Dumb Question: do Different Decks Elicit Different Interpretations?

[katrinka]

3 minutes ago, Raggydoll said:

True true. Now sweetie, please allow us to get back on topic 😘

Yes, let's. 🌺

Joe, speaking for myself, no, at least not another Tarot. The closest I've come is switching to Lenormand when the questions come rapid-fire.
But any Tarot will answer virtually any kind of question.

[Raggydoll]

2 minutes ago, Joe said:

@Raggydoll Have you ever done a reading in which you felt one particular deck would work for the question at hand, set down the spread, took a good long look at it, then realized or felt that another deck would actually work better for that question and started all over again? 

Good question! And yes, I believe I have. Not many times, but yes, it has happened. I think it was because I picked the deck based on some ideas instead of intuition (like, “that’s a deck I want to work more with” or “This deck has a theme that should suit the querent/topic well”). But then when I saw it all laid out i would just know that I went to the wrong ‘person’ for advice. It’s like if you decide to call your sister and ask her about something and just as she’s started talking you realize you should have really called your good friend Bob instead. But what I do then is that I don’t hang up on my sister (because that would obviously be very rude 😛), I still hear her out and note what she has to say. Because for some reason I still called her and there might be a gem hidden in her answer. In tarot terms that mean that I will document the reading and not just scrap it. But I will most likely still call Bob afterward (do another reading with that second deck) and when everything is done I’ll try to take everything into account and see whatever I could get out of that first reading. I wouldn’t necessarily divulge that first reading to a client, but it would still be included in the overall interpretation. Sort of like an undercurrent energy. Does that make sense? 

[Eric13]

Everyone is welcome to join, as long as its on topic. I myself also have Crowleys blue book, and I like it a lot. I don't have any of his decks though, because I don't feel they blend with how I read and the way I want to read also. 

[Eric13]

@Raggydoll Thats a fascinating answer and it makes sense. It also shows how a deck can elicit different interpretations and even feelings. It also shows that if someones interpretations concerning a spread, or particular deck aren't really jiving with the question, or mood or feelings, it's perfectly acceptable to try another deck for the same reading. 

[Raggydoll]

2 minutes ago, Joe said:

@Raggydoll Thats a fascinating answer and it makes sense. It also shows how a deck can elicit different interpretations and even feelings. It also shows that if someones interpretations concerning a spread, or particular deck aren't really jiving with the question, or mood or feelings, it's perfectly acceptable to try another deck for the same reading. 

Yes it is (as long as it’s not a face to face reading, because that would probably look pretty odd to the querent ☺️.) But i still think it’s vital to document the first one (take a picture and note the positions) so you just don’t ignore it. With time, I have found that this happens less and less. It’s just that I tend to listen better to my intuition now than I did before.  

[Barleywine]

7 minutes ago, Raggydoll said:

Yes it is (as long as it’s not a face to face reading, because that would probably look pretty odd to the querent ☺️.) But i still think it’s vital to document the first one (take a picture and note the positions) so you just don’t ignore it. With time, I have found that this happens less and less. It’s just that I tend to listen better to my intuition now than I did before.  

I once had a fascinating "bridging" experience. I did a reading with the RWS for a man, and as we were talking afterward about my background I mentioned the Thoth (which he had had some experience with), and he immediately paid for another reading with that deck. It turned out that he was big into virtual reality technology, and he related very well to the Thoth 7 of Cups as the outcome card (even if the title didn't make much sense to either of us).

Edited June 29, 2019 by Barleywine

[Marigold]

33 minutes ago, katrinka said:

 

Crowley did more drugs than any of them and he switched Justice back to VIII.

Crowley was a genius. A mad genius. Can't stand the guy and particularly his political ideology which I find hugely disturbing, but he was still a genius. I'm glad he switched Justice back to 8. But although I'm grateful for that, I'm really glad his vision of world governance didn't materialise. 

 

(Am going off topic again I suppose. I never know when we're on or off topic in a thread. I see a thread as something that evolves. And if we're talking about different decks and their interpretations, how can we avoid talking about the intentions behind the decks and the beliefs of their creators.)

Edited June 29, 2019 by Marigold

[devin]

1 minute ago, Marigold said:

I see a thread as something that evolves.

Like a conversation. (Not a dig at the mods, btw. I don't envy their job.)

[Raggydoll]

Also, knowing that you read professionally @Joe, I will say that sometimes I feel that the answers I got from a deck was just insufficient for the type of reading I wanted the querent to get, and that’s when I often add another deck to the reading, to expand and elaborate (or to balance it out and provide the ‘missing’ elements). Let’s say I do a relationship reading and then feel like I got a good deal of information about the relationship but I wanted some more insights or guidance for the querent, then I often intuitively know what deck and what positions (if any!) that I need to add. And so that’s what I will do. And other times I intended to get guidance but find that the deck was more focused on explaining the reasons and analyzing the present. Then I can add a second deck for advice that will round off the reading. So I definitely find that different decks has different voices and different areas of focus. 

