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

[gregory]

You are doing the right thing. 👍

[ilweran]

Just now, gregory said:

You are doing the right thing. 👍

 

There have been some interesting conversations 😅  Which I don't remember having when I was a child, except for the time I came out of school repeating a rhyme I'd heard from other children which was racist - it was primary school and I just didn't realise. My mum very kindly and patiently explained why it was unkind and I never said it again. She did the same with some of my friends when we were older and they were using words insulting to people with certain disabilities, again just explained the meaning, my friends were horrified, never used them again. But there was never any hate or bigotry expressed towards LGBTQ+ (though that wasn't talked about generally so much then), different cultures, religions etc.

 

I think these days it needs to be talked about explicitly because he's going to come across stuff online when he's older that is intolerant/unaccepting of difference and probably convincingly packaged to seem reasonable to the unwary - something else we've started to touch on.

[gregory]

When I was doing my practice teaching modules, a 7th grade boy came in wearing a very fancy (and, I admit,, attractive) T-shirt with some slogan in Italian - it was obscene, IIRC - and refused to change it, even though he was told he would be sent home. Until a member of staff took him aside and told him what it actually meant. He blushed alarmingly, and turned it inside out - and rushed home to change over the lunch hour... Sometimes we malign children unfairly. I wonder who bought it for him - possibly some father with a silly sense of humour - or with no taste or decency !

Edited January 31, 2021 by gregory

[katrinka]

7 hours ago, devin said:

 

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:

 

 

Woody was one of ours. 💘

I've had occasion to contemplate fascism a lot in recent years. We came way too close for comfort. And I've come to the conclusion that historically, only one thing works to get rid of it. That thing is heavily based in "us vs. them." Germany, for instance, is not fascist now. 

Just my thoughts on the matter. If anyone has another fix, I'd like to hear it.
 

Quote

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

He was brilliant and flawed, like a lot of other people mentioned ITT.
 

6 hours ago, gregory said:

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,

I agree. Tolerance is just putting up with someone. It doesn't imply that you actually care about what happens to them. 

But the paradox can work that way, too: "The paradox of acceptance states that if a society is accepting without limit, its ability to be accepting without limit is eventually seized or destroyed by the unaccepting."

"Tolerance" is just one of those poor word choices that caught on too much, I guess. Like a bad meme.

 

5 hours ago, ilweran said:

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

YES. These things are taught.

Edited January 31, 2021 by katrinka

[katrinka]

5 hours ago, ilweran said:

I think these days it needs to be talked about explicitly because he's going to come across stuff online when he's older that is intolerant/unaccepting of difference and probably convincingly packaged to seem reasonable to the unwary - something else we've started to touch on.

Yes. I think you can create a kind of core ethic in early childhood when it's easiest to push diversity and keep the ugly stuff out, but after that you have to work on their "immune system", so to speak. The other side is tricky and insidious. 
https://medium.com/@DeoTasDevil/the-rhetoric-tricks-traps-and-tactics-of-white-nationalism-b0bca3caeb84

 

[Guest]

7 hours ago, gregory said:

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 agree. Tolerance is but a form of permissible limits. Once it is adopted, the limit increases until we are left with ... well we but need to turn on the news. 

[ilweran]

22 minutes ago, katrinka said:

Yes. I think you can create a kind of core ethic in early childhood when it's easiest to push diversity

I don't even see it as pushing anything, it's just people. No matter who we love, what colour skin we have, where we were born, even how we dress, what music we listen to (thinking of the terrible murder of Sophie Lancaster here), whatever, we are all human, people, first and ultimately have more in common than we have differences.

[katrinka]

54 minutes ago, ilweran said:

I don't even see it as pushing anything, it's just people. No matter who we love, what colour skin we have, where we were born, even how we dress, what music we listen to (thinking of the terrible murder of Sophie Lancaster here), whatever, we are all human, people, first and ultimately have more in common than we have differences.

Well, yes, it would depend on your definition of "push". 
I used it in the sense of actively striving for the diverse options - playmates from various backgrounds, no all-white doll collection, lots of PBS, etc.

[katrinka]

1 hour ago, timtoldrum said:

I agree. Tolerance is but a form of permissible limits. Once it is adopted, the limit increases until we are left with ... well we but need to turn on the news. 

Yes. This.

(Is that an upcoming blog I'm seeing in your signature?)

[Guest]

15 hours ago, katrinka said:

(Is that an upcoming blog I'm seeing in your signature?)

It is. I’ve typed up five articles of the Fortūna Picturebook The Fortune-Teller’s Tarot (3 in longhand too). 2 on the Tarot Fortune Cards and one on the PL. Hope to start posting from Wednesday . 

