Differences In Decks- How Do You Read Them?

Umbrae

Once the artist creates the deck - it becomes MY deck. I read it how I want.

“When you are ready to read, close the book that tells you what the cards mean, sit back, and start.” Robin Wood

Scenic, non-scenic, character driven, or Chock-Fulla-Symbols, I can pretend to be Oh-SO-Snooty and use a deck just the way someone else thinks I should use it…

RWS/WCS meanings came from Mathers mis-translations of Etteilla. Do I really have to follow lockstep with erroneous claptrap?

Or I can be me.

And I can read the deck like me.

Even with all them nice companion books, it all comes down to one thing.

It’s my deck. I’m reading for you. Who cares what a third person thinks.

Scion

Umbrae said:
RWS/WCS meanings came from Mathers mis-translations of Etteilla. Do I really have to follow lockstep with erroneous claptrap?

Wait-wait-wait!

Now Umbrae...

That is, um, wrong. There is some Etteilla in the Golden Dawn meanings. James Revak has written a wonderful article about the links and they are far more complicated and involved than a "mistranslation." You KNOW that that isn't the case, whether you believe the GD is wank or not. The Golden Dawn meanings, whatever you may think of them, come from a mixture of magical astrology and hermetic Qabalah, with little bits of cartomantic tradition (Etteilla among others) stirred in.

Further, that "erroneous claptrap" is the underpinning of maybe 85% of the decks in print today, and probably about 90% of the decks used for divinatory tarot. Not to resurrect the silly/fake arguument "study vs. intuition" but if someone thinks they are "intuiting" Abundance or Joy or even "Party!" when they look at the 3 of Cups on any GD-based deck they are deluding themselves. They are interpreting a piece of artwork (i.e. using their intellect, i.e. NOT intuition) that draws its meanings directly from the Hellenistic Decans:

The Picatrix said:
"A woman of beautiful visage, and having on her head a green wreath of myrtle, and in her hand is the stem of the planet which is called the water lily, she is singing songs of love and joy. And this is a face of playing, and of wealth, joy and abundance."

Now, no one MUST know that if they don't want to, but the fact is, it wasn't a "mistranslation" of anything, least of all Etteilla. I know how you feel about book-learning, so let's skip over all that. Someone who wings it and looks at three women toasting is looking at a depiction of a astromagical tradition at least as old as Christianity, Every time they lay a spread, they are still studying that tradition whether they admit it or not. They are looking at a fax of a xerox of an email of a synopsis of someone's take on that tradition, but the basic face of Mercury in Cancer is right there. Umbrae, you are always saying: JUST READ THE CARDS. What do you think they are reading? If they are using a GD deck then they are studying the GD system every time they look at a spread. Full stop.

Again, no one in compelled to try understand how it works or why it works, but the Golden Dawn tradition isn't comparable to the New Age rorschach version of divination where everything is about self-help and psychobablble rather than information. Moreover, to suggest that readers who use a Golden Dawn deck aren't affected by the fact that they are coopting a piece of magical technology is bizarre. If they aren't, then why bother using something in which they don't believe? As you often say, they might as well use sugar packets; but for the record, if they are so much as naming the sugar packets with trump titles and card numbers they are using symbolism that is fundamentally esoterica, and thence magickal.

I know the word magick makes lots of folks squirmy and embarassed. I've heard lots of people say that they don't believe in all that complicated gobbledegook, because "they just read the cards." What do they think they're reading? These pictures didn't fall from the sky! The Golden Dawndidn't just scribble down a bunch of mushy, random thoughts about empowerment and affirmation. The artwork of the Waite-Smith illustrated a magickal worldview. It's a little bit like serving a dinner party of the altar of a cathedral: it does look like a table, it serves many of the functions of a table, but there is more going on there, otherwise why bother sending your caterers into Saint Paul's?

Obviously, my thoughts about magick are my own. No one has to believe anything. But it is dishonest to use any Golden-Dawn-based deck and simultaneously claim that it is all bullshit and worthless and that what matters is the pictures. THE PICTURES WERE DESIGNED BY OCCULTISTS. Waite & Smith and Crowley & Harris were all initiates of magickal orders. Not everyone will/should/can make sense of their work but just because someone can't do it doesn't mean it is all worthless. As I once said in another thread, anyone can use the pages of a book as toilet paper but that is not what was intended.

