Not connecting to a new deck

[LadyNettle]

Hey everyone! I recently got a new deck, The Harmony Tarot, and I think it is so beautiful. It seems like a great fit for me as it's for growth and healing, something I'm working on at the moment. 

 

My problem is I am not connecting to this deck at all, an issue i've never had before. My last two decks i've picked up, starting reading, and it all made sense. With this one my readings just feels jumbled and don't quite make sense. I'm really not sure what I'm doing wrong.

 

Any advice? 🙂 

[katrinka]

I'm not familiar with it, so I googled. Is this it?

 

I can see a witch for the High Priestess, but I can't make sense of "The Divine" for the Lovers. Hopefully it came with an adequate guidebook, because the first step would be to understand the artist's reasoning behind the images. Good luck.

[LadyNettle]

6 minutes ago, katrinka said:

I'm not familiar with it, so I googled. Is this it?

 

I can see a witch for the High Priestess, but I can't make sense of "The Divine" for the Lovers. Hopefully it came with an adequate guidebook, because the first step would be to understand the artist's reasoning behind the images. Good luck.

I’m still trying to work out how she has organised it, the lovers seem to be the 7th card in the deck. Rather than connect a card to a usual deck, I just go with the meaning in the book. 

 

This doesn’t stop the readings from feeling off/jumbled.

 

I chose this deck as I thought it might be refreshing to have different cards, no preconceptions of what a card is meant to mean, but what it feels like, does that make sense? 

[joy]

Hey @LadyNettlethis post is in the wrong section, it is not a Personal Reading but a rather general question. I will move this thread to Tarot Talk & Technique 🙂

[LadyNettle]

Just now, joy said:

Hey @LadyNettlethis post is in the wrong section, it is not a Personal Reading but a rather general question. I will move this thread to Tarot Talk & Technique 🙂

Thank you so much! Apologies I only joined today and there’s so much to look at hehe

[joy]

1 minute ago, LadyNettle said:

Thank you so much! Apologies I only joined today and there’s so much to look at hehe

No worries at all 🙂

[gregory]

Her website does say she has "reimagined tarot...."

 

The suits are named for the seasons, I gather ?

[Grandma]

Welcome to TT&M @LadyNettle!

 

3 hours ago, LadyNettle said:

I'm really not sure what I'm doing wrong.

 Maybe nothing.  Many of us have had decks we just don't click with.  Sometimes a deck I find difficult to read with turns out to be just right for meditation or as an art deck.  Since you find these cards beautiful, maybe just looking at them another way will allow you access to their power.

[Anabiyeni]

I find that my tastes, abilities, and interests change over time. Sometimes if I set a deck aside for months or years and go back to it with new eyes and more life experience, it will click for me. 

 

9 minutes ago, Grandma said:

Sometimes a deck I find difficult to read with turns out to be just right for meditation or as an art deck.  

I agree with this, too.

[katrinka]

3 hours ago, LadyNettle said:

I chose this deck as I thought it might be refreshing to have different cards, no preconceptions of what a card is meant to mean, but what it feels like, does that make sense? 

We need "preconceptions", especially with a deck like this that doesn't communicate a clear concept through the images. We don't have any framework telling us what to make of a lady with an upside down tree hanging over her. 

That one is titled "The Divine", but it doesn't immediately communicate that - an image of a deity would, but again, you'd be going off of preconceptions, what you know about the deity. 

 

When people say that preconceptions have no place in card reading, what's meant is that we need to be as neutral as possible about the sitter and the issue at hand, kind of detached. Knowledge is another matter - we draw on what we know.



 

[stephanelli]

15 hours ago, LadyNettle said:

Hey everyone! I recently got a new deck, The Harmony Tarot, and I think it is so beautiful. It seems like a great fit for me as it's for growth and healing, something I'm working on at the moment. 

 

My problem is I am not connecting to this deck at all, an issue i've never had before. My last two decks i've picked up, starting reading, and it all made sense. With this one my readings just feels jumbled and don't quite make sense. I'm really not sure what I'm doing wrong.

 

Any advice? 🙂 

 

12 hours ago, LadyNettle said:

I’m still trying to work out how she has organised it, the lovers seem to be the 7th card in the deck. Rather than connect a card to a usual deck, I just go with the meaning in the book. 

