Understanding the RWS Tarot

Starling

I loved seeing larger copies. Thank you.

I've always seen a couple of the Pages as female. It looks like they might have been meant to be that way.

Teheuti

roppo said:
Thank you for the information, Taheuti. Now I find Stieglitz held a Ukiyoe exhibition at his 291 studio in 1909, which means PCS had a chance to examine many ukiyoes firsthand. I sense some Sharaku touches from PCS's portraits of Henry Irving.

Nice little tidbit. It's like following a trail of crumbs to put together all the pieces.

Mary

conversus

Mary:

I'm very interested in your question, especially as it has begun to unfold in the thread.

I would be very interested in knowing more about the historical development of the images as they move from some pre-Marseille image through the Marseille to the Golden Dawn descriptions to the images produced by PCS.

Each image in that sort of thread would be patient of a number of interpretations. But I rather suspect that the number and kind of interpretation might be narrowed as one moves from the past toward PCS images.

Imagine the Visconti three of swords, then a Marseille, then the Golden Dawn, then PCS. There is definately a point of view developing here. But is the "tradition" broken, or simply just brought into clarity?

I'd be very interested in a substantive narration of this movement and a reasonably scholarly discussion of the transition.

Then finally (but really at the heart of my interest) how is it that these rectifications are to be received in the present.

Thank you for being involved in the planning of such a conference.

Teheuti

conversus said:
I would be very interested in knowing more about the historical development of the images as they move from some pre-Marseille image through the Marseille to the Golden Dawn descriptions to the images produced by PCS.

Bob O'Neill (with some assistance) did a lot of work on this. It's available at:
http://www.tarotpassages.com/old_moonstruck/oneill/

For the interpretations in Pictorial Key, Waite drew from about a dozen sources, blending them in a pretty amazing way. The images themselves open the interpretive possibilities even larger.

Imagine the Visconti three of swords, then a Marseille, then the Golden Dawn, then PCS. There is definately a point of view developing here. But is the "tradition" broken, or simply just brought into clarity?

I'm not sure if I understand precisely what you're getting at here. For me, the RWS Minor Arcana allow for storytelling in a way that the decks with just pips do not. But that shows my preference for pictorial storytelling over things like suit & number keywords or memorization.

I'd be very interested in a substantive narration of this movement and a reasonably scholarly discussion of the transition.

We've done a bit of that in the Hanged Man - History of Ideas thread, though the more modern works haven't been included yet.
http://www.tarotforum.net/showthread.php?t=94131
Were you thinking of something like this?

Then finally (but really at the heart of my interest) how is it that these rectifications are to be received in the present.

Could you give an example with a specific card?

These sound like some of the things I'm interested in, but I'm not quite sure without seeing an example.

Mary

Starling

conversus said:
I would be very interested in knowing more about the historical development of the images as they move from some pre-Marseille image through the Marseille to the Golden Dawn descriptions to the images produced by PCS.

I'd be very interested in this too. I went to the site that Mary suggested. Although what the owner of that site did was interesting, and it certainly is a beginning of what both of us want, the lack of a visual trail made what was offered there incomplete for me.

As for the Hanged Man thread, it will never go beyond the 15th Century, which, in my opinion, is too bad. It is very interesting knowing where an unusual visual image began, but what both of us seem to want is to know how it got from where it began to where it is now. And that is a totally different question from the one they are discussing in that thread.

Teheuti

Starling said:
the lack of a visual trail made what was offered there incomplete for me.

Yes. O'Neill's Waite/Smith symbols could benefit from having the card images depicted. You are right—nothing substitutes for looking at the cards themselves really closely. Combine looking at the images with information like O'Neill's and you can begin to notice details you never did before.

As for the Hanged Man thread, it will never go beyond the 15th Century, which, in my opinion, is too bad. It is very interesting knowing where an unusual visual image began, but what both of us seem to want is to know how it got from where it began to where it is now. And that is a totally different question from the one they are discussing in that thread.

Actually post #2 of the Hanged Man thread goes up to 1975 with over 30 "interpretations" of what the Hanged Man has meant up to around the 1950s. Of course, it is only a start at detailing how the card has been interpreted. An easy way to go beyond the material in post #2, without having to buy and compare dozens and dozens of books, would be through the collected interpretations in Bill Butler's _Dictionary of Tarot_ plus Jana Riley's _Tarot Dictionary and Compendium_ (which was meant to update what Butler started). They will give you an excellent overview of how the interpretations have continued to develop.