You can "just read" a GD deck. Sure. You don't have to be a plumber to use a sink, but if you want to fix a sink or understand a sink or build a sink or become a master of sinks, a little work and investigation might be useful. If people want to guess at the GD system without just fricking learning it via study AND intuition, mazel tov. Maybe next week I'll try to build a particle accelerator by banging rocks together.

So I will say that no one needs to "march in lockstep" with anything. We are not insects. But neither should they believe that just because they don't study something that it is silly or scary or beyond their capacities. Laziness and inattention of any kind are inevitably the wrong answer. I WILL say that if anyone reading this who uses a Golden Dawn deck but has no idea why the deck works, what its effect on ACTUAL intuition is, which symbols mean what... is kicking the snow at the tip of the iceberg. Many things can (and should) be learned directly from the deck. There are other ways to develop mastery than making sense of the GD system indirectly because "books are rigid." Knowing a whole bunch of stuff doesn't automatically make anyone a great reader, but by the same token, NOT knowing a whole bunch of stuff doesn't make anyone a great reader either.

Anyways, I only thought another perspective was going unspoken. Umbrae, I offer all of this respectfully and because I have a feeling you were itching for a debate.

Scion

WalesWoman

Wow, excellent post Scion... well there you go Future Moth. Get a new deck with it's companion book, study the symbolism, read other books, like 78 Degrees of Wisdom, search the net for excellent sources on tarot, and it will give you a greater understanding.

The first few years I read, I studied my brains out and then someone mentioned intuitive reading... it's wonderful, but honestly Scions analogy is right on. Having the pipes, fittings and a handy dandy tool belt doesn't make one a plumber or give instant know how to do it yourself... but with some books, on-line help and talking to experts, it's possible to fix leaky faucets and install plumbing... tho' it might not be to code. (Our house is a prime example of do-it-yourself everything...it works, with glitches)

I think that learning the basics, getting a good grip on what's behind the card helped learn to read what is on it.

I have gotten really lazy on the study bit and go a lot by guess & golly (intuition) rather than examining the symbolic meanings in the cards themselves and am probably quite "new agey" in my approach these days. But it works for me, since I don't have the time I used to have to devote to tarot. I still haven't gotten the hang of TdM... maybe one of these days.

Umbrae

Scion said:
Wait-wait-wait!

Now Umbrae...

That is, um, wrong. There is some Etteilla in the Golden Dawn meanings. James Revak has written a wonderful article about the links and they are far more complicated and involved than a "mistranslation." You KNOW that that isn't the case, whether you believe the GD is wank or not. The Golden Dawn meanings, whatever you may think of them, come from a mixture of magical astrology and hermetic Qabalah, with little bits of cartomantic tradition (Etteilla among others) stirred in.

Dooood! Hold up there. That first paragraph is monstrous in its complexity and scope! Yes there is some Etteilla in GD meanings.

So what? Big deal! Unlike wine, not all things improve with age!

So Revak has a lovely page…it is not 100% correct in its content.

Then you refer to what I know and move onto…stuff.

There’s really good evidence that the Theosophical Society, the Golden Dawn, Thelema, and Wicca, all fall under the same heading as Scientology. That is…fiction.

Scion said:
Further, that "erroneous claptrap" is the underpinning of maybe 85% of the decks in print today, and probably about 90% of the decks used for divinatory tarot.

Huh? ‘Scuse me? That’s not even logical and has no basis for anything.

“Yup. Folks use it. Must be true.” People bathe, therefore the sky is blue.

Hellenistic Decans? I’d rather go back to magical astrology and hermetic Qabalah.

If Mathers could not translate French to English, imagine what he really did with Hebrew – especially given the anti-Semitic bent of the times…

Crowley wrestled until his death with the Jewish origins of Qabala, which conflicted with his anti-Semitism. His statements resembling blood libel – the accusation that Jewish rites are celebrated using sacrificed children – should be weighed against his esoteric interpretations of the symbol of sacrifice, and his claim about the Egyptian origins of the Qabala should be taken with a sand dune’s worth of salt.

