greenseer
]]]]]
Why do new artists change the suit names?
Luna-Ocean
Well reading through all these replies there does seem to be consensus that a deck creator should be allowed to express his/her creativity without feeling too restricted about what they can do? if a creator wants to use a particular symbol or just go for a completely different view point from the traditional meanings then just do it, and it's worth noting that each of these new suit names that gets invented will often get used again and again in other decks which says alot for that ingenious creators way of thinking.
spiralingcadaver
I'd kind of approach it from the same perspective as I approach going against the standard in games or graphic design: If you're going to change something, you should have a reason, and (even if it's personal), you should be sure it's making it in some way better than the standard, and you should be able to explain the logical steps resulting in the change and how it changes function (if not, you probably haven't thought about the above). If you're just changing something to be different, you probably neither understand the original nor how your changes affect the use.
VioletEye
i'm of two minds on this.
on the one hand, i agree with the OP; i'm familiar with the RWS suits, and it's nice to be able to pick up a deck and know what's what.
but - and here's the thing - i think this is a problem only because many tarot readers have multiple (or myriad!!
) decks in their collection. if you only have one deck, there's only one system to learn, and you DO have to learn some system at some point! so the question could be, "why not develop a deck with its own system, as long as it's thoughtful and it works?"
closrapexa said it well:
here is my example:
i recently acquired the lost tarot of nostradamus. http://www.aeclectic.net/tarot/cards/lost-nostradamus/
it has suits of stars, suns, moons and spheres. these do correspond to the traditional RWS suits, but it goes farther; the court cards are all different according to the suits (religious figures, monarchs, occultists and alchemists, respectively). it comes with a book, so the opportunity for study is there, though to really become familiar with this deck, i think, would take some time.
i don't want to get too into it, this is just to say that it is its own system, and if you were to really delve into it and really learn it, i think you could get so much out of it. and what if this was someone's one and only deck? i like to imagine that...
so! personally, i get what you're saying, but i also think there's room for other systems, should people be interested in putting in the time. really, if everything were the same, it might get old!
on the one hand, i agree with the OP; i'm familiar with the RWS suits, and it's nice to be able to pick up a deck and know what's what.
but - and here's the thing - i think this is a problem only because many tarot readers have multiple (or myriad!!
) decks in their collection. if you only have one deck, there's only one system to learn, and you DO have to learn some system at some point! so the question could be, "why not develop a deck with its own system, as long as it's thoughtful and it works?"closrapexa said it well:
here is my example:
i recently acquired the lost tarot of nostradamus. http://www.aeclectic.net/tarot/cards/lost-nostradamus/
it has suits of stars, suns, moons and spheres. these do correspond to the traditional RWS suits, but it goes farther; the court cards are all different according to the suits (religious figures, monarchs, occultists and alchemists, respectively). it comes with a book, so the opportunity for study is there, though to really become familiar with this deck, i think, would take some time.
i don't want to get too into it, this is just to say that it is its own system, and if you were to really delve into it and really learn it, i think you could get so much out of it. and what if this was someone's one and only deck? i like to imagine that...
so! personally, i get what you're saying, but i also think there's room for other systems, should people be interested in putting in the time. really, if everything were the same, it might get old!
queenxofxwands
Yes, it's important to make that logical leap, but only for the reader I think. One mans logic is another mans crazy, or something like that. I have the Lovers Path tarot deck, and most of the major's have name changes, some I think are better, for instance, Emperor has been changed to Power and The High Priestess to Wisdom.
