The Game of Tarots - Antoine Court de Geblin

Teheuti

philebus said:
I am specifically talking of the myths of tarot's origin and questioning the value of re-interpreting them as allegory. Does that help?
The value of allegorical interpretation of myths is hotly debated by academics and theorticians in the arts and social sciences, some seeing it as very valuable and others not.

Whether it is truly valuable or not is subjective opinion. I would hope we can agree to disagree.

Mary
 

Teheuti

philebus said:
Some people's lives are influenced by their beliefs in divination, sometimes the influence is small but sometimes it is great and to their detriment. That matters to me.
I'm not sure what you mean. Since you've said this matters to you, have you come on Aeclectic Tarot, where most people use the tarot for divination (in its widest sense) or esoteric studies, to convince us that we should not be practicing divination or do you only want to correct the kinds of situations where it is used to people's detriment or what exactly?
 

Sophie

coredil said:
The word "abracadabrantesque" was first introduced by Arthur Rimbaud and got some notoriety as Jacques Chirac used it publicly in the year 2000.
What does it means?
Well, just build an adjective with the magic word Abracadabra ;)
It's anachronic, as is your appreciation (or lack thereof) of Court de Gébelin. He was writing a "grand theory of all cultures" and trying to see some common thread that ran through them. He lived in an era where universalism was not only an ideal - it was about to burst into flower in the French Revolution. He also lived smack bang in the middle of a time when Freemasonry and other secret societies were all the rage and the Gothic novel was at its most popular. Abracadabrantesque? So were they all! Gébelin claiming the tarot as Egyptian was no more far-fetched from the Freemasons claiming a descent from King Solomon. It may sound ludicrous to us now, but we have to judge it according to the culture, desires and priorities of the era: which was idealistic and universalist in nature. Myths create culture far more than facts ever have.

That's why a game couldn't just be a game: it had to stand for something else, something bigger, nobler and more universal.

I think his aims generous, even if he was wrong. And his glorious mistake changed the course of divination history in the West. Hell - it gave the modern occult movement a divination and meditation tool that the West could be proud of. The Tarot is our I-Ching, our Ifa verses. It has proved to be a versatile invention, a card game that is at the same time the projection of every generation's preoccupations since Court de Gébelin. His generation cared about overcoming tragic divisions of fortune, class and culture through finding a common origin to every human culture; they did it with a great deal of purple prose and a love for ritual (perhaps because the Church had become so unpopular!). Egypt was as good a starting-point as any.
 

philebus

Teheuti said:
I'm not sure what you mean. Since you've said this matters to you, have you come on Aeclectic Tarot, where most people use the tarot for divination (in its widest sense) or esoteric studies, to convince us that we should not be practicing divination or do you only want to correct the kinds of situations where it is used to people's detriment or what exactly?

No, I came here because I have an interest in the cards, their history, and their art. It is, as you say, a forum primarily for those who are interested in divination or esoteric studies and as a guest here, I would consider it rude of me to actively pursue such an agenda - though I make no secret of my scepticism, I am cautious as to how I express it.

Of course, the history section is just that and so I do not feel that I need to restrict myself so much within the scope of that topic.
 

Debra

philebus said:
Some people's lives are influenced by their beliefs in divination, sometimes the influence is small but sometimes it is great and to their detriment. That matters to me.

Many here share your feelings. In the parts of the forum where tarot readings and professional ethics are discussed, this is a constant theme and a matter of great concern, with almost everyone emphasizing the importance of free will and rejecting a deterministic reading of the cards. A search shows that "free will" is discussed in at least 1000 threads here, while the simple phrase "not set in stone" appears in 174 threads. I do hope that those who read cards are not being stereotyped, our views reduced to simple superstition.
 

philebus

Debra said:
I do hope that those who read cards are not being stereotyped, our views reduced to simple superstition.

No, although I do have objections to many beliefs, particularly with regards to divination and its influence, that does not entail that I doubt people's integrity - most people hold their beliefs honestly and really do wish to do what is right. But roads paved with good intentions don't always lead where we want to go, so I try to step carefully.
 

Abrac

Thanks Cerulean.

There's an English translation of de Mellet's article at Tarotpedia. There's also a partial translation of de Gebelin's but it doesn't include images.

It's good to have Tyson's version to compare with the others. :)
 

coredil

Fudugazi said:
It's anachronic, as is your appreciation (or lack thereof) of Court de Gébelin. He was writing a "grand theory of all cultures" and trying to see some common thread that ran through them. He lived in an era where universalism was not only an ideal - it was about to burst into flower in the French Revolution. He also lived smack bang in the middle of a time when Freemasonry and other secret societies were all the rage and the Gothic novel was at its most popular. Abracadabrantesque? So were they all! Gébelin claiming the tarot as Egyptian was no more far-fetched from the Freemasons claiming a descent from King Solomon. It may sound ludicrous to us now, but we have to judge it according to the culture, desires and priorities of the era: which was idealistic and universalist in nature. Myths create culture far more than facts ever have.

That's why a game couldn't just be a game: it had to stand for something else, something bigger, nobler and more universal.