***

Initiation is the major theme in Crowley’s system of Thelema, as in the Golden Dawn and Theosophy. Initiation is a complex subject and has been the subject of extensive study by anthropologists. Freemasonry gave rise to the Golden Dawn, and both fit the van Gennep model of initiation accepted by anthropologists.

Tim Maroney

Sure we can agree that the 3 of Cups picture and meaning agree – and have since 1783 or before (stating the CE 1256 Picatrix).

It’s nice to cherry pick. But cherry picking works both ways with a fraudulent system.

3 of Swords:
Picatrix: Quietess, ease, plenty, good life and dance.
Etteilla: Distance departure
Mathers: a Nun, separation, removal
GD: Lord of Sorrow
Waite: Delay, diversion, rupture, dispersion

Nice solid logical evolution of meaning LOL

5 of Coins
Picatrix: Plowing, sowing, building…
Etteilla: Lover, loving, gallant….
Mathers: Lover or mistress
GD: Lord of Material Trouble
Waite: Material trouble

Plowing to trouble – nice solid logical evolution of meaning LOL

6 of Coins
Picatrix: decan of power, nobility, rule over the people
Etteilla: The present – the now
Mathers: Presents, gifts
GD Lord of Material Success
Waite: Presents, gifts…

See – here we find that Mathers could not translate French to English, and once again we have a nice solid logical evolution of meaning LOL

Scion said:
Now, no one MUST know that if they don't want to, but the fact is, it wasn't a "mistranslation" of anything, least of all Etteilla. I know how you feel about book-learning….

I really don’t think you do know how I feel about ‘book learning’. Allow me to restate. Book learning is fine in its place. It is even necessary. In its place, in its time. However never blindly follow the author. He may have read the wrong books also.

Scion said:
Umbrae, you are always saying: JUST READ THE CARDS. What do you think they are reading? If they are using a GD deck then they are studying the GD system every time they look at a spread. Full stop.

Wrong!

Let’s look at the 6 of Swords as an example.

Picatrix – beauty, dominance, conceit, good manners….
Etteilla – Route, alley, road, course, passage etc…
Mathers – Envoy, messenger, voyage, travel...
GD – Lord of Earned Success
Waite – Journey by water, route, way, envoy…

Well now that there boat don’t mean earned success in most decks; some authors add a shame aspect to it (Pollack "78 Degrees...." – page 223 (“Looking deeper we see the image of a long sorrow…”)). And as far as I look at it…

Umbrae said:
Back in ’93, my wife and I were in Israel, visiting her relatives. Her cousin Menya’s family had left Russia around 1918 or so, and moved to Harbin, China. Menya was raised in a Russian-Jewish community there, until he moved to Israel in 1948.

I asked Menya what the Russian word for Adventurer was. He thought for a bit and said there was not one. The concept of leaving your family, your village, and your duty to your family and village was shameful. I think I mentioned this before…

So let’s think for a second on the Six of Swords…why would a journey be a shameful act? Because your actions forced you to do what is now called a “Geographical.” Forced you to leave your family and village! The Shame! This is difficult to grasp in today’s culture. But we blithely repeat the Victorian meaning…History in the cards…

Scion said:
…Golden Dawn tradition isn't comparable to the New Age rorschach version of divination where everything is about self-help and psychobablble rather than information. Moreover, to suggest that readers who use a Golden Dawn deck aren't affected by the fact that they are coopting a piece of magical technology is bizarre. If they aren't, then why bother using something in which they don't believe? As you often say, they might as well use sugar packets; but for the record, if they are so much as naming the sugar packets with trump titles and card numbers they are using symbolism that is fundamentally esoterica, and thence magickal.

Once again this paragraph is scattered and difficult to answer.

Golden Dawn certainly is not comparable to New Age whatever. The former is fiction the latter is based on psychology.

Yes – they could be using Sugar Packets…or Toothpicks – which have no labeling!!!

Scion said:
I know the word magick makes lots of folks squirmy and embarassed. I've heard lots of people say that they don't believe in all that complicated gobbledegook, because "they just read the cards." What do they think they're reading? These pictures didn't fall from the sky! The Golden Dawndidn't just scribble down a bunch of mushy, random thoughts about empowerment and affirmation. The artwork of the Waite-Smith illustrated a magickal worldview. It's a little bit like serving a dinner party of the altar of a cathedral: it does look like a table, it serves many of the functions of a table, but there is more going on there, otherwise why bother sending your caterers into Saint Paul's?