Also, swords have been changed to arrows, and in my opinion, arrows are a better representation for the suit of air, because they fly through it, like thoughts/words, and their point of origin can be far from the target ( or truth) which thoughts/words often are. Once they leave their point of origin, they are subject to the prevailing conditions, which can send them off target, making them completely random, which can be likened to "friendly fire", or they can even be ineffectual as they are at times. Add to that the fact that arrows have a greater capacity to get stuck because of the barbed tip and are extremely painful to remove, and the comparison to ingrained patterns of thought and the process of removing them, or the pain inflicted by harsh words seems to be more fitting. Swords are always controllable by the hand that holds them, implying that physically we are always in control of what we think/say, or how much damage we inflict on others, {because to hurt with a sword you must be physically next to that person} And while in a sense this is true, sometimes the things we say can hurt someone badly, yet we have no knowledge of it, or had no intention of doing it, (because we were aiming somewhere else) and it can come as a shock that this even happened. With a sword, you are right there watching the damage you are inflicting, you see what you are doing. With an arrow, there is always that chance of "friendly fire"
I think there is quite a big difference between the two representations
Also, swords have been changed to arrows, and in my opinion, arrows are a better representation for the suit of air, because they fly through it, like thoughts/words, and their point of origin can be far from the target ( or truth) which thoughts/words often are. Once they leave their point of origin, they are subject to the prevailing conditions, which can send them off target, making them completely random, which can be likened to "friendly fire", or they can even be ineffectual as they are at times. Add to that the fact that arrows have a greater capacity to get stuck because of the barbed tip and are extremely painful to remove, and the comparison to ingrained patterns of thought and the process of removing them, or the pain inflicted by harsh words seems to be more fitting. Swords are always controllable by the hand that holds them, implying that physically we are always in control of what we think/say, or how much damage we inflict on others, {because to hurt with a sword you must be physically next to that person} And while in a sense this is true, sometimes the things we say can hurt someone badly, yet we have no knowledge of it, or had no intention of doing it, (because we were aiming somewhere else) and it can come as a shock that this even happened. With a sword, you are right there watching the damage you are inflicting, you see what you are doing. With an arrow, there is always that chance of "friendly fire"
I think there is quite a big difference between the two representations
rota
sometimes the renaming is an overabundance of enthusiastic creativity and a real effort to bring tarot into the 21st century, sometimes it seems to be a need to make tarot 'softer' and more palatable, and sometimes it's just a felt need to make one's own mark on the field of tarot. it seems unnecessary to me.
Barleywine
Now I think I want a deck where "Swords have been beaten into Arrows"
Necessary? No, not by a long shot. Enlightening? Maybe (Swords seem to be a good candidate for some revisionism). But I'm too much of a traditionalist to be very enthusiastic about it. "If it ain't broke, etc."
Luna-Ocean
Now I think I want a deck where "Swords have been beaten into Arrows"
Necessary? No, not by a long shot. Enlightening? Maybe (Swords seem to be a good candidate for some revisionism). But I'm too much of a traditionalist to be very enthusiastic about it. "If it ain't broke, etc."
The swords are my favorite suits to read in tarot but i do enjoy seeing other ways to represent them like the arrows etc which the other poster had explained, another thing though which i sometime's wonder about is ''why swords for intelligent thinking'' why was this used by e.waite when creating the system in the RW? he could of just used a mouth or tongue but then again that wouldn't of looked appealing
so i suppose the Swords represented the tongue.dancing_moon
The swords are my favorite suits to read in tarot but i do enjoy seeing other ways to represent them like the arrows etc which the other poster had explained, another thing though which i sometime's wonder about is ''why swords for intelligent thinking'' why was this used by e.waite when creating the system in the RW? he could of just used a mouth or tongue but then again that wouldn't of looked appealing
Actually, he didn't invent the suits. They were adopted from earlier decks.
Richard
It is just a convention, nothing more. Thoughts are generally ephemeral, like air, hence were represented by the Swords, which swish through the air. However, they can also cause damage if they hit something, as can tornados and hurricanes and destructive thoughts. Thus the Swords designation seems appropriate.The swords are my favorite suits to read in tarot but i do enjoy seeing other ways to represent them like the arrows etc which the other poster had explained, another thing though which i sometime's wonder about is ''why swords for intelligent thinking'' why was this used by e.waite when creating the system in the RW? he could of just used a mouth or tongue but then again that wouldn't of looked appealing