 

This doesn’t stop the readings from feeling off/jumbled.

 

I chose this deck as I thought it might be refreshing to have different cards, no preconceptions of what a card is meant to mean, but what it feels like, does that make sense? 

Did it come with a good guidebook that explains the creator's thoughts behind the deck?  If so, I would study that to firstly work out the structure and ideas behind the deck.

Once you have a structure, I'd then flip through and pull out any cards that don't make sense and use the guidebook to work out where the creator is coming from with each of those cards (depending on how many there are, this stage can take some time).

Finally I'd start doing small readings and trying to get all the dots to connect and put together a reading that makes sense!

 

Hope that's helpful!

[AlbaTross]

I have a couple decks I didn't really connect with at first, but I have become more fond of them over time, and although neither of them are my main go-to decks, I do use them occasionally for the types of readings I think they're the best fit for.  So, it's quite possible you will connect more with your deck later on.  

 

That said, decks that take liberties with the naming of cards are a bit of a pet peeve of mine, whether it be suits, or Majors.  I don't mind so much if it's something like Staves instead of Wands, or if one or two Major cards are swapped out and it's immediately clear what the new name represents, but some decks really deviate from the original card names.  I can see myself maybe trying such a deck again in the future (the novelty deck I started with technically does this with the suits), but only once I've completely mastered all the card meanings, as I might be looking for a new challenge at that point.  Even then, I might be more inclined to just try another deck tradition.  If I do check out such a deck, I'll most certainly be taking how well the original meanings carry over into consideration.  

 

The problem is, it's difficult enough when a card's imagery is quite different from the original meaning.  Messing with the names of cards is even more challenging.  A good guidebook is a must in that case, as it will really help clarify the creator's intent with the cards, and why they've been changed to what they are.  Also, I've come to regard the standard 78 cards as the thing that makes Tarot, well...Tarot.  It's one thing to add one or two extra cards to a deck, as at least the standard cards are all there.  It's another thing entirely to change out a lot of the cards. 

 

I haven't taken the time to really draw a line in the sand, but there comes a point where I wonder whether a deck may as well just be an Oracle deck, as I have a difficult time seeing the Tarot in it.  Maybe that's just me though.  I'm kind of getting that sense with this deck, which is why I'm bringing it up, as maybe that's the reason you're not connecting with it the way you'd like.

[LogicalHue]

22 hours ago, LadyNettle said:

My problem is I am not connecting to this deck at all, an issue i've never had before. My last two decks i've picked up, starting reading, and it all made sense.

 

To step back a little on this whole issue, I can't really think of any context where someone does something twice and then when there's a problem with the third time the appropriate phrase is: "I've never had this problem before".

 

This happens. I have 31 decks. I didn't immediately connect with all of them. I've never really connected with some of them. I use some more at some times of my life and others more at other times. I use different decks for different things. You're going to have different experiences with different decks and I think that's all this is. You've only got 3 decks, you probably have the bandwidth to keep this one in rotation for a while and see if you start to find a footing. Or, as someone else suggested, just leave it be a while. Maybe its just not the right deck for the right time.

[Guest]

On 2/18/2021 at 5:47 PM, LadyNettle said:

Hey everyone! I recently got a new deck, The Harmony Tarot, and I think it is so beautiful. It seems like a great fit for me as it's for growth and healing, something I'm working on at the moment. 

 

My problem is I am not connecting to this deck at all, an issue i've never had before. My last two decks i've picked up, starting reading, and it all made sense. With this one my readings just feels jumbled and don't quite make sense. I'm really not sure what I'm doing wrong.

 

Any advice? 🙂 

Like you, each pack contains an intrinsic quality or essence. It gives the cards their voice.  Over time, the reader has to cultivate a bond, at the temperament level, between their own essence and the cards.
 

Sometimes we are incompatible at this intrinsic level; and if so, it cannot be forced.
 

That, however, requires time to assess. Start with the cards: ask them to introduce themselves.  If that works, give them 3-6 weeks of daily work. If it doesn’t improve, you and that deck are not compatible.
 