[katrinka]

The Tarot Fortune Cards? I'm SO there! 😁

[Page of Ghosts]

I'm reviving this thread as I've found myself in something of a pickle - I recently bought the Crooked Way Gothic Tarot by Duck Soup, was blissfully excited about it, and today I came across the issue of that deeply, deeply controversial (for good reasons, I should add) oracle deck of theirs and I feel so conflicted. There is no one to blame but myself in this situation - I had heard of the oracle deck many years ago and I think this was one of the reasons for why I never bought the Rackham Oracle or the Zirkus Mägi Tarot. The memories of the controversy faded and I didn't look at any of their other decks, nor did I see anyone write much about them, or did I think about them for years and years, and I only stumbled upon it after I was browsing the interwebs for their delivery times, which I could not find on the website, and saw a google suggestion for "duck soup tarot controversy". Sigh. It's not a secret in the tarot community, as discussed previously here, but I guess once these controversies slow down after the initial blowup there is naturally less current discussion about it, and it slips out of the consciousness, especially if you have some memory issues like I do. There was a tiny thing in the furthest back of my mind while I browsed their website, but I could not grasp it. I probably would not have bought the deck if I had remembered about that oracle deck, which must have been that tiny thing I felt somewhere in my mind. But, well, this is not the crux of the issue.

 

What is done is done. There is nothing I can do now (I sent an email and politely asked); the deck is paid for and will be shipped out soon. Eventually it will be here in my hands and I'll have to figure out what to do. It's a beautiful deck but I think I will struggle with the association I now have to the oracle deck, being that it's the same creator and all. Some of you have well formed opinions about how you deal with controversial decks, or decks controversial by association, but I am kind of fluttering about without a solid conclusion. I wish I could be the kind of person who was unaffected by things like this, but it's difficult for me. I can see both sides to this - death of the (still living) author versus feeling very uncomfortable with the associated oracle deck and the decision to keep it available for purchase over so many years. And of course the doubling down and defending it, with no change of mind after being presented with differing viewpoints. Still, I can only operate within the realm of things I can personally control, so by owning the deck it's only useful to focus on myself and my relationship to it, not so much the deck creator and what they've said and done that I don't agree with or understand. And if that should be too difficult for me, there's always the option to rehome it. I'm sure there are plenty of people who take less issue with the controversy and would be happy to own it. First I still want to give it a chance myself, however.

 

Aside from what has already been discussed here previously, I wonder if any more people on this forum have struggled with the same thing. Did you reach a conclusion? Were you able to connect and work with your deck or did the unfortunate association make that impossible to you? I read the entirety of the Bonestone and Earthflesh Tarot thread after the creator ended up in my YouTube recommendations - I didn't know she was making a deck or that it had become so controversial - so I'm wondering how any of you who got it ended up getting along with that one, for example.

Edited March 20, 2021 by Page of Ghosts

[Stephanie]

I think the tarot deck creator leaves some kind of imprint as they determine the meaning. But reading success, I think, is limited to the reader. I'm a beginner at tarot reading though and I own one deck, Raider tarot.

[Guest]

An excellent thread and range of views that influences us all differently, for sure.  For me, the effect is that I am ditching the idea of having a default deck.  You people are much further along the journey than me so have the job of sorting through an environment you're intimately a part.  The curious effect i'm experiencing is that the closer I consciously move toward exploring tarot, the further away I get.  So my arbitrary ideas on which deck to use or refer to as default, for discussion's sake, become unecessary.  I'm aware of some of the history behind the RWS deck, and that would ordinarily be enough to ditch it, but how far back would I have to go to find something untainted and purely universal - would such a thing even exist?  Then at the other end of the scale a thousand new decks, all with their new political bias spring up... what are they all looking for?  Is it getting further away from a common "root" so to speak?  Maybe one of them will illustrate the singular concern of our era in the way RWS has attracted a "classic" status.  Right now though, how could I pick it?  The implications and assumptions of the word "classic" are dubious in itself.  So the answer to my assumption that I need a default deck turns into the conclusion that no, I don't, and without a deck I move further away from tarot?  I'm left with my obvious bias, such as the one I have against oracle decks that are limited by a phrase rather than the endless parameters of an image, but that's someone else's business and might be good for them to get them somewhere from where they are.  If I ask, "Tell me about the Sun" and you reply, "Well, it's this this this and this" and then show me your card and it's a picture of a snowflake at night and nothing more, what difference does it make?  On the other hand, if you show me your card and I say, "That's Christian Mystic symbolism..." all I've done is started conflict, and that isn't what I asked or what we were going to do.

