DruidCraft - Shoes

Disa

Well, we've discussed our thoughts and opinions on the size of the feet in the DruidCraft, but I'm now curious about the shoes.

It seems there is no rhyme or reason as to why some people have shoes and some don't. Kings and Queens are both with and without shoes. The same with people trudging along rocky paths- some have shoes, some do not.

I tried to make a correlation such as, well they are barefooted at home, but put their shoes on when they are on a journey, but even that didn't work.

Any one have any idea as to the significance of shoes or no shoes in the deck overall? Or should we look at each card individually and take that as a symbolic meaning. If so, what would it mean?

I'd love your opinions on this. :)

Disa
 

ana luisa

That´s a very interesting thread. I focus on accessories as well so I might have a closer look at their shoes now that you pointed that out. I looked at the cards that were wearing them and it seems that the shoes have a touch of "belicose" feeling to them. Depending on the type of shoes, the predisposition to fight is softer or stronger. The princes of Swords, Wands and Pentacles wear shoes whereas the prince of cups is barefoot (he´s more "passive"), less "angry". Funny, the only queen that wears shoes is the queen of wands, also the most "fightable" of the four.Well, that´s just an opinion. It could be all nonsense but... In fact, when I read, the only shoes that do carry an important message are

The four of pentacles - "childish" slippers, insecurity, person attached to things for safety reasons.

Six of Wands - red slippers, energetic, royal, victory after bloody (red) battles

Ten of Wands - Very tight shoes, cutting circulation, oppression, sacrifice through excessive work

King of Cups - Comfortable, tsensible shoes, tailored to his feet,just what the owner needs...

The lack of shoes, on the other hand gives me a feeling of strength, stability,being in tune with yourself and nature, of accomplishment.

Curious to see what others may add to the "shoe" factor!
 

inanna_tarot

TBH i've never given it any extra thought. I tend to think of being barefoot as special because in our society we tend to always cover our feet - so barefeet is about being amongst friends, being sensual and feeling the mud and grass between your toes. But I dont tend to read anything special into their shoes in a reading.

Each to their own I guess!
 

WalesWoman

Hmmm, maybe the ones with shoes have tender feet, bruise easily... or are a bit thin skinned?

Shoes I think had to do with showing your station in life as well, so maybe it's sort of if you've got it, flaunt it? And maybe not quite so in touch with the ground or as grounded as ones without shoes.
 

dryadintheelm

I thought about something similar just this morning, my COTD was the Prince of Cups and it made me feel the dew on my feet. This isn't shocking, it's a rainy day and I hate shoes. I was drawn to his feet though, and wondered how many people in the deck were barefoot. I shifted through it and thought the same thing, simply that some were and some weren't without a pattern becoming visible. It wasn't a mystery to me though, I thought it was an individual thing without having a theme or pattern. Like, the man in Seven of Cups might drag his toes through the water, while the Eight of Swords would need her feet to be her eyes. Different reasons for being barefoot. The man in the Ten of Wands is probably blistered and weary, his bandage looking shoes reflect that. The Princess of Wands isn't afraid of walking on hot sidewalks (sing it sister, neither am I), and the man in the Three of Wands seems to be planning a long journey that would be hard on bare feet.

They do really seem to hate shoes in this deck though, and only wear them if they absolutely have to. Sometimes that reason seems to be to demonstrate an air of authority (though the warmhearted King of Pentacles prefers his visitors to feel at home and eschews that, and the Lord cheats with sandals).
 

Aeon.of.Horus

Druid Cultures...

I have also been wondering for some time now as to why some were wearing and some weren't wearing shoes in the Druid Craft Deck.

Then it hit me..... like a hot brick!

They are all of the Druid tradition so some of them will be Celts and some Pictish.
Many of the people who are wearing shoes (apart from the Royals) to me seem to be Celts
and the ones without shoes look more like the Picts. Picts are well known for running in to battle naked wearing only WOAD (the blue war paint) for protection. So it seems that it may be a cultural thing...

The Royals on the other hand are all over the place but I see the princesses have no shoes but all the princes have, the queens don't have except for the queen of wands and two of the kings have whilst two don't lol. It would seem that being a Royal you get to do what ever the **** you like hehehehehe.

Aeon
 

celticnoodle

I've only just come across this thread and found it interesting. I never really payed much attention to the fact that some were barefoot and others were wearing shoes. But, like Ana luisa posted, figured the shoe or shoeless just added a 'hint' to the feeling of the card itself. Also thought it would pertain to the whether or not the card was depicting a grounded person or not. Unfortunately, I do not have this deck available to me right now--its at my vacation home. So, I'll have to wait a week or two before I'm able to go through each card to determine if my above guesses are correct or not.

I have also been wondering for some time now as to why some were wearing and some weren't wearing shoes in the Druid Craft Deck.

Then it hit me..... like a hot brick!

They are all of the Druid tradition so some of them will be Celts and some Pictish.
Many of the people who are wearing shoes (apart from the Royals) to me seem to be Celts
and the ones without shoes look more like the Picts. Picts are well known for running in to battle naked wearing only WOAD (the blue war paint) for protection. So it seems that it may be a cultural thing...

The Royals on the other hand are all over the place but I see the princesses have no shoes but all the princes have, the queens don't have except for the queen of wands and two of the kings have whilst two don't lol. It would seem that being a Royal you get to do what ever the **** you like hehehehehe.

Aeon

Then, I read your post, Aeon. I think YOU HAVE IT! :thumbsup: Very cool thought process here. I never would've come up with this, I do not think, but I am glad to have read your post and think it is pretty cool the developer of this deck and artist thought to have incorporate this into the pictures. (If they did and you are right this is--and I think you are!). :D
 

Aeon.of.Horus

I've only just come across this thread and found it interesting. I never really payed much attention to the fact that some were barefoot and others were wearing shoes. But, like Ana luisa posted, figured the shoe or shoeless just added a 'hint' to the feeling of the card itself. Also thought it would pertain to the whether or not the card was depicting a grounded person or not. Unfortunately, I do not have this deck available to me right now--its at my vacation home. So, I'll have to wait a week or two before I'm able to go through each card to determine if my above guesses are correct or not.



Then, I read your post, Aeon. I think YOU HAVE IT! :thumbsup: Very cool thought process here. I never would've come up with this, I do not think, but I am glad to have read your post and think it is pretty cool the developer of this deck and artist thought to have incorporate this into the pictures. (If they did and you are right this is--and I think you are!). :D


Thank you
I do so love this deck and I am a Celt too,
Like I said when it hit me it just seem so blatently obvious especially in the swords suit they are all so Pictish pure warriors... :thumbsup:

Aeon