Do you think a Tarot deck creator imprints or determines the potential of the deck?

[gregory]

6 hours ago, AJ-ish/Sharyn said:

I'm not tempted to buy that deck, but if I were, I wonder if I should be 'woke' and do a deep background check on Rackham, and should I do the same for Thorn at Duck Soup. It makes me tired to think about it. 

I stand by my opinion that unless someone is shoving their personal lifestyle/opinions in my face (Rosanne Barr comes to mind for some reason) I don't care 2 cents for, or condemn the artist. I care about the product. If the product offends me, I'm not spending my dollars or time on it. 

 

I'm rather with you. I think of the gorgeous music of Beethoven, and how he was a nasty abusive man...

[ilweran]

1 minute ago, gregory said:

I'm rather with you. I think of the gorgeous music of Beethoven, and how he was a nasty abusive man...

Though long dead, so he's not making any profit from you enjoying his work. That makes things a lot simpler.

[gregory]

There is that

 

And I do avoid J K Rowling these days....

[AJ-ish/Sharyn]

Long dead doesn't absolve much for me. Unless raised in a cave by wolves people know right from wrong. 

[ilweran]

33 minutes ago, AJ-ish/Sharyn said:

Long dead doesn't absolve much for me. Unless raised in a cave by wolves people know right from wrong. 

It might make the difference for some people though if the person isn't profiting in any way. Beethoven clearly isn't. My example of a composer earlier, if I buy his music he gets money. I don't want him to recieve my money.

[katrinka]

1 hour ago, AJ-ish/Sharyn said:

Long dead doesn't absolve much for me. Unless raised in a cave by wolves people know right from wrong. 

 

Wolves actually have wolf rules, and they're ethical in a wolf kind of way. 😁

But I agree, being dead doesn't absolve anybody. The thing is, though, if we eliminate the works of everybody who said or did something horrible, there isn't a whole lot left. That's a LOT of books, music and art. If a person was closed off to everything from Mozart to Wuthering Heights to classic films to John Lennon, the result would be ignorance. I don't read Ayn Rand or Hitler because they're just horrible all the way through. But if there's genius in something, it's worth slogging through some s*** to get to it.

But purchasing the works of a living person is a way of supporting them. They get paid, they get famous, and they get paid even more. And some peoples' ideas and actions are beyond what I care to be supportive of. I don't have Emily Bronte or Crowley here to argue with. But I can certainly go on twitter and tell JK Rowling why so many of us are disgusted with her.

Edited January 12, 2021 by katrinka

[rubystandingdeer]

You mentioned the decks by A.E. Stone, the Anieth Nature deck and the Stone Tarot.. I love the stone tarot and It has spoken to me on a deep level.

I have read that you did not like it back in 2017. The artist/creator does imprint. but, wow... this deck is incredible on so many levels. She had done her best to add enough in each and every card for us to see and use for our own readings.   

[WildWoman71]

I feel like the deck creator has an intention for each card they have created; but as a reader - since each of our life experiences and intuition and connections are different - - no two readers message will be exactly like anothers - creator of the deck or not.

 

So I guess my answer is no - a creator does not imprint the meaning of their deck - they infuse their knowledge and emotions into the deck and then release it to collective for each to receive what they will from it....

[Guest]

 

Everything has some intangible essence that makes it “it.” Cards are no different. Some refer to this as the voice or spirit but I prefer (in English) essence.

 

Not all essences are as strong as others. Often this is due to the creators not building as potent spirit as others (for various reasons). 

 

But they do put something of themselves in the cards.  

 

We cannot change an essence or strengthen it.  It can also be incompatible with the reader’s own self. 

 

Over time I have found older patterns have a stronger essence aligned for fortune telling. The Greenwood, however, is not aligned to this pattern. Also I prefer time-neutral cards — these are not locked into time space. 

 

[Raggydoll]

34 minutes ago, timtoldrum said:

 

Everything has some intangible essence that makes it “it.” Cards are no different. Some refer to this as the voice or spirit but I prefer (in English) essence.

 

Not all essences are as strong as others. Often this is due to the creators not building as potent spirit as others (for various reasons). 

 

But they do put something of themselves in the cards.  

