IF... then How?

IF a TdM inspired deck by Andrea Serio were to be completed, THEN HOW should it be done?

This is a Tarot deck creation spin off from this thread, concerning the possibility of ever producing the deck.
http://www.tarotforum.net/showthread.php?t=98238

My question, here, is... how should it be done?
I would like to specifically address the minors, as the Majors are easier.
I guess we will never be able to totally *agree* on any solution, but discussion may still be interesting.

1. Pips or Illustrations
a. Pips: it's difficult to have them wrong. They don't depart too much from the Marseille template and they are definitely faster.
Doing pips it's also a missed opportunity. In a way, if the *intent* is to modernize the Marseille, we could think that modern Tarot does not use pips. Also, Serio's art would not be able to make a real difference on pips.
b. Illustrations. What actually place on illustrations? Would that depart too much from the original template?

IF Illustrations was better, what should we do?
- I would, definitely, excape from RWS or Thoth based illustrations or meanings. The whole point would be to stay on the MArseille and not to blend with unrelated systems, just because they are confortable (imho).
Possibilities:
. Etteilla system (it was actually created on the Marseille. It only later led to the Etteilla deck). (I would not suggest this, because I hope we will publish the Dames' Fortune Wheel deck by Paul Huson, and there is no point to follow twice the same road).
. Numerology. This may seem easy, but what numerology system? I would not use Cabbala. Pithagorean, maybe?
. Fingers. Ace = thumb, Two = index, etc... (ehm, I don't know the English names for all the fingers ^^). This could be very intuitive. People, after all, counted with fingers.
. Modern. Using any of the many system used for readings ips, like, for instance, polarity and intensity?

Again... If Illustration was to be choosen: would it be better a full ilustration or an illustration incorporating the original pattern? If the second is choosen the illustration will be probably more abstract, or smaller.

ric

I would like to see a TdM inspired Serio with scenic minors, scenes being integrated with classical pips symbols.

For the meaning, are there other defined meanings for the TdM minors except those of Etteilla? earlier ones?

RiccardoLS said:

Doing pips it's also a missed opportunity. In a way, if the *intent* is to modernize the Marseille, we could think that modern Tarot does not use pips. Also, Serio's art would not be able to make a real difference on

- I would, definitely, excape from RWS or Thoth based illustrations or meanings. The whole point would be to stay on the MArseille and not to blend with unrelated systems, just because they are confortable (imho).

Click to expand...

I agree here. Illustrated pips that are not influenced by the Golden Dawn tradition (as far as that is still possible today) would be incredibly refreshing.

You'd have to research how this would have been done a few centuries ago though, if you wanted it to be true to TdM. Maybe look into emblemata and things like that? Er, ask jmd?

Or you could go for a modern TdM, but that would mean... illustrating a numerological meaning that is modern and at the same time true to the historical background? Sounds like a tough job... A modern example of pips with additional (not integrated) pictures would be the Old English, or you could go for something more abstract like the Tarot of the Spirit. I would prefer something more abstract that integrates the original pip illustrations, a bit like the 'moody minors' of the Thoth but in a new approach, back to the intuitive numerological basics without the additional esoteric theories.

I so hope you can find a fresh integrated illustrated system, with some depth to it as well. That would really make it innovative and worth all the effort. Not just pips with extra illustrations (like the Old English) please...

If they were to be illustrated pips, then perhaps something along the lines of the Old English or New Century tarot designs (i.e the standard pip imagery with a small scene underneath)?

Or perhaps 'moody minors' such as the LS Crystal tarot or the Thoth?

Either way, I think the minors should retain a pip-style but I don't think they need to be limited to how the Marseille pips are arranged (i.e curved swords and flowers). Nor do they need to be uniform in design (i.e how about different designed swords, cups etc like the Thoth, thereby with a bit more character to suggest a meaning?).

In terms of how you interpret them, I don't think you need to restrict yourselves to any previous method. After all, the beauty of the Marseille is that you can come up with your own technique for interpretation. I'd leave it to Serio and for his art itself to suggest the meanings.

number symbolism of the pips

There is also the cosmographic, relating the numbers to the sequence of spheres, this could also relate to the rules of the games in that two suits run high to low and two low to high; as the spheres earth to primum mobile are also counted both ways - also for those who want qabalistic references such a system allows them to make direct parallels between the astronomical and sefirothic spheres for themselves without the specific and direct inclusion of suc.:

There is the most straightforward and common symbolism in the congrence of ideas classified by number, ie, seven days of the week, 7 gates of the human head/body, 7 planets, etc; 4 elements, 4 seasons, 4 directions etc. One can find plentifu lists of such correspondences in 17th century and earlier sources from which to choose inspiration. Also this type of system is what you find in the soldier or servants 'almanac' type correspondences; I think minor arcana as almanac could provide a rich vein of ideas and imagery.

I like the idea of an altered pip; not scenic, but updated from the traditional design. Something geometric.

I vote for traditional pips.

I must also cast a vote for traditional pips. Whilst many tarot packs can be very beautiful, they can look rather homogenous to my eyes. There is a wonderful aesthetic in a tarot made of distinct parts, Fool, Trumps, Pips, and Courts. It is a combination of different but complimentary styles that I think gives these packs a richness lacking in others. I know, I could be accused (not unjustly) of having ulterior motives but I genuinely feel this way.

Of course, it could be possible to still decorate the pips with some meanings. Scapini's Romeo & Juliette comes to mind as a good example - distinct parts to the pack with the pips featuring decoration to indicate meaning while not losing the traditional images of the suites. This is one of my favourite modern packs.

Hello Riccardo.

If you truly want to make an "updated" version of the Tarot de Marseille, and not something just loosely inspired by it, I should think the first step in the project would be to define what a "Tarot de Marseille" is. It would be much better to do this before making design choices that might disregard those parameters in favor of something more palatable, but less TdM.

Perhaps listing parameters that, in your view, give the TdM its identity would be a helpful starting place. Then, if you choose to graft on some other system, the reasoning behind it can be better thought out.

Almost OT

What is that make something, something?
For instance, how do you know that the animal you see just over there for the first time, is a dog?

Psychology has demostrated that it's not:
- a list of parameters
While our brain is capable of associating a list of parameters to the *Dog* concept, it is not the method we use to recognize it as such.
- it is not experience
We can accept into the dog family also dogs very different from those we have experienced. The *Dog* concept is not an average of all the dogs we have seen.
- it is not a necessary and sufficient condition.
The *Dog* concept does not seem to be related to any key concept or specification.
etc... etc...
Then we should also think that we can recognize as a *Dog* the real thing as much as a realistic artwork, or Snoopy. And it doesn't give us any cognitive dissonance.
And yet... the definition of *Dog* our brain use to recognize the *dog* concept is part of those elements above. Think how we continue to instinctively associate a Dolphin with a fish.

The psychology discussion is very very interesting... but necessarely OT.
What I wanted to say is that trying to define rationally the TdM is not the best way to get factual. Once you start you will never finish.
Simply... any definition you try to give of the TdM (as for any definition of Tarot - another popular question), in order to be rational, can't include contracdiction and inchoerence... then it wouldn't be able to define anything complex as the Tarot concept seems to be.