Do tarot decks need darkness to tell the truth?

[Siavahda]

I'm not entirely certain that this is the right sub-forum for this post, so I apologise in advance if the mods need to move it. But this is a topic that's been on my mind a lot lately, and I've discussed it with the few tarot readers I know in real life, and would really like to know what more of the community thinks about it.

 

I'm also not trying to start any kind of drama or controversy, so please know that nothing I say is meant to offend anyone. I just genuinely want to discuss this.

 

So: here's the debate I've been having. On the one hand, nearly any tarot card can be interpreted as 'good' or 'bad', depending on the context. We all roll our eyes whenever some B-movie horror flick uses the Death card to predict the literal death of the protagonist, because we know that really, Death symbolises change - and sure, that can include literal death, but it rarely does. I've only ever known the Tower to symbolise disaster, but I've seen other tarot readers interpret it as change, much like the Death card - a rough change or transformation, maybe, but one with a new beginning to follow. So even traditionally 'negative' cards can be interpreted in a more positive or hopeful light.

 

On the other hand, can any deck truly convey a whole and complete answer if it is incapable of showing the negative aspects of a situation? Life is not all glitter and light, as much as we would like it to be. Sometimes the answer to your question is not one you want to hear, or that is comfortable to hear. But ignoring that, or deliberately undercutting a deck's ability to convey that negativity, can only mean that at best, your deck is simply not able to answer every question. It seems like putting blinders on yourself and on your ability to do whatever it is we do when we read the cards.

 

I've mostly been thinking about this in terms of card art. Looking over the art of the Brady Tarot, and comparing it to the Spiritsong Tarot - both animal decks, but completely different in style - is what made me realise in the first place that some tarot decks refuse to acknowledge the darker sides of life at all. For those who haven't heard of it, the Brady Tarot is making ripples by unflinchingly depicting the harsh reality of nature (as well as simply having gorgeous art and a brilliant eye for symbolism, of course), complete with various animals and birds mid-hunt, and so on. Very few cards show actual violence, but there is some, and more than a few show scenes where death or pain is clearly about to come. Whereas, as beautiful as it is, the Seven of Feathers (Swords) of the Spiritsong in no way depicts the traditional negativity of that card; the card description makes no allusion to the fact that the Seven of Swords is one of the most unambiguously negative cards in the tarot system of divination. (You can see and read both the card and its description at the link below).

 

http://www.paulina.ws/spiritsong/feathers07-cheetah.html

 

I'm not at all sure there's anything wrong with a tarot deck that gentles the harshness of (some of the) cards. While I know there are oracle decks that embrace the darker aspects of reality, Doreen Virtue's Goddess Oracle continues to provide some of my most powerful and accurate readings - and anyone who's ever brushed against a Doreen Virtue deck knows her cards have always been full of love and positivity, with very little (if any) acknowledgement of things like sadness or pain or injustice. So I know from my own experience that 'gentle' decks are capable of packing a punch and being perfectly accurate.

 

But I also know there are some questions I would not seek answers for from my Goddess Oracle, because of that gentleness. And in those situations, that unrelentingly positive outlook looks a lot like (deliberate) blindness.

 

Maybe that doesn't matter; from what I can tell, most of us turn to different decks for different kinds of questions, if we don't have one core default deck. As long as the reader can be trusted to reach for the deck best able to answer the question at hand, it doesn't really matter if some other deck can't give a complete answer to the same question, does it? And if I trust a tarot reader to draw the right cards to answer my question, I definitely trust them to pick the right deck for it.

 

And yet, something about the 'gentle' decks I've been seeing everywhere bothers me. It may simply be personal prejudice; I've seen a lot of pain in my life, and it's hard not to feel cynical when faced with a deck that seems to be pretending pain doesn't exist. The fact that tarot was designed to have both positive and negative cards isn't an argument that really holds much water with me; tarot was also designed in accordance with very strict gender binary and stereotypes, and I'm happy enough for those to get tossed out the window. It seems more than a little hypocritical to demand that decks stay true to tradition on this issue but not on that one.

