Art versus Concept

ATrickyBusiness

shadowdancer said:
Having said that I have Ciro's decks and love them to bits, and they are the higher end - probably what I would call more artistic created.


Now I think Ciro is a good artist (I may not like everything he's done with the Tarot, but I don't think artists can do everything perfectly, most rock stars don't make good Opera singers, and so forth). However, calling his decks more artistically created, I'm not sure if I can agree with here, there are many other decks out there made with pen, ink, or acrylic or other mediums that are extensively detailed, and have about as much work put in to it has his decks. I might not like them all, but they're just as artistic as his.
 

shadowdancer

yep you are right, and I know I had not explained myself well. I love pencil drawn and coloured cards. Have a real soft spot for them for sure. Heck my dad is an artist who still uses paint he had from where he used to work - wall emulsion but his creations are awesome. I have been raised on that type of creation and love it. I was trying to explain how I differentiate between the two types of art and messed up my explanation. duh.

For hanging on my wall I would use Ciro's work and also understand - they too are hand created, but using a different medium. (I got that wrong a few times in the past and now know to correct myself - hopefully I got it right this time...lol) But I would not hang up on my wall anything which is perhaps produced in a more raw form. Exception would be Ash's work - I think it is stunning and incredibly appealing for a display purpose.

sorry for any offence caused - got to try and explain my thoughts better as it can come across as a bit black and white at times.

Davina
 

OnePotato

Debra said:
Well, for me, a visual concept is without content per se. You could make a picture of my two cats sleeping or my husband cooking breakfast using the same artistic concept as in the Pen Tarot or the Wild Green Chagallian and that picture wouldn't be tarot in any way--but would share a concept for illustration (b & w with a spot of color, or the Chagall-inspired colors and perspective and etc.).

YIKES!
I disagree.

A "concept" is the idea of the content of the image.
"Two cats sleeping on a pillow" is a concept.
"Someone cooking breakfast" is a concept.
There can be many different interpretations of these concepts, with variations in composition or pose or appearance, or etc, but they can still communicate the basic concept.
The method or style of creating the image is the "rendering style".
"Drawn with a ballpoint pen" or "Drawn in b&w with a spot of color" is a rendering style.


People often confuse "art" and "aesthetics".
For a long time, art was about making a representation of things. Appearance was important. Decorative quality was important.
"Aesthetics" is particularly concerned with appearance.
Then, things changed, and art became more focused on the "idea of something".
Aesthetic value and appearance became less important, as things like "concept" and "experience" became the focus.
The Surrealist Movement is a good example.

Aesthetics plays a role in any art, but its role in a given work may be given more or less importance by the artist.

Art can be "ugly" but still very meaningful.
 

Rosanne

OnePotato said:
Art can be "ugly" but still very meaningful.

Now there is a word I have seen used for RWS, and many people do not use the deck for this reason. Many people(like me) use the deck regardless of the Art- for the concept. I have found some Tarot a better mix of the Art and the Concept. I have found some good Art and a poor concept- I do not use those to read with- but I do use them to show the variation of Tarot available. Like the RWS, there are decks with great concept and poor Art and for this game of Tarot (however you play it) they will work. I am thinking of the cartoon-ish Ferret Tarot- funny and usable- executes the concept in an OK way- suits the concept- but it is not fine Art- but it is Tarot art.
Luigi Scapini made a really ugly go of replacement cards in the Visconti Cary- Yale- do not use them for reading- yet his Medieval Scapini deck I do think of as Art. His theme was pseudo Medieval, his concept was Christian with Hebrew and Classical imput- it works as concept, theme, and Art FOR ME.
Some people think that computer generated Tarot is Art. I do not- even when the theme is appropriate, the concept appropriate- I will not use it for reading- but I might for a card game- playing with Artistic Cards is a joy.
I look for Concept first- then the quality of the Artistic expression- but will forgo latter for former.
~Rosanne
Oops for me there is one exception- the Thoth- I love the artwork of the cards and loathe the concept.
 