Even if a deck makes sense immediately, it does not signify a true bond. Similarly, a deck you struggle with at first does not betoken incompatibility. Give it time.

Edited February 20, 2021 by Guest

[Nemia]

Would it help to read the deck like an oracle, not a tarot deck? I actually appreciate decks that don't rehash RWS imagery but go off on tangents. Sometimes these tangents are so personal that for the reader, the card doesn't make sense, but in this case, the Lovers as Divine makes a lot of sense. The artist put the emphasis on the decision aspect of the Lovers, not the love aspect. How to divine the signs the world is giving you, and reaching a decision. 

 

I always find it easier to read the images as they are, with or without guidebook. The tarot structure with its scaffolding of esoteric lore can be very helpful but if the art is strong enough, you don't need it. I had good readings with the Thoth before I knew what a decan is 😄 I simply read the images, like stills from a movie or a story board, and that's a technique you can use with nearly every deck. 

 

For decks I totally can't find a way into, I like Alison Cross' book Tarot Kaizen (she offered these exercises also on Facebook, I think). I didn't even work through the whole book with the deck that troubled me, and it really helped me. Sometimes the obstacle that makes you stumble when trying to work with a deck is precisely the reason why you need that deck. 

 

I like the look of that deck, btw 🙂 

[Raggydoll]

Typically when this happens for me, it’s because I am not resonating with the art and/or the creators approach to tarot. When that’s the case, i will re-home the deck after a while (I always give it multiple chances, but I don’t try to force it because I already have so many great decks and it’s not the end of the world to let one go). I haven’t seen this particular one but I do know who Harmony Nice is. I know she’s a Wiccan and a very successful YouTuber, and I also know that she has been critiqued for having made inaccurate statements about the origin of Wicca (claiming it to have ancient roots). Because of that, I am a bit weary of how she went about the ‘reimagining of tarot’. But I’m a natural skeptic and sometimes I am wrong in my preconceived notions. Those two cards that Katrinka posted don’t really speak to me, but I would be interested to hear the accompanying texts in the guidebook. Maybe it is one of those decks where the guidebook is especially helpful. Do let us know what happens! Best of luck! 

[AJ-ish/Sharyn]

On 2/18/2021 at 11:57 AM, LadyNettle said:

 

I chose this deck as I thought it might be refreshing to have different cards, no preconceptions of what a card is meant to mean, but what it feels like, does that make sense? 

Maybe you are ready for an oracle, rather than structured tarot? Cut the titles off and use it as such if you are trying for reading without preconceptions. 

[Saturn Celeste]

On 2/18/2021 at 12:47 PM, LadyNettle said:

I am not connecting to this deck at all, an issue i've never had before.

You might want to consider doing a deck interview with it.  It might reveal it's intentions more clearly.  Here's one I found online, there are a ton of them! https://littleredtarot.com/tarot-deck-interview-spread/

[Moomintroll]

I’ not quite sure if my writing is relevant here, but I think that sometimes one has to dig very deep in order to find the meaning of the image. 

Imo, Lovers card, which is renamed here as Divinity, is intrinsically about one’s relationship with divinity, that place in oneself that is most precious, most lovable.

But, in early stages that love and infatuation is projected to someone met in the outside world.

I’m studying at the moment the Journey Into Egypt tarot and from that I learned that the pyramids are like an inverted tree, roots -top of the pyramid - are in heaven and branches diverge downwards to the everyday reality.

According to some sources the pyramids were in fact build in order to contact the spirit world and they acted like energy transmitters.

And, of course, lovers card symbolizes alchemy’s ’solve et coagula’, which means that something has first to break apart, after which it can be built anew, join together to a greater whole, and that is the meaning of the Temperance card when you begin to find that divine source inside yourself.

Astrologically, gemini (lovers) is about analysis after which all those separate bits and peaces are recombined to a more integrated whole which is symbolized in the opposite sign, sagittarius, temperance.

That proces is beautyfully described in the JIE tarot, the myth about Isis collecting all the broken parts of the dismembered Osiris.