 

And yet.

 

What does everyone else here think? Do you have 'gentle' decks, and if so, what is your relationship with them like? Do you need your decks to have some 'darkness' in them, or do you steer well clear of any deck with negative imagery? Do you think a deck that excludes the negative can be as accurate or true as one that doesn't? (Do you think a very dark deck has the same blind spots as one that is very light?) Are we in danger of blinding ourselves with this surge of gentle decks, or do we need them to help us see and hold to the light in what can sometimes seem to be a very negative world?

 

I really can't figure out where I stand on this.

[Shinsoo]

I only use one deck, the Gilded Tarot.  It's kind of a happy medium--there is some darker imagery in it, but there's also lighter imagery as well.  It's very vivid, much how I imagine the spirit world to be like at times.  Not muted colors like real life on Earth.

 

I can't see myself giving many Tarot readings without addressing the darker aspects of humanity at some point within them.  My deck has a tendency to b!tchslap me sometimes--as well as others.  Though then again, that could be just how I interpret them--I can be a straight shooter at times, haha

 

So to me, i guess the deck doesn't really matter--the cards are what they are--whether they are gentle in nature or more dark, it is up to the interpreter to draw the conclusions as to what the cards are saying.

 

 

[MollyCat]

  What does everyone else here think? Do you have 'gentle' decks, and if so, what is your relationship with them like? Do you need your decks to have some 'darkness' in them, or do you steer well clear of any deck with negative imagery? Do you think a deck that excludes the negative can be as accurate or true as one that doesn't? (Do you think a very dark deck has the same blind spots as one that is very light?) Are we in danger of blinding ourselves with this surge of gentle decks, or do we need them to help us see and hold to the light in what can sometimes seem to be a very negative world?

 

You’ve asked a good question.

 

I think the answer really depends on the reader and her experience, knowledge and perspective and how she brings those to understand and interpret the cards.  Tarot is, after all, simply structure and symbolic language.

 

As you know, the ‘Sun’ might be a joyful symbol of light, life and warmth to one person but also a symbol of drought, dryness and death to another – depending on context and the reader’s experience and perspective.  And some decks tend to be more 'noir' than others, usually reflecting the designer's preference or attitudes at the time of design.

 

I went through a very difficult stage of life a few years ago and didn’t want to be reminded of darkness and negativity.  I knew those two things existed and had experienced them, but my spirit needed nurturing, so I used the Osho Zen deck most days, with its gentle, educative messages.  Another deck which I love for this purpose is the Shining Tribe by Rachel Pollack.  Having said this, both decks do tell the ‘whole’ story.  The reader’s knowledge and perception are essential to discern the whole story, however.  I knew people who couldn't stand either deck!

 

Few stories are completely black or white; and Tarot is nothing if not storytelling.

 

I usually know what I need at any given time and choose accordingly.  All of us change and grow and our knowledge and perspective develop as we do.  I used to feel quite uncomfortable with Marseille type decks.  Now I find them witty and great for storytelling.  Incidentally, storytelling is what we do when reading tarot for ourselves or others. :)

 

Thanks for the question.  I think it will evoke some good discussion.

 

 

[DanielJUK]

I've found that if a message wants to come out, it comes out! whatever deck you are using and however you do the reading! The message always seems to come through for me whatever deck I use!

 

I am not sure about if a deck is all positive, I know one of DV's tarot decks literally cuts out all the negative cards, there is a difference I think about having a positive image or art of every card and cutting out the system's archetypes which have a purpose. I have only one of her Angel oracle decks and have used it for positive messages. They are all positive but if things are going badly in your life, it will pull out a card that fits even though they are all positive! The message will come out even if you try to block it. Doing an indepth reading though I wouldn't like a deck that was all positive, it doesn't match the human condition. As Humans we are darkness and light and a deck has to represent that. I think it does need darkness to represent us or it's just an inspirational message card, pick one a day!  ;D

[Rose Lalonde]