OnePotato

Hi Rosanne.

The sort of flip side to what I said is that the qualities of the rendering of the image have a direct effect on its ability to successfully communicate the intended concept of the artist to the viewer.
So, the art matters.

Generally, in the tarot world, the idea that the creator had in the first place "dwells" in the images. It doesn't matter how meaningful the "script" was, (if there was one,) if the images do not fully communicate all aspects of the idea to the viewer. (Unless the work is presented as a written one, with images functioning simply as additional illustration. But that isn't much of a deck of cards.)

By the same token, if the concept is simplistic or poorly built, it doesn't matter how intricate the art is. It's not communicating anything of substance.

Among other things, a good tarot deck needs both good thinking and good rendering.
 

Debra

Thanks, OnePotato. My vocabulary for art criticism is weak at best.

So can you tell me if this is correct, using your vocabulary:

Suppose you have the concept of a deck in which opposites will be emphasized. You want to use lots of black and white for this reason, and, say, lots of mirror images within the cards, and maybe a contrast also between hard edges and soft edges--all intended to reinforce the "opposites" idea that you hope to express both on individual cards and in the deck as a whole. Is this the CONCEPT?

Then you figure out what medium and rendering style will best suit this (and your own talents and inclinations)--manga-style with magic markers? in a classic lifelike oil painting? use the computer to "draw" rather than paper or canvas and your chosen marking implement? photography? Etc. Is this the RENDERING STYLE?

And you want it all Thothy--the SYSTEM, yes?

*head spins, goes to lie down*
 

OnePotato

Debra said:
..................Suppose you have the concept of a deck in which opposites will be emphasized. You want to use lots of black and white for this reason, and, say, lots of mirror images within the cards, and maybe a contrast also between hard edges and soft edges--all intended to reinforce the "opposites" idea that you hope to express both on individual cards and in the deck as a whole. Is this the CONCEPT?

Then you figure out what medium and rendering style will best suit this (and your own talents and inclinations)--manga-style with magic markers? in a classic lifelike oil painting? use the computer to "draw" rather than paper or canvas and your chosen marking implement? photography? Etc. Is this the RENDERING STYLE?

And you want it all Thothy--the SYSTEM, yes?..................

Well, the formal vocabulary is less important than the recognition of the process one is following.
You generally do whatever you can.

"System" seems like more of an esoteric idea than an "art vocabulary" one.

I suppose your concept is to emphasize the theme of "opposites" as you perceive them within the previously established "Thoth" system. (As defined by Crowley's writings and the Thoth deck, I guess.) And you are cleverly choosing a rendering style that is particularly supportive of this theme, as a way to add visual emphasis on it, so as to get your point across better.

"Concept" is not necessarily as singular as your example, though.
The idea of "theme" is not particularly strict, either.
You could explore the concept of "opposites" in the Thoth system, and design the hard edged black and white imagery along a cats and dogs theme, for instance.

Of course, this is more of a laboratory discussion than a studio.
Things are probably very rarely as formal as I've implied here.
There are lots of recipes for making art.
 

greycats

This is an interesting thread. Thank you, Pen.

To present a very subjective range: I can and have done a reading just using scraps of paper with suit and number indicators on them, like Kng C for King of Cups, etc. There's no art to that whatever, and basically I'm just reading the inside of my head.

But it is not by any stretch the worst. Sometimes the art is offensive to me personally--such as (I'm making this up, but it's not too long a stretch to the real thing) Strength depicted as a tank rolling over a person and depicted in such a way that the viewer is obviously supposed to cheer for the tank. In short, the art contradicts everything I would have attributed to the virtue of Strength. In this case the art actually interferes with the tarot and I'd find it hard to read with such a deck.