Obviously, my thoughts about magick are my own. No one has to believe anything. But it is dishonest to use any Golden-Dawn-based deck and simultaneously claim that it is all bullshit and worthless and that what matters is the pictures. THE PICTURES WERE DESIGNED BY OCCULTISTS. Waite & Smith and Crowley & Harris were all initiates of magickal orders. Not everyone will/should/can make sense of their work but just because someone can't do it doesn't mean it is all worthless. As I once said in another thread, anyone can use the pages of a book as toilet paper but that is not what was intended.

Being a member of a magical order is not a qualification. It is a fact. Just because its true – does not make it valid in a discussion.

Electricity can kill you, it also keeps your beer cold.

Scion said:
If people want to guess at the GD system without just fricking learning it via study AND intuition, mazel tov. Maybe next week I'll try to build a particle accelerator by banging rocks together.

Blah blah blah (lol)

Scion said:
Anyways, I only thought another perspective was going unspoken. Umbrae, I offer all of this respectfully and because I have a feeling you were itching for a debate.

Scion

I agree on the first part, and not really on the second.

I’ll leave you with a quote specifically pertaining to the fiction of Thelema, Golden Dawn etc…

“In this book it is spoken of the Sephiroth and the Paths; of Spirits and Conjurations; of Gods, Spheres, Planes, and many other things wich may or may not exist.

It is immaterial whether these exist or not. By doing certain things, certain results will follow. Students are most earnestly warned against attributing objective reality or philosophic validity to any of them.”

Aleister Crowley

Hooked on TdM

I have nothing to add.. just wanted to say.. it makes my day reading posts like these!

Hooked

sweet_intuition

For me, it's a blend of both the "structural" aspects of the tarot, with the intuitive approach to the tarot.

The structural aspect, i.e. the astrological, qabbalistic, numerological, magickal, alchemical, etc etc part of the tarot for me gives me the essential blueprint of the card. While the intuitive approach which relies on how the "artwork" speaks to me adds a sense of "enrichment" to my understanding the card especially how it varies from deck to deck.

Since I'm most familiar with the GD structure and it's set of correspondences, I refer to them mainly when trying to understand and explain the structure of the tarot. And since I understand astrology more than hermetic qabalah (though I try my best to study it in every possible opportunity) I focus first on the astrological correspondences in order to gain a better understanding of the card, followed by the qabalistic correspondences etc etc, till I reach the image it self.

Now to me, knowing the structure is important. After all, you can't build a house without a solid foundation and a firm structural skeleton. However, I always put an importance to the artwork of each deck, because lets face it, we can't really live in a house that has no walls, floors, nor furnishings. The artwork at times can come into play within a reading more often than the structural aspect. Sometimes the expression on a figure's face, or the body language of another, or even the way flowers are arranged can bring about so many different meanings that can simply add dimensions to each reading.

Taking the above mentioned example of 3 of Cups. On an astrological level, it's Mercury in Cancer. On a Qabbalistic Level, it is the Sphere of Binah (Ruled by Saturn) in the world of Briah. All that does lead to a greater understanding of the card. However, lets take the image of 2 GD based decks:-

RWS and Robin Wood

We see a celebration and a party in both. However, notice in the Robin Wood Tarot, the chalices each have three phases of the moon inscribed upon them, almost symbolizing the Maiden, Mother, and Crone aspect of the goddess. Now doesn't that seemingly simple addition just bring about a complete new way of looking at the card?

Again, this is just how "I" understand and read cards with different decks. To each their own at the end of the day. I personally feel, that in the case of the tarot, just focusing solely on the structure or the picture of the deck somehow makes the interpretation come out a bit (again, just my opinion) incomplete. Focusing solely on the structure would make the reading dry and soulless, while focusing solely on the imagery makes the reading all "woo-woo". Combining the two together brings a sense of "life" to the reading.

Hope this was helpful

Love and Blessings

Nevada

Umbrae said:
Once the artist creates the deck - it becomes MY deck. I read it how I want.