I've been doing this comparison work for 40 years (but especially the past 15 years or so) and feel I've only scratched the surface.

Mary

conversus

Mary:

Teheuti said:
I'm not sure if I understand precisely what you're getting at here. For me, the RWS Minor Arcana allow for storytelling in a way that the decks with just pips do not. But that shows my preference for pictorial storytelling over things like suit & number keywords or memorization.

Could you give an example with a specific card?

These sound like some of the things I'm interested in, but I'm not quite sure without seeing an example.

Mary

Mary, Thank you for your response. Let me give an example of what I'm thinking of:

http://www.freewebs.com/altenwald/3swords/3ofswords5.html

I'm not sure of the rules, I may not be able to maintain this link.

However, moving on:

I should begin my query with the following assumptions (which may only damn me in my ignorance) : The Visconti-Sforza represents an antique and antecedent norm for the Three-Swords image. The remaining images suggest several developments in the depiction of the Three-Swords, each with an attendant set of interpretive possibilities.

It is my understanding that Mathers and his crowd in the Golden Dawn sought to rectify the Tarot pack presumably from "errors of translation or transmission" from antiquity to their day. And being consummate scholars of great humility achieved great things, even if their mighty oaths constrained them to keep their achievement to themselves.

It is my further understanding that Arthur and Pamela sought to rectify again the efforts of the Golden Dawn, while yet maintaining a sort of veil over the process in order to avoid the breaking of the same or similar mighty oaths.

The truth claim of the Golden Dawn would be that their image and interpretation would somehow connect more closely to the original intent of the cards of the Visconti era (and to the Egyptians that preceded them) than those images of the Marseille or later iconic interventions.

If this string of images is anything even approaching a valid progressive-spectrum of representation Then we see a progression of ideas and possible interpretations.

In the first image there are three swords, surrounded by quite commonplace foliation. Three is more than Two and less than Four. Three has Mathematical, Numerological, Sociological, and Theological implications. Oh, and of course we are talking about swords--whatever that might mean.

In the Noblet image there are still three swords so all that was implied in the Visconti still probably applies. But you encounter this pesky vesica pisces which totally dominated the sword series from two to ten. It seems to me a very naked card. The foliation is minimal and quite abstract. I imagine that JMD has a great deal to say about it. The possibilities for interpretation are definately impacted by the addition of the vesica pisces.

Later renditions of the card in the Marseille tradition will include more floriation, which in my view, has to sharpen the focus [perhaps lessen the number] of possible interpretations.

As one moves from the Marseille to the Golden Dawn (remembering their claim to Rectification) there is definitely a shift in point-of-view and a concomitant shift in the possibilities of interpretation. If nothing else it represents a very definite change of representation.

Moving further along to Pamela's image there is another change (albeit related to the Sola Busca). Pamela or Arthur had a particular point of view here, a particular set of intuitive possibilities they wanted to put forward.

I am not speaking here to the relative merits of scenic as opposed to non-scenic pip illustrations. But the scene Pamela created has a point of view, a focus among the myriad interpretive possibilities available to the intuit. This has enormous impact.

I think that a conference in celebration of Pamela's Genius, ought to provide some sustained and relatively scholarly discussion of the contribution her images have had and may yet have to the interpretive or divinatory event made possible by the whole pack. And perhaps a good discussion of how her images represent one of the many historical high-points in the long struggle of the human heart to depict, and so give voice to, and grapple with, the meaning and value lurking behind the image of three-swords, etc.

I am deeply grateful for the discussions that happen here, but a public conversation in an international celebration would have a different impact on the unfolding history of the conversation, no?

Teheuti

Conversus, your discussion above is really interesting. Thanks for the graphic. As always a picture speaks a thousand words. I think I understand what you are getting at - that each depiction of a card focuses the interpretative possibilities in particular ways - sometimes as an addition to a prior depiction and sometimes suggesting new (contradictory/rectified/other) possibilities.

conversus said:
It is my understanding that Mathers and his crowd in the Golden Dawn sought to rectify the Tarot pack presumably from "errors of translation or transmission" from antiquity to their day. . . .
The truth claim of the Golden Dawn would be that their image and interpretation would somehow connect more closely to the original intent of the cards of the Visconti era (and to the Egyptians that preceded them) than those images of the Marseille or later iconic interventions.