 

We cannot change an essence or strengthen it.  It can also be incompatible with the reader’s own self. 

 

Over time I have found older patterns have a stronger essence aligned for fortune telling. The Greenwood, however, is not aligned to this pattern. Also I prefer time-neutral cards — these are not locked into time space. 

 

Well put, and I agree. There is an essence to decks. I think sometimes that essence is very much due to the creator but other times it is like if other, strong circumstances, have helped shape the imprint. 

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Raggydoll said:

Well put, and I agree. There is an essence to decks. I think sometimes that essence is very much due to the creator but other times it is like if other, strong circumstances, have helped shape the imprint. 

Yes. Very much so. There are certainly packs where something else has guided the hand or has drawn from something else.

[vulprix]

On 1/12/2021 at 10:17 AM, katrinka said:

[...] If a person was closed off to everything from Mozart to Wuthering Heights [...]

[...] I don't have Emily Bronte or Crowley here to argue with. But I can certainly go on twitter and tell JK Rowling why so many of us are disgusted with her. [...]

Do you know something about Emily Bronte that I don’t? If anything from what I have read, Charlotte Bronte seemed like a rather manipulative person...

 

Love all Bronte sisters’ works all the same 🙂 

[katrinka]

1 hour ago, vulprix said:

Do you know something about Emily Bronte that I don’t? If anything from what I have read, Charlotte Bronte seemed like a rather manipulative person...

 

There's racism in Wutherring Heights.

https://englishstudyhub.blogspot.com/2015/05/racism-in-novel-wuthering-heights-and.html
(Charlotte was no better - see Bertha Mason in Jane Eyre. Also Rochester's fortunetelling act. Jane Eyre was appalling enough to insspire Jean Rhys to write Wide Sargasso Sea in response. Charlotte was anti-Catholic too, as evidenced in Vilette.)

Oh, and Emily gave her dog a beatdown on at least one occasion.
https://the-toast.net/2014/06/10/the-animalistic-emily-bronte/

 

 

Quote

Love all Bronte sisters’ works all the same 🙂 

As do I. Just the way they put words together is amazing - I can read them again and again and still enjoy the novels, even knowing full well how everything ends. The prose is stunning. The fact that their work is still enjoyable in spite of the sisters' bigotry and animal abuse is testimony to the quality of their writing. 

Edited January 28, 2021 by katrinka

[vulprix]

2 hours ago, katrinka said:

 

There's racism in Wutherring Heights.

https://englishstudyhub.blogspot.com/2015/05/racism-in-novel-wuthering-heights-and.html
(Charlotte was no better - see Bertha Mason in Jane Eyre. Also Rochester's fortunetelling act. Jane Eyre was appalling enough to insspire Jean Rhys to write Wide Sargasso Sea in response. Charlotte was anti-Catholic too, as evidenced in Vilette.)

Oh, and Emily gave her dog a beatdown on at least one occasion.
https://the-toast.net/2014/06/10/the-animalistic-emily-bronte/

 

 

As do I. Just the way they put words together is amazing - I can read them again and again and still enjoy the novels, even knowing full well how everything ends. The prose is stunning. The fact that their work is still enjoyable in spite of the sisters' bigotry and animal abuse is testimony to the quality of their writing. 

Thanks for the tea, katrinka 🙂 🍵 I see what you mean.

[katrinka]

Yes. That's not to say they didn't experience discrimination - both class and sex. Their books are profoundly relatable, Anne's in particular.

 

If you haven't seen To Walk Invisible, I highly recommend it. 

 

But I still wish they'd condemned this stuff in all its forms.

[ilweran]

19 hours ago, katrinka said:

The fact that their work is still enjoyable in spite of the sisters' bigotry and animal abuse is testimony to the quality of their writing.

We are all influenced by the norms of the times we live in, were they bigoted even by the standards of their day. (If they're not it didn't make it ok, but it does give context).

 

It's over 20 years since I read Wuthering Heights and I've never read Charlotte Brontë.

 

Massive Tolkien fan though, and there's often discussion about racism in his books. I don't believe he was racist by the standards of his time and I think he would be horrified by white supremacists using his work for, well, anything really.