[Raggydoll]

6 minutes ago, Marigold said:

Crowley was a genius. A mad genius. Can't stand the guy and particularly his political ideology which I find hugely disturbing, but he was still a genius. I'm glad he switched Justice back to 8. But although I'm grateful for that, I'm really glad his vision of world governance didn't materialise. 

 

(Am going off topic again I suppose. I never know when we're on or off topic in a thread. I see a thread as something that evolves. And if we're talking about different decks and their interpretations, how can we avoid talking about the intentions behind the decks and the beliefs of their creators.)

It’s when the discussion gets off in the nitty gritty about specific creators and specific decks that I consider us of topic here. Also, if you are unsure if something is off topic then you can always go with what we moderators say. We’re not perfect and we go off topic ourselves sometimes, but we do our very best to keep things somewhat tidy (and we also have the final say in what’s off topic or not 😉)

[Barleywine]

2 minutes ago, Raggydoll said:

Also, knowing that you read professionally @Joe, I will say that sometimes I feel that the answers I got from a deck was just insufficient for the type of reading I wanted the querent to get, and that’s when I often add another deck to the reading, to expand and elaborate (or to balance it out and provide the ‘missing’ elements). Let’s say I do a relationship reading and then feel like I got a good deal of information about the relationship but I wanted some more insights or guidance for the querent, then I often intuitively know what deck and what positions (if any!) that I need to add. And so that’s what I will do. And other times I intended to get guidance but find that the deck was more focused on explaining the reasons and analyzing the present. Then I can add a second deck for advice that will round off the reading. So I definitely find that different decks has different voices and different areas of focus. 

I haven't brought in a different deck during a reading, but I have added an oracle card as a kind of summary at the end. It got mixed reviews from my sitters, who couldn't really figure out the what-and-why of it.

[Marigold]

I don't want to take a dig at the moderators either. I was a moderator for some time at Aeclectic many many years ago (when I was known as Diana). It's a lot of work and they have to please everybody and that's not possible. And they want to keep the boards tidy. Tidyness is next to godliness, no ? 

 

But I do love off-topic myself....

 

 

 

 

 

[devin]

Can I be off-topic and ask why things have to be tidy?

[Eric13]

@Raggydoll I agree and understand what you mean about the sitter maybe being bothered about another deck being used for their reading. That makes sense. And I like the idea of using a second deck for a reading. I'm working on that now myself, but I'm trying to use a completely unique deck I recently found, for tarot readings to bring in another interpretation of the question, adding to the spread. I found a great Palmistry deck made by Grimaud I'm learning to use as tarot. One card works really great for an additional interpretation. I posted a picture of it in the June section Saturn Celeste started. 

Different decks adding different voices and areas of focus is a good reason to have alternate decks also. Just keep that de-enable section going!

[joy]

In my opinion the issue with off-topic is, that someone asked a question and now gets very interesting details/comments but they have nothing to do with the initial question.

So the initial question was by @Halcyon and the question was 'do Different Decks Elicit Different Interpretations?'

If you feel the discussion has diverted away from answering the question, then in my opinion that is 'off-topic' and has nothing to do with 'tidy'.

[Raggydoll]

7 minutes ago, devin said:

Like a conversation. (Not a dig at the mods, btw. I don't envy their job.)

The reason why we try to keep things somewhat on topic is because we want to make sure that people can find the topics that they are interested in and that they can relocate an old discussion easily. People can’t be expected to know that the thread that started about the color of bananas is now about the ketogenic diet. And so those that would have really loved to discuss keto diets will miss it, and those that want to go back and try to find that great tip they saw in that one thread will have a hard time to recall what the title of it was. And yes, the moderating gig isn’t always easy but we sure love this forum and our awesome members and that’s why we do it. (See, now even I got crazy off topic too. I bet @Saturn Celeste will stop by and spank me ☺️)

[Eric13]

@BarleywineI've never tried oracle cards myself. I have a recent zodiac deck, looked at it, but never tried it. I found a nice Palmistry deck I'm learning to use as a tarot deck, very interesting to blend in. 

But, I'm outta here for the day. Have fun.