Occasionally the execution of an image, even though the image is essentially benign or even joyful, will affect me in a similar way. The Woman of Trees in The Shining Tribe is an example. She's beautiful. And she makes me itch. Sometimes a whole deck is mildly to moderately irritating--body proportions are way off, the colors look like they've been cut out of paper and pasted on, etc. I can read with these decks, but they start out in my outer circle and they never advance.

On the other hand, sometimes the art is very good: the design is pleasing, the colors interesting, the figures elegant, etc. But each card looks like the next, sometimes to the point that unless the cards were numbered and titled, one cannot not tell which card is which. And I'm back to reading my own head again.

The decks I appreciate the most, the ones that I usually have within easy reach are those in which the art and the tarot reinforce each other--which they can do in so many different ways. An example: I don't really like adding meta-systems such as the Kabbala to the tarot. Yet I learned the Kabbala because of Navigators of the Mystic Seas. I felt like I had to learn that system to understand the art, the how and why of those images even though I already understood what they were depicting in reference to the tarot.

Ironwing is another deck in which the art and the tarot intersect very richly and on more than one level. The artist does a lot of metal working in addition to her paintings and drawings. Her "fool's journey" is that of an apprentice craftswoman who is learning to be a smith. Every image is either a depiction of a work of art or one that describes how to become a craftsman. And she is very knowledgeable regarding the fauna and flora of her environment. And she knows tarot through and through. So you get layers of meaning in each card.

Outside the range: Pixie. I've always thought of her as an illustrator. An artist, of course, but an illustration is art tweaked in a certain way. You try to catch the essentials of a scene but you don't want to put in too much lest you contradict the text or whatever is being illustrated. So the scenes she created have the essentials but leave a lot of things for the reader to fill in. That, to me, seems like a pretty good place to start. ;)
 

Rosanne

greycats said:
The decks I appreciate the most, the ones that I usually have within easy reach are those in which the art and the tarot reinforce each other--which they can do in so many different ways.
Aye you have worded what I could not and I thank you greycats! When Art and Tarot reinforce each other......perfect.



Outside the range: Pixie. I've always thought of her as an illustrator. An artist, of course, but an illustration is art tweaked in a certain way. You try to catch the essentials of a scene but you don't want to put in too much lest you contradict the text or whatever is being illustrated. So the scenes she created have the essentials but leave a lot of things for the reader to fill in. That, to me, seems like a pretty good place to start. ;)

ooooh ahhhh I had never thought of RWS as so general- but you are right-.
See- I learn something everyday.

~Rosanne
 

Eco74

I just keep getting lost in semantics and going nowhere...

My baseline is still what I added in my first reply in this thread.
The simpler the art - the better for me to read with. Mainly because my reading style is looking at the details, correlations and rhythms of the cards.
Too much detail, and too much 'perfection' and I get less out of the reading.

The question of what 'good' and 'bad' is should probably be kept separate though.
What works great artistically for one person doesn't work at all for the next and a system that one person resonates with doesn't speak at all with another etc.

I do agree that for a deck to work the artwork would have to resonate with the idea behind the deck (be it a concept, theme or otherwise) but how this correlates is primarily for the creator of the deck to determine.
Whether others can see it and feel it as clearly is a different matter alltogether.

Some decks may be thrown together and have a few 'panic-cards' here and there if the chosen theme or style are making them difficult to fit in - but most are well thought through and many hours (days, weeks or even years) will have been spent by the creator to put it all together.
To say something is "poorly made" just because it doesn't resonate with Me would be a fault on my end since I have no idea how much time and thought has gone into the creation of the art/deck.

That said, there are decks out there that I can't get my head around and others that I immediately click with for one or other reason - be it art, concept, system, style - or all of the above.
And this even if a lot of work and time has gone into researching and creating the deck. Some of the most appreciated well researched and well crafted decks out there simply fall flat when I try to read the cards. The images and the symbols or something about the combination just doesn't resonate with me.
Doesn't make it a bad concept or theme or bad art though..