Would a different elemental/suit system be a deal-breaker?

It depends, thus no.

If it somehow solved the "tofoldness" of intellect and fight/negativity of the swords then it might even be a big improvement. Attempts with 5 suits instead of 4 somehow never worked for me though.

Actually: defenitely no, it would appeal to my curiosity in any case

closrapexa said:

For me it wouldn't be provided the deck explained itself well enough why (not the LWB, the deck). The traditional attributions have centuries of history and context, and a deeply-rooted structure and reasoning. Simply switching the attributions on a whim is uninteresting to me.

Click to expand...

Oh, I agree completely. This wouldn't be a whim (nor would it be my invention).

Since we're far enough down the thread, far enough to not influence the poll questions, I will go ahead and say it's the system Mellanchollic used in his Old Fashioned Pips and Courts thread; also advocated by the late Jean-Claude Flornoy (explained clearly here by Ayumi). It just makes so much sense to me, especially in relation to the concept of the Four Temperaments. I really like using this system with decks that have plain pips.

We have so many decks that follow the usual system, I think it would be interesting to explore something different. On the other hand, I am also so used to the usual correspondences that it's a little odd flipping back and forth between them. Half my mind wants to go one way, half the other. Then there's a part that wants to leave the elements out completely, or blend them (because I've never thought any suit was ONLY one element - so much depends on the context of the reading, etc).

Of course any plans I make may change without notice and who knows, I might end up with Fire/cakes like Lotus mentioned!

Thanks everyone for your answers. I really appreciate all your thoughts.

My typical approach to reading with a deck . . . any deck . . . is just to shuffle it, draw cards, turn them over, and read the pictures.

What suit corresponds to which element or season or other what-not just doesn't concern me much.

I usually only crack open the LWBs in order to record ISBNs and other information in my database. (In other words, I rarely read far enough to discover the author's or artist's intentions regarding suit associations).

What about if the elemental attributions stayed the same, but the qualities attributed to them were changed? Fire, for example, denotes change, action and movement as Wands, but what if it were attributed to thoughts and the mind? Or Air as Swords were attributed to feelings?

closrapexa said:

What about if the elemental attributions stayed the same, but the qualities attributed to them were changed? Fire, for example, denotes change, action and movement as Wands, but what if it were attributed to thoughts and the mind? Or Air as Swords were attributed to feelings?

Click to expand...

I personally would find this too confusing without any logical reason for such a change. Breaking such a strong elemental connection as water=emotions needs to have a reason that makes sense, and can make sense to other card readers. Sure, a card artist can do whatever they envision, but certain things are so symbolic that changing them on a whim can really alienate others from wanting to use the deck.

Laura Borealis said:

Poll is simple yes or no, because I am curious if it would be a deal-breaker. If you're thinking "It depends!" then the answer is No, as the mere fact of a different system would not be a deal breaker... Feel free to discuss what it would depend on, though!

Click to expand...

I voted yes, but it really does depend.

For example, Swords/Sticks being interchanged with Air/Fire is a common variation that most are familiar with and accept (although most people have a preference), but changing Coins=Earth and Cups=Water would make a deck much less useful to me. I might still buy it if I really liked the art, but I probably would never use it for reading.

I feel that the answer to this question is largely dependent on how Tarot is being used. My main deck is the Rider-Waite, which I have used almost exclusively since around 1969-70. I am not a fortune teller. The deck is used as as map of the macroscopic universe as well as my own psyche. Therefore it is inconvenient for me to flit back and forth between different elemental suit assignments. However, this approach to Tarot obviously ain't for everybody. So use whatever grabs you.

BTW, the assignment of suits to specific elements is superficially unrealistic. Just about everything pertaining to the "minor" arcana involves more than one element. However, it is convenient to associate certain suites to specific elements, as a general guideline.

For me, I like Tarot decks that have some connection between them, and am less interested in decks which stray very far from the original structures of the Tarot. Suits with different names is fine with me (after all, many of the traditional decks call the suits by different names: wands can be sticks, staves, and trees and are all still clearly wands).

I actually think that similar suits with different interpretations attached would be really interesting. I can easily make the imaginative leap necessary to associate wands with the mind, and, really, spirituality and imagination and energy (concepts usually associated with wands) are all constructs of the mind anyway. Given that spirit/energy/imagination (wands), emotion (cups), reason (swords), and sensation/money/material world (disks) are not really all that separate, I would be glad to see and use a different interpretation.

LRichard said:

I use the usual Elemental attributions (Wands = Fire, etc) extensively and automatically. For me they have wide ranging mythological, psychological, and occult associations which I have built up over the years and would be loathe to give up. Another system (such as the Wiccan) would be a deal breaker unless there were something really special about the deck. I have no problem with decks which are neutral regarding the Elements, such as those in the Marseille tradition.

Click to expand...

This is pretty much me and saves me from having to type it.

I selected, "No."

I am not fond of becoming locked in to anything, including elemental suit systems. I like that my diverse collection allows me to explore and view familiar cards from various angles. I like to be open to what my gut my tell me first when I view a card - and then to explore the subtleties of element, etc. as it pertains.