 

On a personal note, the parallel question of knowing about the history of an artist, their work, and whether or not to own or use their work has been an active process in my life for at least the last ten years.  There are values and approaches I recognise immediately as unacceptable to celebrate/experience and so I leave them.  This doesn't mean I repress their existence, I mean, real life keeps shoving those old evils in new forms in our face more and more so we don't actually need the old examples when we have the present day ones right in front of us.  When I come across that stuff, in music, or a film or an image or a phrase, or a style, I remember who I was when I first experienced it, and can feel that, and I acknowledge who I am now, and make a judgement based on the difference between those versions of myself.  I can then appreciate the process, and tell myself, ok, time to let that go because real life in the present awaits. 

 

As always... this is just, like, my opinion.

[katrinka]

4 hours ago, Sparrow said:

So my arbitrary ideas on which deck to use or refer to as default, for discussion's sake, become unecessary. 

 

I think the RWS is very good for discussion purposes, because everybody knows that one. 
A "default" deck doesn't have to be the default for all purposes. I've been using the Tarot Fortune Cards (Thomson Leng) more than the others lately, you could call it my current default. But if I talk about it here, there's going to be precisely two people who get what I'm talking about, since it's based on Eudes Picard and not the Golden Dawn. A lot of the art is different, the elements are assigned differently, it's a different system. So it's my default for reading, but for discussion, there's RWS. 

I can agree, there's no ultimate "default" deck. 
 

4 hours ago, Sparrow said:

I'm aware of some of the history behind the RWS deck, and that would ordinarily be enough to ditch it, but how far back would I have to go to find something untainted and purely universal - would such a thing even exist?  Then at the other end of the scale a thousand new decks, all with their new political bias spring up... what are they all looking for?  Is it getting further away from a common "root" so to speak? 

 

I wouldn't call the newer decks politically biased. They do try to be more inclusive, and that's coming from a good place - "white cishet" shouldn't be a default, either. 
Of course the road to hell is paved with good intentions, and these decks can get things all wrong. I've seen a good deal of stereotyping and cultural appropriation, for instance. 

 

Those old wipipo decks will work. It's all symbolic anyway, those straight white people are just shorthand for people. You can read Tarot, Lenormand, Kuan Yin sticks, Kippers, Runes, bones, Tibetan Mo, whatever for literally anybody. That's the beauty of it. 

The common "root" would be the old Tarots, I think. The Viscontis, the TdMs...Tarot de Marseilles especially lends itself well to reading. If you don't mind rough woodcuts, that's the way to go...
https://tarot-de-marseille-heritage.com/english/index.html

 

The method is a bit different from the Golden Dawn type decks. The Magician is a con artist, the Hanged Man is a pittura infamante - no transcendence there, it's more like the way Mussolini ended up, lol. The Pips are generally read according to number and suit, like playing cards (which the Tarot is) and you can bring in other techniques like color pooling, elemental dignities...

There's a great resource in progress here: https://damefatespicturebook.com/the-picturebook-of-fate-the-fortune-tellers-tarot-2/
 

4 hours ago, Sparrow said:

Maybe one of them will illustrate the singular concern of our era in the way RWS has attracted a "classic" status.  Right now though, how could I pick it? 

You don't need to pick it. The human condition is the same as it ever was. 
Today the issue is climate change. In the Depression, it was the Dust Bowl. Today, it's COVID. At other times in history, it was plague, smallpox, influenza.
The more things change, the more they stay the same.

 

We're just trying to have food and a comfortable place to stay, maybe some companionship and a few nice things. And that's threatened sometimes, and we want to know what to do and how it will turn out. Same as it ever was.
 

4 hours ago, Sparrow said:

The implications and assumptions of the word "classic" are dubious in itself.  So the answer to my assumption that I need a default deck turns into the conclusion that no, I don't, and without a deck I move further away from tarot? 

 

It really sounds like you're overthinking all this. 😉

 

4 hours ago, Sparrow said:

I'm left with my obvious bias, such as the one I have against oracle decks that are limited by a phrase rather than the endless parameters of an image, but that's someone else's business and might be good for them to get them somewhere from where they are.

 

I loathe most of those things, too. Endless affirmations and no answers.

 

4 hours ago, Sparrow said:

If I ask, "Tell me about the Sun" and you reply, "Well, it's this this this and this" and then show me your card and it's a picture of a snowflake at night and nothing more, what difference does it make? 

The difference is that it would be a horrible, horrible deck. 🤣

 

And yes. There are decks out there that are THAT BAD.

 

4 hours ago, Sparrow said:

On the other hand, if you show me your card and I say, "That's Christian Mystic symbolism..." all I've done is started conflict, and that isn't what I asked or what we were going to do.

 

I don't see any conflict. (And I am decidedly NOT Christian.)
Tarot is a product of Christian Europe. It's full of Biblical stuff like Judgement and Devils and Popes and angels. But again, these are symbols, shorthand for things that are universal. When I see Judgement, I don't read it as some trial court paradigm that happens after we die and are supposedly raised from the dead, so we'd better accept Jesus OR ELSE. That would be eating the menu. It can be a wake up call, it can be something starting up again that you thought was over with...you get the picture.

