My RWS hate/hate relationship

Chu'si

lampkin said:
How many of you can honestly say you would have ever heard of tarot if there had been no RWS beginner deck for you to break the ice?

Off topic I'm sure, but I can honestly say I never heard of tarot before hearing about Raider Waite. Actually, I first started getting tarot cards (Animals Divine being the first) only for the pictures, since I'm an art lover. It wasn't until a couple years later from researching online that I found out about Waite (and I don't have a beginner's deck, and I never will). What first got me into tarot was from a general divination book I got to help me with my runes, not a typical beginner's deck like you assume. I don't think it's THAT uncommon.

lizziecat

RiccardoLS said:
Why?

The RWS is recognizable.
There is no other alternative tradition to portray pictorial minors that gives the same effect: recognizability. Familiarity.
That sense that allow a reader to work with a deck and slowly uncover the subleties of it.

And again, I can see - clearly - all the structural defects of the RWS.
A deck that belongs (imho) to an outdated, obsolete, way of using Tarot.
And yet, every time I try to pry myself out of the RWS (see the Vampire deck) I have the feeling I'm walking into an elitist modd, where only me, those willing to make a big study effort, can se the structural side of a deck.
Of course, one can always read intuitively. But intuition alone... I'm not sure it is always enough.

ric

I suppose you might ask what exactly is the definition of "Tarot" - why is it separated from all other card-type forms of divination? When does a structure or design stop being "Tarot" and become something else?

Tarot didn't start with the RWS. Maybe digging a little deeper into Tarot history will reveal the structural "template", so to speak, for contemporary Tarot design.

And don't get me started on contemporary Tarot design....

It's like building a car - just because the most popular and familiar car <insert your favorite brand here> is all over the place doesn't mean it's the only car. It could be a Hummer or a Volkswagon - extremely different designs and varying structures but everyone would agree they are "cars" and not "trains" because underneath all the fancy stuff is a familiar "template" (steering wheel, brakes, etc.)

All you need is the template - the rest is where it becomes interesting and (hopefully) rises above a "theme" or a "clone."

firemaiden

Chu'si said:
Off topic I'm sure, but I can honestly say I never heard of tarot before hearing about Raider Waite. Actually, I first started getting tarot cards (Animals Divine being the first) only for the pictures, since I'm an art lover. It wasn't until a couple years later from researching online that I found out about Waite (and I don't have a beginner's deck, and I never will). What first got me into tarot was from a general divination book I got to help me with my runes, not a typical beginner's deck like you assume. I don't think it's THAT uncommon.

I did NOT find tarot through the Raider Waite or even the Rider Waite. The first deck I found was the Thoth. And it was a long time before I realised that wasn't the "template" for everyone. As I said, I was living in Germany, and that was definitely the most common deck there. By the way, tarot and new age stuff was BIIIIIIIIIIIG over there.

Debra

lampkin said:
So essentially Waite acted as a tarot pimp, selling out the tarot for his own personal fame and fortune, selling out sacred occult secrets in THE prostitute of tarots, the RWS.

Oh dear. I've been consorting with prostitutes. Many, many prostitutes.

Oh dear oh dear.

Good thing I don't believe in "sacred occult secrets"!

Nina*

lampkin said:
How many of you can honestly say you would have ever heard of tarot if there had been no RWS beginner deck for you to break the ice?

I can. The first deck I ever saw was an old Piatnik TdM and the first deck I ever got was the Thoth. For months I didn't know about RWS or any other deck for that matter.

Aoife

Its interesting that analogies with cars have been made. The RWS came into being at the same time as the motorised vehicle, relegating animal-powered vehicles to a largely folksie status in the western world.

We live in a time of rapid technological advancement and diminishing resources. Pretty soon anything made from or driven by oil will become a relic. So perhaps now is the time for a new vehicle for our soul-seraching to evolve? Or maybe we should return to the tried and trusted vehicles of the past?

firefrost

**Originally Posted by lampkin
How many of you can honestly say you would have ever heard of tarot if there had been no RWS beginner deck for you to break the ice? **

The first deck I ever looked at was an IJJ swiss. Honestly.

sacredashes

RiccardoLS said:
Ok, I have an hate/hate relationship with the RWS.

ok... and it looks like you're in good company... so what's the point to the statement?

oh.. wait a minute.. here you go...

RiccardoLS said:
I recently completed a new script for a deck... (well, not that recently actually, anyway...). On the Majors I was inspired (there was a leading idea that mark the main focus of the deck).
On the minors... I fell back on the RWS and hated myself for that.
(to me: Conformist! Coward! Collaborator!)

if you say so... again, you're in good company. why does that bother you so? ...oh, you already answered that one didn't you?

RiccardoLS said:
Why?

The RWS is recognizable.
There is no other alternative tradition to portray pictorial minors that gives the same effect: recognizability. Familiarity.
That sense that allow a reader to work with a deck and slowly uncover the subleties of it.

hhmmm... yes, i see where you're going with this, i think but correct me if i misunderstood you.

so many people are using the RWS format to read the cards, it just makes sense to borrow the idea from RWS and build on it so the deck created from the the backbone of the RWS is.. how shall we put it... more user-friendly? BUT...