[katrinka]

6 hours ago, ilweran said:

We are all influenced by the norms of the times we live in, were they bigoted even by the standards of their day. (If they're not it didn't make it ok, but it does give context).

 

But what are the standards of our day? Systemic racism? State sanctioned murder of POC by police? ICE? The school-to-prison pipeline and cheap slave labor via private prisons?
Our times are no better. 

John Brown lived in the 19th century, roughly contemporary to Charlotte Bronte. She'd have heard of him. 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Brown_(abolitionist)

Charlotte did fear social censure - she was forever doing things to protect her sisters' reputations, even after their deaths. She kept The Tenant of Wildfell Hall out of publication for years after Anne died. But I can't even view her as a secret nonracist living in a racist society and having to play along. There's too much bile in those passages. And mixed race is reserved for the madwoman in the attic, there are no good or neutral POC in her books. 

People of all generations have that choice to make, to be racist or antiracist, and to what degree.

 

Quote

Massive Tolkien fan though, and there's often discussion about racism in his books. I don't believe he was racist by the standards of his time and I think he would be horrified by white supremacists using his work for, well, anything really.

Yes, there's degrees of this stuff. Tolkein is interesting. He actually made some clearly antiracist statements. OTOH, there's the Orcs.  🤨 He's on the racist spectrum, but not by as much as some.  I've never heard of him making the kind of sickening statements that L. Frank Baum did. But that's a whataboutism, not an excuse.

 

Edited January 30, 2021 by katrinka

[ilweran]

32 minutes ago, katrinka said:

But what are the standards of our day?

We'll that's the question, and something I do think about a great deal. Not just in terms of racism, but homophobia, sexism, the whole lot. We seemed to be moving in the right direction for a bit and now we seem to be moving backwards. In the UK hate crimes against all protected characteristics (except sex, because that isn't considered a hate crime, let's be honest, we'd run out of court time and prison space...) went up after the Brexit referendum.

 

I try to hold on to the positives. When I was 18 or 19 opinion polls regularly showed that a majority did not think gay people deserved equal rights, yet now sexual orientation is a protected characteristic, section 28 is long gone and gay marriage is a thing and became legal with very little fuss.

 

On the other hand a really amazing woman I worked with was driven out of her home by racists, and another friend was too worried to wear her hijab in public. Both of these were pre the referendum. And sadly I do have racist relatives.

[katrinka]

1 hour ago, ilweran said:

We'll that's the question, and something I do think about a great deal. Not just in terms of racism, but homophobia, sexism, the whole lot.

 

Yes, exactly.
 

Quote

We seemed to be moving in the right direction for a bit and now we seem to be moving backwards. In the UK hate crimes against all protected characteristics (except sex, because that isn't considered a hate crime, let's be honest, we'd run out of court time and prison space...) went up after the Brexit referendum.

 

They've gotten bold in the US. I think they were always there, but we had them on the margins, they knew to keep it somewhat quiet. 
Now they've found each other on the internet and they've been endorsed by some of our "leaders", so they're making a lot of noise: Proud Boys, Boogs, etc.
Technology has grown in leaps and bounds in our lifetimes, and it's always followed by social change. Like when the birth control pill came out, women were able to start demanding more rights. Electronics are making huge changes, for both good and ill. Etc.

It's too much too fast and I have a theory that a lot of people would like to return to the past. In some ways, I would too. But not bring back Jim Crow or a woman not being able to have a credit card - sheesh! I'd just like to see families able to live comfortaby on one income again. I don't care which of the couple works and which stays home - that's for them to work out. And racism, homophobia, etc. isn't going to bring that back. 

I'm going OT here and having a hard time wording this in a nonpolitical way, so I'll stop. 
 

Quote

I try to hold on to the positives. When I was 18 or 19 opinion polls regularly showed that a majority did not think gay people deserved equal rights, yet now sexual orientation is a protected characteristic, section 28 is long gone and gay marriage is a thing and became legal with very little fuss.

 

It's a tug-o-war here. I just hope good prevails.
 

Quote

On the other hand a really amazing woman I worked with was driven out of her home by racists, and another friend was too worried to wear her hijab in public. Both of these were pre the referendum. And sadly I do have racist relatives.

