Sorcerers Tarots, tell me about it?

Some of my trimmed LoS decks (Crystal, Tarot of the Masters, Ancient Tarot of Bologna, Classical...) are among my most treasured decks. The Sorcerers doesn't really need trimming though. the fussiness of the inner borders detracts from the white borders and the titles (IMO)...

OctoberGwen said:

And in this case, that might actually solve my issues because it would remove the borders AND alter the size. Too bad I don't dare trim.

Click to expand...

Someone just MIGHT have atrimmed one to trade, you never know...

People do offer trimmed decks.

Aerin said:

Someone just MIGHT have atrimmed one to trade, you never know...

People do offer trimmed decks.

Click to expand...

I know. I have a beautiful Tarot of the Trance that thorhammer trimmed and sold to me.

I loved loved loved my sorcerers deck!
It was my PDR deck, while I was still doing the PDR.
I blogged with it.
LOVED IT!
Still do, but I have so many decks and so little time.
It's hard to explain what I loved so much about it.
It looks like just another LS theme deck, but when you sit down, and give it a shot, it's really worth it.

I think I commented on it in the LS decks you actually read with thread too.

I think many people just trade it away without giving it a chance.

Did I mention I LOVED this deck?



If I was to ever cull my decks down to say ten, this would be one I would most definitely keep.

Interesting you should say that rhombchick... I do feel that it is a deck which would have substance given half a chance. It looks florid and decorative and pastel-watercoloury and predictable but I think it has cards which really pull in clever and different meanings.

I received it this week and can't stop looking at it. I also have so many decks, so little time but I have really enjoyed examining this deck and thinking about meanings. It is so full of imaginative touches and yet seems so soft and gentle to use. I don't think this is a deck to put on the shelf and forget about.

And yet I find the Art Nouveau Tarot (which seems to be mentioned more here) by the same artist, much less memorable.

I love the Devil; Pan in a forest; meaning frenzy, delirium... So many cards I love...

It does look like an intriguing deck. Some of the cards don't seem to match their elements (Eight of Cups for example looks more like a Coins card) which might be a little confusing for me. I like that many of the cards give a feeling that there is a story, but it doesn't usually seem to be any specific story like a myth or a fairy tale. In this way it reminds me of the Universal Fantasy although the artwork and tone of this one is different. I love all the birds and flowers in the deck.

I'm wondering if there is enough in the pictures to go on for intuitive type readings. Some of the cards are detailed, but sometimes the details are the kind that might not seem meaningful in a reading.

I have had impulses about getting this deck or at least puting it on my wish list but never acted on it, not a bad deck some cards i like some i don't the fool seems very disturbing LOL

I think LoS card stock is great it is thinish but is great quality which anybody who is a card stock connoisseur knows the secret is quality of the cardstock not thickness.


I am glad it seems LoS has moved away from the multi-lingual decks recently and has opted for universal symbolism instead,it increases the overall esthetic .

I like to see decks as paths in the wood. Or maybe they are the journey themselves, or simply travelling companions.
However the way I like to see them, there is always some travel metaphorically involved.

Many "standard" LS decks works mostly when you let them free. They maybe resonates more with questions than with answers. If you are in a moment of a path where you need to control the deck you work with... decks like the Sorcerors will never work.

What I remember about the deck is that it started with almost a childish bent.
5 and 6 of Cups had been among the first cards done. Then I could see the deck moving, evolving, growing to much more adult, harsher moods, and slowly regain balance in a mature way.

I don't have this deck myself, but I've seen the scans and it hops on and off my wishlist.

I just thought I'd mention something that might be of interest to someone who's on the fence about the deck but loves the work of the late Pre-Raphaelite painter J. W. Waterhouse. When I first saw the scans I happened to have JUST returned from a major Waterhouse exhibition at the Royal Academy in London. I was very intrigued to realise that quite a lot of the cards in the Sorceror's Tarot are directly based on Waterhouse paintings. If I get round to it I'll have another look and make a list, but maybe eight to ten cards are close interpretations.

Waterhouse was fascinated by the concept of women as sorcerors, or 'sorceresses' as he would have put it.

I haven't seen this mentioned anywhere before, so I thought I'd share

I was aware that - as in other decks by this artist for LoS - there is a lot of adapting of images. the Art Nouveau Tarot is just too much for me; one of the reasons why I could never imagine myself getting this deck. So many of the images are copied from Classical/poached/drawn on (whatever you want to call it) artwork. The Sorcerers Tarot seems less so. Definitely a Preraphaelite thing going on though (like in the Lovers).

I quite like the childish bent. I like the 7 of Cups, with the child listening to monsters and goblins as only children know how.

Like so many LoS decks - and maybe this is just me - I don't feel an urge to study or journal or anything with this deck. I don't feel an urge to get excessively familiar with it, but so often their decks work well when you don't know them particularly well and you use them with no preconceived ideas, no particular familiarity. Just take them down from the shelf when you need them, lay them out and read, with no expectations. They speak loud & clear with no consciousness of a *system*, does it/does it not deviate etc etc. Just take them on their own terms.

One niggling pedantic grammatical thing here r.e punctuation. It is officially called "The Sorcerers Tarot" but shouldn't it be The Sorcerer's Tarot (i.e the tarot of a sorcerer?) OR is it The Sorcerers' Tarot (i.e the tarot of sorcerers = plural, more than one)???

Actually, come to think of it, is The Mermaid's Tarot or the Mermaids' Tarot??