Hi Siavahda. Interesting thoughts and discussion. Your thread title points to a way of reading - reading tarot to "tell the truth".  I assume you mean a reading capable of addressing the range of possible experience, so yes, then a deck would need to be able to include positive and negative to some extent, as most do. But as you said, we turn to different decks for different questions. Also, I think, for different purposes at different times. Someone might want to read with a deck where only the positive side is shown/written about when they're seeking daily inspiration or a creative prompt. Or a lift when they're feeling vulnerable or disillusioned (or reading for someone else who feels that way). After my mother died, I had the opposite reaction, and read with a deck that included death a lot, because it comforted me to be reminded that I wasn't alone in loss. Like you I would've felt cynical about a deck with no pain. But to each their own. While I wouldn't rely on a deck that attempted to keep things strictly positive as a way to get at the truth, I can see where it could serve other purposes.

[Samual_Jennings]

I think decks should be overall "unbiased", but symbolic. That's why I have an affinity for simple but meaningful decks like Rider Waite.

 

Sent from my LG-M153 using Tapatalk

 

 

[gregory]

I've found that if a message wants to come out, it comes out! whatever deck you are using and however you do the reading! The message always seems to come through for me whatever deck I use!

 

I am not sure about if a deck is all positive, I know one of DV's tarot decks literally cuts out all the negative cards, there is a difference I think about having a positive image or art of every card and cutting out the system's archetypes which have a purpose. I have only one of her Angel oracle decks and have used it for positive messages. They are all positive but if things are going badly in your life, it will pull out a card that fits even though they are all positive! The message will come out even if you try to block it. Doing an indepth reading though I wouldn't like a deck that was all positive, it doesn't match the human condition. As Humans we are darkness and light and a deck has to represent that. I think it does need darkness to represent us or it's just an inspirational message card, pick one a day!  ;D

I'm pretty much with Daniel. Nothing is ever totally positive, and if we ignore the negative sides of readings (or try to make sure they don't happen by using a DV deck) we will miss a lot that is very important.

 

To quote someone I forget who it was or what the words were: If there were no darkness we would not know light.

 

Laurell Hamilton took it a bit further:

 

“They say there is no light without dark, no good without evil, no male without female, no right without wrong. That nothing can exist if it's direct opposite does not also exist.”

[Cobweb]

What an interesting question!

 

I think on the whole that there’s nothing wrong with taking out the negative cards.  I’m sure there are situations where it could be helpful and appropriate.  That said, there must be a point on there spectrum where so much has been taken out that it’s no longer a tarot deck and no longer a tarot reading. 

 

 

I think the difference between this and abandoning traditions like binary gender/gender stereotypes is that tarot has always worked via symbols and archetypes.  When society changes, those archetypes run the risk of becoming stereotypes, readers no longer identify with them, and so the tarot deck benefits from an update.  It’s still tarot, just tarot for a society that’s no longer that of Renaissance Europe.

 

But society hasn’t changed enough to remove the relevance of Death or The Tower.  We are all going to experience some loss, sorrow, even disaster.  So taking them out of a deck or radically softening them ends up reducing the vocabulary of the deck.

 

 

And, yes, I think I’d feel the same about a very dark deck that wanted to strip out the love, hope and humour from the cards too!  Nothing wrong with it, mind,  and might be useful in the right circumstances.

 

 

Anyway, fascinating question and so interesting to see everyone else’s take on it!

[Raggydoll]

To me, it doesn't matter if a depiction is originally intended as a bright and happy one - when I do my readings I let my intuition alter my perception so I will notice different details and have different undertones every time. There are so many facets to even the most ‘simple’ symbols, that’s why it is possible to divine with basically anything and everything under the sun. I try not to place too much significance/importance on my divining tools (that does not, however, mean that I do not treat my tools with respect - it just means that I view them for what they are to me - tools). I just don’t want to forget where the ‘real magic’ lies.

 

And regarding people interpreting Death as “changes”.. well that is not how I tend to see it. For me, Death is usually about endings of some sort (and “changes” would be the sugar coated way of expressing it, imho). Sometime these endings are welcomed, but most of the time they are uncomfortable or even painful.