Ugh. Yes, I have those, too. I find it very hard to converse with my birth mom. I don't want to fight with her because she's in her 80's - I'm not going to change her - but I feel filthy hearing some of the things she says and not calling her out. So I mostly avoid her. It's sad.

Edited January 30, 2021 by katrinka

[devin]

On 1/29/2021 at 7:37 PM, ilweran said:

I think he would be horrified by white supremacists using his work for, well, anything really.

 

On 1/30/2021 at 2:26 AM, katrinka said:

Yes, there's degrees of this stuff. Tolkein is interesting. He actually made some clearly antiracist statements. OTOH, there's the Orcs. 

 

I read a wonderful essay on Tolkien by a traditional, somewhat reactionary, Christian type. It held the problems with Tolkien to be twofold:

 

1) His books racialize ,or maybe it would be better to say essentialize, morality, making them an unsalvageable ethical and moral mess. This "us versus the orcs" mentality, the essay maintains, could be taken as a decent summary of contemporary Western moral philosophy.

 

2) He tries to create a literary alternative to modernity by harking back to the world of ancient European epics. But he does so while being very much embedded in the present and thus ends up rewriting the past and riding roughshod over traditional European culture.

 

The essay also draws a direct parallel between Tolkien's project and that of 20th century nationalists:

 

Both operate within the realm of fantasy by ignoring actual European tradition and actual European history. Both are trying to create an alternative to modernity, but, by merely mirroring the social and philosophical currents of the present, they fail dismally. And, finally, both end up trapped like Tolkien's dwarves in their cockeyed attempt to recapture the dwarven ancestral homeland of Moria: "We cannot get out. We cannot get out. There is nothing more."

 

Cheery stuff.

 

Tolkien was not, of course, a fascist and his work has much to recommend it.

Edited January 31, 2021 by devin

[katrinka]

1 hour ago, devin said:

1) His books racialize ,or maybe it would be better to say essentialize, morality, making them an unsalvageable ethical and moral mess. This "us versus the orcs" mentality, the essay maintains, could be taken as a decent summary of contemporary Western moral philosophy.

 
Yes to all of what you posted, but I want to point out that in some cases, "us vs. them" is vital.

 Popper's Paradox 

So - us vs. the racists, or the nazis, good. Us vs. the orcs - no.

[ilweran]

1 hour ago, devin said:

His books racialize ,or maybe it would be better to say essentialize, morality, making them an unsalvageable ethical and moral mess. This "us versus the orcs" mentality, the essay maintains, could be taken as a decent summary of contemporary Western moral philosophy.

Tolkien himself struggled with the orcs, their nature and if they were capable of redemption.

 

Towards the end of his life he was rewriting his whole mythology (again!)...

[devin]

3 hours ago, katrinka said:

Yes to all of what you posted, but I want to point out that in some cases, "us vs. them" is vital.

 Popper's Paradox 

So - us vs. the racists, or the nazis, good. Us vs. the orcs - no.

 

Popper aside, I used to believe in the whole 'us vs. them' thing. Now, I'm not so sure. Nothing intelligent to say on the matter, though.... so here's a song:

 

 

3 hours ago, ilweran said:

Tolkien himself struggled with the orcs, their nature and if they were capable of redemption.

 

Towards the end of his life he was rewriting his whole mythology (again!)...

 

Yeah, no offence to the man or his talent intended!

[gregory]

On 1/29/2021 at 5:37 PM, ilweran said:

We are all influenced by the norms of the times we live in, were they bigoted even by the standards of their day. (If they're not it didn't make it ok, but it does give context).

 

It's over 20 years since I read Wuthering Heights and I've never read Charlotte Brontë.

 

Massive Tolkien fan though, and there's often discussion about racism in his books. I don't believe he was racist by the standards of his time and I think he would be horrified by white supremacists using his work for, well, anything really.

 

I agree with you - but I'm not sure about Tolkien.

 

I object to tolerance as a concept, BTW. That suggests there is something that needs to be TOLERATED - which is in itself a suggestion that there's something wrong with it.

 

I'm for acceptance,

[ilweran]

Acceptance is obviously better, but if somebody can't accept, tolerance is better than the alternative and hopefully will turn into acceptance one day.

 

I'm just trying to bring up my son to treat all people as people.