 

It's fine the way it is. It speaks. And if you monkey with it too much, try to wiccanize it or whatever, you lose something.
Just take it as it is: "If it ain't broke, don't fix it."

 

4 hours ago, Sparrow said:

As always... this is just, like, my opinion.

 

As this was mine. 🙂

 

Edited March 29, 2021 by katrinka

[Guest]

16 hours ago, katrinka said:

 

Thanks for your reply and the resources in your links, katrinka.  I'm looking at The Picturebook of Fate, now, Tarot de Marseille trumps cards, and an example relevent to this discussion comes up:  There's a juggler.  I suppose there are still quite a few people make a living as literal jugglers and would have a reality dictated by the environment they had to work in, but personally, I would see a juggler once every 20 years at best.  Old era, direct influence from the artist.  Common root?  Mostly metaphorical, and the stock meanings relate to those metaphors of actually being a juggler.  In the list of  Health related concerns there's a degenrative disease called Dupuytrens Disorder first described, with remedy, in 1831.  Its something a juggler or those involved with repetative manual skills might've commonly suffered.  Another way to describe the situation could be, " Over time, Dupuytren's contracture can cause one or more fingers to stay bent toward the palm. This can complicate everyday activities."  Complication of everyday activites through overuse of a certain skill is certainly something anyone can relate to, even if you aren't a juggler or living in the 1800's.  So despite the artist or the era, there is something useful to be found. I'm beginning to like this deck already... oh no personal bias! 😁

[katrinka]

Juggling can certainly be a part of what he does, but I think you're putting too much emphasis on that. 
In the old decks, he's more commonly referred to as Le Bateleur:

 

He's an itinerant con-artist type. At best, it's a little like the carnival coming to town: you know it's a cheat but you're paying to be entertained. At worst, it's more like a shell game or three card monte. Nearby cards will clue you in to which it is.

He comes to the village, sets up his table, creates illusions, takes what he can from the rubes and moves on. He's still relevant. You may not see it happening at a table in a field, but it happens a lot, both on a small scale and on corporate levels. Read the papers. 😉

I saw Ken Kesey in a film once. He made a quarter disappear and said "You know it's a trick, but just for a split second there, anything was possible." It can be kind of like that, too. That's why "potential" gets mentioned a lot with this card. 

Edited March 29, 2021 by katrinka

[Guest]

21 hours ago, Sparrow said:

Thanks for your reply and the resources in your links, katrinka.  I'm looking at The Picturebook of Fate, now, Tarot de Marseille trumps cards, and an example relevent to this discussion comes up:  There's a juggler.  I suppose there are still quite a few people make a living as literal jugglers and would have a reality dictated by the environment they had to work in, but personally, I would see a juggler once every 20 years at best.  Old era, direct influence from the artist.

Ordinarily, I refer to the card as le bateleur. But I have had several readers request I use English titles. In choosing the titles I sought to choose a title that reflects the card’s nature. Le bateleur is not a magus or magician — he’s a sleight of hand trickster. Over time, the term juggler was used to refer to both this card and street performers.  
 

They did not just juggle but were adept at several skills designed to entertain. 

 

22 hours ago, Sparrow said:

In the list of  Health related concerns there's a degenrative disease called Dupuytrens Disorder first described, with remedy, in 1831.  Its something a juggler or those involved with repetative manual skills might've commonly suffered. 

The health meanings I associate with the cards come from experience. Primarily, le bateleur will indicate migraines. However he can indicate any issues with the hands and fingers. 

 

On 3/28/2021 at 11:27 PM, Sparrow said:

For me, the effect is that I am ditching the idea of having a default deck.

The reason one works towards a primary deck — which becomes your default — is that card meanings are locked in the design - they’re not transferable. So eventually, one has to have one main one % You can use others. I do use another (the tarot fortune cards), but the ancien is the primary. It is the set I have formed a connection with.

[Guest]

7 hours ago, timtoldrum said:

The reason one works towards a primary deck — which becomes your default — is that card meanings are locked in the design - they’re not transferable. So eventually, one has to have one main one % You can use others. I do use another (the tarot fortune cards), but the ancien is the primary. It is the set I have formed a connection with.

 

Ah yes now, as a pre-beginner, this might be my problem and I though about this last night.  Are you saying that RWS doesn't measure/illuminate the same things as Tarot de Marseille?  Can you extend your statement a bit for me?  Two further questions emerge if that's the case: What place does personal bias/predispostion in the reader have on reading tarot, should they somehow be "fixed" or "solved" or be an expression of an archetype before they read?  Could a person construct a deck made up of various decks, measuring things that their personal archetype or persona could read?  Would that be ridiculous? Would it just be projection, of the unhelpful kind?