I think his aims generous, even if he was wrong. And his glorious mistake changed the course of divination history in the West. Hell - it gave the modern occult movement a divination and meditation tool that the West could be proud of. The Tarot is our I-Ching, our Ifa verses. It has proved to be a versatile invention, a card game that is at the same time the projection of every generation's preoccupations since Court de Gébelin. His generation cared about overcoming tragic divisions of fortune, class and culture through finding a common origin to every human culture; they did it with a great deal of purple prose and a love for ritual (perhaps because the Church had become so unpopular!). Egypt was as good a starting-point as any.
Of course your answer makes sense in some ways.

But to, me trying to understand the historical context really does not implicate that I should have sympathy for the expressed ideas!
The spirit of time or "Zeitgeist" as they say in Germany, is a strange thing!
There are a lot of things which are "all the rage" today and I really really do not like them at all and I have absolutely no comprehension for them!

Also I am also not sure in this case what should be considered as anachronic, my critic or Gébelin's theory?
Especially as it is very often tried to declare Tarot as as a tool which independant of time (well Gébelin did this too)

I make another assumption, I am am quite sure (well I hope so) that if I had lived in 1786, I would have found what Gébelin wrote abracadabrantesque too.
There are quite a lot of books as old or even older than Gébelin Monde Primitif that I can read today with much joy.

Yes of course, he was probably the one who gave a significant impulse for divination Tarot, but I absolutely do not like his impulse and the way the things went after him and Etteilla (who has really a lot to do with this, and in my comprehension a lot more than Gébelin).

I do love Tarot and I do use Tarot to read sometimes.
But it took me some times to understand that I had to throw away all this heavy baggage that comes just from this time: Gébelin, Etteilla ... and later from Waite ... Crowley ...

Also seing how it still influences new Tarot authors or artists, I really wish sometimes the impulse from Gébelin and from a lot of follower would have not been so abracadabrantesque.

Of course I am aware that what is abracadabrantesque is a very subjetive thing ;)

BTW I used during a long time the Yi King and I never had any problem my with any interpretation as I have with a lot of Tarot interpretations.

If I recall well you are native french speaker?
Do you like the style of Gébelin?

Best regards
 

Yygdrasilian

Hunting the Green Lion

VITRIOL: an old alchemical name for the caustic, corrosive liquid prized in alchemy for its’ ability to react with metals other than gold. Now simply referred to as sulphuric acid (H2SO4), the term has taken the meaning of invective, as in rhetoric appeals laced with malice; but I prefer the backronym proffered in the works of ‘hoaxed’ Benedictine monk, Basilius Valentinius: Visitem Interiora Terrae Recitificando Occultem Lapida -which roughly translates as: “Visit the interior of the Earth, by rectification (repeated distillation) one finds the hidden stone.”

Jean-Jacques Manget in his Bibliotheca chemica curiosa (1702) claimed Valentinius’ manuscripts were found after the pillar in which they had been concealed for more than century had been struck by lightening.

[Removed by moderator]

Regardless, whoever Basilius Valentinius really was, ‘his’ skill as an alchemist was undisputed and ‘his’ discoveries highly regarded by practitioners of ‘the craft’. And, whatever contemporary chemists may think of the luridly surreal symbolic emblems hatched by their predecessors, the hermaphrodites, wolf of metals, & three-headed chickens are undisputedly part of their History.

So it is with Antoine Court de Gebèlin’s le Monde Primitif and Tarot: a ‘false history’ that influenced his contemporaries (including US presidents & dignitaries) and subsequent generations - fueled perhaps by ‘Nothing’ more than the potency of dreams and ecstatic vision. His ideas still exert influence to this day as this thread, and the controversy it hath stirred, makes plainly evident ...especially if you loathe him.

And the historian who esteems only the tangible artifact over the discourse of ideas has as much chance at learning the many layered nuances of our culture’s past as an archaeologist who excavates solely with bulldozers & dynamite.

However ludicrous anybody’s forays into speculative philology, if they can be articulated so as to be understood, they have the capacity to be believed. And only a Fool would deny the tangible effect beliefs exert thru the time lines of humanity’s shared past ...and future. But the exquisitely sublime irony of this contentious dispute over de Gebèlin’s legacy is that there is an essential Truth behind his thesis that the ‘civilization’ of the ancient world was indeed more ‘enlightened’ & ‘advanced’ than our own...

...and, of course, that Tarot really is the Book of Thoth!!!
 

coredil

Yygdrasilian said:
But the exquisitely sublime irony of this contentious dispute over de Gebèlin’s legacy is that there is an essential Truth behind his thesis that the ‘civilization’ of the ancient world was indeed more ‘enlightened’ & ‘advanced’ than our own...

...and, of course, that Tarot really is the Book of Thoth!!!
There is one thing I like in Gébelins's essay, in Article III of "Du jeu des Tarots" he describes how the game of Tarot is played ;)

In case we are doubting, since Gébelin we know that Tarot is a card game ;)

BTW talking about vitriol, I am not really "caustique" (caustic) and I am glad I am able to laugh today when I read Gébelin ;)

Best regards