RiccardoLS said:
And again, I can see - clearly - all the structural defects of the RWS. A deck that belongs (imho) to an outdated, obsolete, way of using Tarot.

really? says who? which correct tarot structural blueprint are we comparing the RWS to? which correct tarot structural blueprint are decks suppose to adhere to, to begin with? is there an absolutely correct, fixed standard uniform tarot structure? set by whom? says who? by which tarot authority?

RiccardoLS said:
And yet, every time I try to pry myself out of the RWS (see the Vampire deck) I have the feeling I'm walking into an elitist modd, where only me, those willing to make a big study effort, can se the structural side of a deck.
Of course, one can always read intuitively. But intuition alone... I'm not sure it is always enough.

ric

and those willing to make the big study effort will do so at their own time and leisure. afterall, it is a personal journey and i'm sure there are legions out there who will make the effort to walk the elitist walk; or not....
what's that thing called again?... oh yeah... freewill..

and they will eventually see the structural side of any deck they choose to use whether its a RWS, its clone, copy, photocopy, semi-copy, quarter copy, hybrid, etc, etc, etc...

so when the time comes and one decides that intuition alone is not enough; the big study effort alone is not enough; combining the two is not enough or tarot alone is not enough, they'll probably go find some method that brings their learning to another level.

i always thought it was one's personal responsibility to do so; not the tarot deck creator's responsibility.

the creator's responsibility, i've always felt is to keep true to his/her understanding of the tarot and convey that understanding in their creation. it may not be an all time favorite but it's honest labour and that is worth some respect... whether its a personal creation; a creation for the masses or both. just an opinion so don't bother sending Cousin Vinny after me...

however, if its a business we're talking about.. well then, the whole ball game changes, doesn't it? there's infinately more at stake than just producing what one wishes to produce in a whim because all that $$$$$ involved and ultimately... the bottomline.

make what sells vs make what one wants to make? tough one, isn't it?

so.. back to hate/hate the RWS.. was this thread to address your concern for the readers who may not walk the elitist walk or your own creative dilemma because of your hate/hate for the RWS?

if its the first... worry not.. i'm sure we'll find our way even if it takes some of us longer to get there;
if it's the second.. i'm sure you'll find your way even if it takes you a little longer to get there.

RiccardoLS

sacredashes said:
what's that thing called again?... oh yeah... freewill..

sacredashes said:
just an opinion so don't bother sending Cousin Vinny after me...

sacredashes said:
however, if its a business we're talking about.. well then, the whole ball game changes, doesn't it? there's infinately more at stake than just producing what one wishes to produce in a whim because all that $$$$$ involved and ultimately... the bottomline.

sacredashes said:
make what sells vs make what one wants to make? tough one, isn't it?

Wow, another Nasty.
Hiding a personal attack under a wise and condescending tone.
Why say anything when it's so easy to make insinuations?
Guess I should thank DI for this as well.

Let's see... what I get from this thread.
It's seems I'm a snotty elitist, and now - behind a few rethorical questions - I discover that asking questions on the approchability of a deck when designing it is an attack to free will. But that's not important because, ultimately, my only reason and motivation is *sales*.
So, what hinted before by DI and hinted again by Sacredashes (but can people at least skip the wise tone and the rethoric questions like "tough one, isn't t" and "what was called again?") this thread has no purpose but what... advertisment... glory seeking... whatever.

Well, it all ended up as a personal attack on the person.
Not even to what I think, just to me.
Subtle. Yet it's there, and maybe, in some posts, there is nothing but that personal attack.

sacredashes said:
so.. back to hate/hate the RWS.. was this thread to address your concern for the readers who may not walk the elitist walk or your own creative dilemma because of your hate/hate for the RWS?

if its the first... worry not.. i'm sure we'll find our way even if it takes some of us longer to get there;
if it's the second.. i'm sure you'll find your way even if it takes you a little longer to get there.

Couldn't this thread purpose be...
sparking a discussion about the structure of decks,
about the defects and the cons of the RWS structure in the minors, vs the recognizability virtues and the pros,
addressed within a forum that include Tarot authors that could have faced the same dilemma, found different solutions or have a different take than mine?

I guess that, simply, such a discussion can't even be begun on AT.
Because it went up to be a personal attack without even starting.

bye,

ric

fluffy

I am sorry Ric that you feel you can't have a discussion on the structure of decks. I wasn't going to reply as usually I just like reading and don't think I have much useful to say, but I wanted to let you know that this thread has made me think of what the structure of Tarot is all about.

To me tarot doesn't have to be 78 cards. I consider the minchiate to be a tarot deck and that has much more majors than an ordinary tarot deck. To me what makes it tarot is the fact that it has Trumps and suits. The more IU think about it it doesn't even have to have four suits or courts, just majors (any amount above one) and suits (any amount). I have decided that I think the need for trumps is to represent "big" things in your life and suits to represent "minor" things in your life, every day things. This is what tarot is to me.

I think you shouldn't feel bad about subconciously reverting to RWS symbolism, it is so hard to think of anything else for pictoral minors. Try and think of the minchi and how many trumps they have and that works!

Love Fluffy
xxx

My RWS hate/hate relationship

Chu'si

lizziecat

firemaiden

Debra

Nina*

Aoife

firefrost

sacredashes

RiccardoLS

fluffy