, while Cups cards signify those that that are overlooked or UNRECOGNIZED. These qualities stem from a very simple contrast in the materials: Wood is opaque while glass is translucent. SWORDS/COINS Swords cards represent forces or situations that are RIGID, while Coins represent ones that are MALLEABLE. Steel is very hard to mold without reaching considerably high temperatures, while gold is among the most adaptable metals on earth. Furthermore, Swords cards can indicate situations/forces that are FOCUSED, while Coins cards can indicate ones that are DIFFUSE. A steel sword comes to a very sharp point, whereas gold coins exist and circulate as a multitude. Finally, Swords cards might signify situations/forces that are SIMPLE, while Coins cards signify ones that are COMPLEX. This dimension is related to the focused/diffuse one, but it can also be conceived of in other ways. Often the simple flash or threat of steel is enough to get things moving in a narrative, where as gold references payments, gifts, bribes, and all other more elaborate modes of influence. This materials-based contrast results in the following descriptors for the Suits: - SWORDS/STEEL = RIGID, FOCUSED, or SIMPLE - BATONS/WOOD = NATURAL, ENDURING, or RECOGNIZED - COINS/GOLD = MALLEABLE, DIFFUSE, or COMPLEX - CUPS/GLASS = ENGINEERED, FRAGILE, or UNRECOGNIZED In this method, then, the number on a minor card indicates a basic situation or force that is operative in the reading, and the suit lends adjectives that refine our understanding of this situation or force. The upright Eight of Batons could indicate a sense of enduring or naturally-emergent balance between forces, whereas the upright Eight of Cups could indicate a balance that is purposefully fostered or delicate. Of course, any reader using this method would need to make the best choice of adjective on the basis of the question, context, other present cards, and gut feeling. The reversed Two of Swords could indicate a rigid, focused, or simple conflict, or some combination of these factors that the reader would need to decide. There are times that that the choice is easier, however. While the upright Ace of Coins could possibly indicate a malleable or diffuse beginning, the strangeness of those combinations more likely means that the card indicates a complex one. Importantly, for this method to work, the reader would need to indicate the context or arena of the reading in the question itself; general "tell me about my life" readings will probably yield answers to broad to be useful. Because the suits no longer indicate spheres of life like work or interpersonal relationships, readers will need to determine this focus in the prompt (i.e. "Tell me about my relationship with X" or "What is going on with my promotion at work?"). ***** As I said at the start, I am happy with my initial practice of this method but still in the process of refining it. I'm curious to know what others think and if they have any ideas for how to improve it. Can you think of any contrasting adjective that might be more illuminating than the ones I've assembled for the suit objects/materials? Ones that can be added to the list? Is there some major dimension of human experience not adequately captured in the numbers now? Any other thoughts?
Recommended Posts