 

 

[gregory]

OK - out of curiosity, and as it was dirt cheap, I just got a copy of the Harmony deck. My "majors" are not numbered, and there is actually a card called lovers which does have two people on it. The majors don’t in my view bear any real relation to tarot majors; most are renamed in ways that don't match the cards we know - and to be honest except that there are 10 pips and four courts in each suit - the minors aren’t very tarot either; they certainly don’t in any way match up to Waite meanings as we know them. The handbook does say she follows her own wiccan path, and that the cards are designed to improve well-being. That’s not quite the way I have ever seen tarot. They are pretty, though; I’ll give them that. But I can’t honestly use them as tarot. As that isn’t the way I read, I can probably get past that - but I don’t see this as an actual tarot deck; that has certain conventions which this does not.

[Guest]

2 hours ago, gregory said:

OK - out of curiosity, and as it was dirt cheap, I just got a copy of the Harmony deck. My "majors" are not numbered, and there is actually a card called lovers which does have two people on it. The majors don’t in my view bear any real relation to tarot majors; most are renamed in ways that don't match the cards we know - and to be honest except that there are 10 pips and four courts in each suit - the minors aren’t very tarot either; they certainly don’t in any way match up to Waite meanings as we know them.

 
Do you like it? The Greenwood had a different order of the trumps and most cards had been reframed by Chesca’s powerful art. When I first acquired it there was some hesitation and I had to put the Marseille out of my mind. I didn’t see it as an oracle but a different tarot.
 

I mean the Florentine have 97 cards and two emperors but is a tarot. 

[gregory]

I guess I kind of like it - the art is good. The guidebook would be more helpful if she had explained how she had chosen the cards/images she had chosen in terms of tarot - and, crucially, how she thinks they fit into tarot. There's a card called "The Cliff", for instance, which almost looks like the traditional fool, but the place in the majors (such as they are) suggests death. And is the goldfinch with a third eye is (probably/possibly)  in the place of the magician (which would put that Witch in as HP and that Divine as Hierophant.) BUT as my majors aren't numbered, I can't even try to work that way. (And I have now got them out of order while examining them, anyway !)

 

The Greenwood handbook is more helpful - and Chesca's own handbook even more so. I need more words, for this one.

 

Maybe I will use it in the next ISG...

[gregory]

@timtoldrum

 

Tell me - what EXACTLY makes a deck a tarot deck for you ? Is it OK if it simply has 22 majors and 56 minors in 4 suits with 4 courts per suit ? My issue with this one is that that simple structure is the only similarity, and the booklet doesn't explain why this is so.

 

MAYBE the U S Games version  has a better book ? My majors aren't numbered, and the book is not good on it all.

[Guest]

On 2/25/2021 at 11:21 AM, gregory said:

 

The Greenwood handbook is more helpful - and Chesca's own handbook even more so. I need more words, for this one.

Chesca’s writings was what opened the deck up for me. 

 

7 hours ago, gregory said:

@timtoldrum

 

Tell me - what EXACTLY makes a deck a tarot deck for you ? Is it OK if it simply has 22 majors and 56 minors in 4 suits with 4 courts per suit ? My issue with this one is that that simple structure is the only similarity, and the booklet doesn't explain why this is so.

 

MAYBE the U S Games version  has a better book ? My majors aren't numbered, and the book is not good on it all.

To be honest, that is a question I have never reached a firm conclusion.  Outside of English-circles, it is a rather broad category.  The tarot Persan de madame Indira is a tarot to me — but others say, no. It has just 55 cards. My cousin’s wife calls her cards tarots but most would call them Zigeuner or Sibilla.

 

Generally, I would define a Tarot as a deck comprised of trumps and pips. The numbering can be different.  After all some readers do not use the pips, others reduce them. 
 

This deck sounds as if it is let down by its book. When I saw it I couldn’t understand why the Sun was titled in French, but the other cards were not.
 

In addition saying it’s Wiccan is not helpful — Garderner, Alexandrian, Dianic?
 

It’s sad that it is not better described or explained.

Edited February 26, 2021 by Guest

[gregory]

Thanks - that's really rather where I am with it. Depending on who I am paired with, I may try it out....

 

1 hour ago, timtoldrum said:

Chesca’s writings was what opened the deck up for me

 

I was being polite in case you... But yes, exactly !