I doubt if the GD were much concerned with going back to a Visconti era deck, or even back to some Egyptian source since they avoided Egyptianized art. Rather they reconceptualized the Minor Arcana based primarily on their own version of the Tree of Life and on astrological decanates (with some adherence to Etteilla-based meanings). In their own minds, I'm sure they were convinced that they were accessing some archetypal design and mega-pattern that had lost its purity through the ages.

Waite was doing the same, in his own unique way, but was even more cognizant of the whole history of tarot interpretation, which he tried to marry with the GD material. The RWS deck was not Waite's ultimate vision of a ceremonial magic/mystic Tarot, which he approached much more specifically with the so-called Trinick Tarot (named after the primary illustrator).

If this string of images is anything even approaching a valid progressive-spectrum of representation Then we see a progression of ideas and possible interpretations.

As I suggested above, I think we would get into trouble if we hold too closely to the idea of the progression of images and ideas. It would probably look more like a tree with leaps and disconnects and odd reconnects to previously abandoned branches.

Three has Mathematical, Numerological, Sociological, and Theological implications. Oh, and of course we are talking about swords--whatever that might mean.

To assume that there is a consistency in these implications can lead to problems.

For instance, Five was the number of marriage in the Pythagorean system, but on the Tree of Life it is Geburah—Severity, ruled by Mars. So, you'll find Etteilla and most non-GD, European writers viewing the fives as the best of the suit, while in the GD all the fives indicate difficulties (and the sixes show some of the best qualities of the suit).

In the Noblet image there are still three swords so all that was implied in the Visconti still probably applies. But you encounter this pesky vesica pisces . . . The possibilities for interpretation are definately impacted by the addition of the vesica pisces.

Exactly, and thus goes the "history of ideas"—shifting and changing, adding and subtracting. It is because of all these little details that some Tarot readers prefer to follow a set of abstract concepts that have nothing to do with the pictures. You might as well use index cards with only the number and suit written on them in the most basic way possible.

If nothing else it represents a very definite change of representation.

Exactly my point above.

Pamela or Arthur had a particular point of view here, a particular set of intuitive possibilities they wanted to put forward.

Pamela's contribution is not to be underestimated but, as she wrote nothing about the cards, and we don't know for sure what materials Waite gave her other than the Sola-Busca cards (and remember she was trained to illustrate other people's words), we will always struggle with what specifically was her intuition as differing from Waite's.

But the scene Pamela created has a point of view, a focus among the myriad interpretive possibilities available to the intuit. This has enormous impact.

Yes - it allowed for and even encouraged a certain kind of story-telling with the Minors that hadn't existed before.

I think that a conference in celebration of Pamela's Genius, ought to provide some sustained and relatively scholarly discussion of the contribution her images have had and may yet have to the interpretive or divinatory event made possible by the whole pack.

Excellent point. One possible way to do this is to point out interpretations that came into being via her deck that aren't part of any preceding tradition.

perhaps a good discussion of how her images represent one of the many historical high-points in the long struggle of the human heart to depict, and so give voice to, and grapple with, the meaning and value lurking behind the image of three-swords, etc.

An example of this would help me see more of what you mean.

These have been really good ideas that I hope can be used in any conference that actually comes together.

Mary

mac22

Teheuti said:
I know several people who've been doing this. Bob O'Neill did quite a bit of the groundwork, and also A. Grinder (who seems to have disappeared). I've also been doing a lot of this research over the past few years. I've identified dozens of his allusions - often based on a three or four word phrase in the middle of a sentence. I also discovered the Grail stories that are the basis of the Minor Arcana. However, how many people are truly interested in all this trivia?
Mary

I AM for one!

mac22

mac22

Teheuti said:
Actually he was a lot clearer and more specific than he sounds. Sure, stuff is hidden in his writing, but that's because he was an occult (i.e., 'hidden') author who believed in the magical value of hiding things in plain sight that
can only be perceived by the person who has reached a certain 'level' of perception. Most people aren't really interested in the
deeper stuff anyway as it takes far too much work and study to become sensitized to the patterns. The brilliance of the deck (and where PCS outdid Waite) is that it works at so many different levels.
Mary

You know I have come to pretty much the same conclusions about ol' Waite and about Pixie Smith . When I started with PKT 30+ yrs ago I thought Waite was ponderous, pedantic, over blown & egocentric.

Now 30 yrs later I can better see what he was aiming at

I also have much better tools to mine folks such as Waite with.

Maybe just maybe I became sensitized

Mac22