Edited June 29, 2019 by Eric13

[FLizarraga]

8 hours ago, Raggydoll said:

I agree in that the majority of modern decks will share a similar range of basic meanings (I put this definition to mean decks printed in the last century, post-RWS). But that historical reproductions will be a different ball game, as will all the ‘reconstructive/“unique” decks. So for the non psychic reader then sure, a three of swords will mean pretty much the same from reading to reading (it will at least remain in its broad range of commonly noted  interpretations)

 

(I differentiate psychic from intuitive here because I feel that an intuitive person will use their intuition to determine which of all the possible card meanings that apply to the querent situation while the psychic person will receive input beyond what the cards themselves hold. That’s just how it works for me so I’m using that as my own definition)

Oh, I wasn't even talking about meanings here. I was referring to the basic, underlying formal structure that makes a deck of cards recognizably a Tarot: the 22-triumph, 40-pip, 16-court layout, give or take a few extra cards --like the Cary-Yale's female pages and knights, or the extra suits that some modern decks boast. (We'll have to agree that those wonderful historical eccentricities like the Sola Busca or the Minchiate are basically one-offs, as they don't even resemble each other and created no real following.)

 

And, while I'm pretty sure that Tarot was always used for divination (as cartomancy is probably as old as cards), the whole esoteric side of the Tarot did not start developing until the 1700s, and did not really flourish until the contributions of such as Papus, Waite and Crowley-Harris. All the esoteric paraphernalia that we use nowadays to read Tarot --all the meanings, the astrology, numerology, Kabbalah, psychology and so forth-- can be ultimately viewed as arbitrary, as Enrique Enríquez does; though of course to completely discard those riches is, IMHO, throwing out the baby with the bathwater.

 

I love the fine distinction you make here between an intuitive reading and a psychic one, Raggydoll. I've never seen such a precise definition.

 

[Nordica De Spell]

18 hours ago, katrinka said:

So let's look at this Hierophant from The Alice Tarot:

Why should we look at that when we don’t have that deck and don’t have the money for that deck. 😱Dang you!!

[Guest]

2 hours ago, katrinka said:

It's swapping the positions of two cards out of 78, with everything else remaining intact. Roughly 2.5% of the card positions have been changed.

Very true.

 

Its also worth remembering that there was never one “universal” ordering of the trumps. I prefer Justice and Fortitude as 8 and 11; however, I don’t see it as being the correct order or that vital beyond synthesis in the classical tirages.

[Nordica De Spell]

To answer though; yes to me I don’t know The Thoth, but The Marseille isn’t an RWS at all (but RWS is a little bit Marseille.)

 

Within the RWS system, I’m one of those whom @JustPeachy mentions, whom use different decks with different questions and readings. 

 

Other than that, it depends on the deck and the creator. Some are more faithful to the traditional RWS than others. But even a deck like The Golden Universal, reads differently to me than The Golden Rider. And they’re both The Rider-Waite, so I’d have to say yes. It’s why I collect. (Plus yes, the art!)

[FLizarraga]

10 minutes ago, Nordica De Spell said:

Why should we look at that when we don’t have that deck and don’t have the money for that deck. 😱Dang you!!

Run to the de-enabling thread, Nordica. Run for your life!

Edited June 29, 2019 by FLizarraga

[Nordica De Spell]

1 minute ago, FLizarraga said:

Run to the de-enabling thread, Nordica. Run for your life!

Yeah, I know!! I have such a bad case of addiction!!!! 🤣

[Raggydoll]

12 minutes ago, FLizarraga said:

Oh, I wasn't even talking about meanings here. I was referring to the basic, underlying formal structure that makes a deck of cards recognizably a Tarot: the 22-triumph, 40-pip, 16-court layout, give or take a few extra cards --like the Cary-Yale's female pages and knights, or the extra suits that some modern decks boast. (We'll have to agree that those wonderful historical eccentricities like the Sola Busca or the Minchiate are basically one-offs, as they don't even resemble each other and created no real following.)

 

And, while I'm pretty sure that Tarot was always used for divination (as cartomancy is probably as old as cards), the whole esoteric side of the Tarot did not start developing until the 1700s, and did not really flourish until the contributions of such as Papus, Waite and Crowley-Harris. All the esoteric paraphernalia that we use nowadays to read Tarot --all the meanings, the astrology, numerology, Kabbalah, psychology and so forth-- can be ultimately viewed as arbitrary, as Enrique Enríquez does; though of course to completely discard those riches is, IMHO, throwing out the baby with the bathwater.

I agree completely. Well said. 

12 minutes ago, FLizarraga said:

I love the fine distinction you make here between an intuitive reading and a psychic one, Raggydoll. I've never seen such a precise definition.

 

Thank you. I’m glad it resonated 🙂

[FLizarraga]

Halcyon, you should know by now that your question was anything but dumb... 😎