Agreed. However, the thorny question of which came first, the folk cartomantic tradition or the occultist interpretation is a moot point, certainly one worth exploring further. As an aside, as I recall, Maxwell was somewhat surprised to find that many of the folk divinatory meanings, to use the current terminology, agreed with his rather rational or analogical explanations of the cards.
To return to the thrust of my earlier point, to give an example, let me cite the well-known French book by J.-G. Bourgeat, "Le Tarot", from the early 20th century. It's a fairly short, concise and quite readable book on Tarot by an occultist author. (Let's face it, they're not exactly renowned for their clarity of writing, are they?)
The divinatory meanings are quite often seemingly arbitrary, but the proposed spreads and methodologies are clear and functional. (Contrast with Papus' excruciatingly complicated "Divinatory Tarot" for instance...) And I must say I found it rather useful, and dare I say "operative", in my experience, despite its bad history and mystery; Gypsies, Egyptians and what not.
Its value is therefore limited overall, but as a "cookery book", as I've heard this type of literature described before, it is helpful. I'm sure that there are many other books, both old and new, which fit that criterion also.
And no doubt these remarks could equally apply to a course of studies or a workshop as well as to books.