I think what I ignore the most in companion books is any religious connections. Even if it's a religion I agree with, I don't want a religious bias in my readings -- for myself or anyone else. It's okay with me if some spirituality of a more generic flavor comes through, but -- for instance with DruidCraft -- well, bad example because I love the mythology involved so much and the nature aspect is just, well, NATURE, to me, which I have no problem with either. But some of the Golden Dawn and other religion based decks have books with material that, in my opinion, reeks of someone else's religious agenda. So I tend to tune that out and just try to get to the basis of the symbolism without the religious baggage.

Nevada

Gavriela

Given how the Marseille and GD decks both come out of heterodox, but profoundly Christian tradition, it makes ignoring the religious underpinnings a bit difficult.

You don't have to become Christian to be a reader, but you're not going to understand a lot of those symbols if you don't have at least some familiarity with the religion and its historical symbolism.

Scion

Umbrae, that was lovely! :thumbsup:

I had a feeling you might say something like that... and in exactly those terms.

Actually you were the one who said that the GD meanings were all-Etteilla;

Umbrae said:
RWS/WCS meanings came from Mathers mis-translations of Etteilla. Do I really have to follow lockstep with erroneous claptrap?

Strangely enough, I was the one who said it was more complicated than that. You're making my case for me.

But that's just nitpicking on little things like facts. By the same token, Hellenistic decans are magical astrology so there's no need to "go back" to anything. They are literally the foundation of the GD decks and thereby modern Tarot. Every time you pick up a GD-based deck you are studying that stuff even if you think it's bullshit. And THAT'S what I can't wrap my head around.

When I said that the Golden Dawn meanings were popular and used in 90% of decks, you told me that

Umbrae said:
That’s not even logical and has no basis for anything.

But the fact is, people use those meaninggs successfully, so even if you don't agree with them or use them doesn't emean that they are useless or silly. More importantly, the idea that using a GD deck can occur with out absorbing their symbolic structure is strange. That is exactly how we learn: we observe patterns and assemble patterns within those patterns. Rinse repeat. The point is that when people "just read" (as you like to say) the Three of Swords as Suffering they are studying the Golden Dawn's system whetrher they know it or not. Since most decks created regurgitate the GD system in varying degrees of success, to claim that one can use those decks without learning the GD system is bizarre... like claiming you can learn to speak French phonetically but that even once you can have a conversation, you refuse to know what the sounds mean.

Now, obviously I disagree with you, but I'd like to take it down a notch and hit the nitty-gritty. Let's get really bare bones, because as you say loading the ideas just presents the position but make it difficult to discuss unless you feel like writing essays.

I'll ask you this: Why bother reading with a Tarot deck if it's nothing special?

Actually, a while back I got into a discussion with Teheuti about this but the conversation got lost in the shuffle of another topic. I seriously can't figure out how the self-help, magick=BS school of readers use something that is designed as an occult object down to the millimeter. If you believe an occult system doesn't work then why are you using it as if it does? And if it does work as it was intended, then how can you say its creators were deluded charlatans?

I know that you, Umbrae, personally read with Golden Dawn decks. I also know that there are shades within the Golden Dawn meaning structure. I'm not sure why you think that's evidence that they are meaningLESS. But answer my question: why read with an occult deck at all if it's all bullshit? Frankly, why read Tarot if it's all bullshit? I am seriously dying to know. It puts me in mind of Jewish Nazis and military intelligence and other oxymoronic modern marvels. Of course all this gets back to the mechanics of divination and what each of us believes about the power behind the practice.

But, before we get there... I want to take this in stages: if the Golden Dawn system is wank, then why are you even looking at their images?

Answer me that and then we'll get to the rest.

Scion

Sheri

The only comment I am going to make in this very interesting conversation is this.

Scion said:
The point is that when people "just read" (as you like to say) the Three of Swords as Suffering they are studying the Golden Dawn's system whetrher they know it or not.

This sounds like just because the Golden Dawn attributed a particular meaning to a card that they now "own" it forever on... especially a "common" or easily intuited. I'm no scholar, but I am pretty sure there were Tarot decks with 3 of Swords, and therefore interpretations of the 3 of Swords that included suffering long before the Golden Dawn was even a tiny speck of inspiration in someone's head.

valeria

Differences In Decks- How Do You Read Them?

Umbrae

Scion

WalesWoman

Umbrae

Hooked on TdM

sweet_intuition

Nevada

Gavriela

Scion

Sheri