Camoin Marseilles -- the "true" Tarot, or just squinting at squiggly lines?

Premdas said:

There is really something "historical" and a real structurated esoterism in the Camoin. And that' beyond the "restorater" himself!!!

Click to expand...

No, it's purely the invention of the so-called "restorater". There certainly is an estotercisim in this deck, but it's purely the personal system of Jodorowsky. It's not historical, it's a collection of 19th and 20th century occult beliefs, plus his own meanings that he's attached to symbols that he's chosen from various sources.

The claim that it's historical is absurd. It's just another personal interpretation of the tarot. If you like it, use it. But don't kid yourself that Jodorowsky has somehow re-established a link with the past.

Qote Greg "So what is the value of this deck then?""

First, It put in relief some missing details in the TdM. It forces us to do real researches to authentify and understand. Many things emerge today because of this deck. And It make us talk (lol)

Greg: "You're saying it shows "original" symbolic details, but that many of them belong to more recent decks, and that some of are not correct. And yet in an earlier post you say it's an important historical deck. This does not make sense.

Yeah I express incorrectly because my english is very poor. I just have said what I mean by "historical"; and I never said that the new detail of the Jodo Camoin "belong to more recent decks", no, only old TdM and TdB!!!

"The problem with Jodorowsky's "symbols" is that they are highly personal."

Welle I ask again what details are so "personal" in this deck?

"Most of them are details that most people wouldn't notice"

You maybe. Some will notice and for me this is one of the interest of Tarot (TdM): those little details who surprise u and give you to meditate....

"and I honestly don't think the original engravers gave them much thought either."

Waw! This is really something "personal" you think here!!! Your honesty is honouring u!


"You can say "the egg on the Popess symbolizes this" and "the door on the tower means that", but how do you know?"

Yes, u are right! U can say "the snakes on the dress of TEMPERANCE are symbolising the birth of Mercure, but can u say what symbolizes the birth of Mercure?

"You can't possible know what was originally intended, no matter how many old decks you look at."

This is something else. You maybe can't possibly know. It depends on what u consider possible or not. But what seems impossible for u is maybe not for others.

"...and which gives the impression that he's more than a little mentally unstable.Jodorowsky is neither a scholar or an historian. He's a mystic. . It's only important to people who like to read with it."

He is a FOOL! And hat is the problem ith being a "mystic" hen you study and live ith Tarot???

"The deck is no more important than any other deck"

OK we stop here with that, this is u re point of u, it's not the final world sentence of judgement...

Yeah ELTAROT

I retraduce correctly:

"It is a historic covered? At least not for now, but as YvesLM says, it remains to be seen in many years, that's what means "historical" here...

Yes this is what I mean by historical! And I belive it remains to be seen in many years; more, it is the beginning of a refreshed vision on Tarot.

Quoting Greg

"It's purely the invention of the so-called "restorater". There certainly is an estotercisim in this deck, but it's purely the personal system of Jodorowsky. It's not historical, it's a collection of 19th and 20th century occult beliefs, plus his own meanings that he's attached to symbols that he's chosen from various sources. The claim that it's historical is absurd. It's just another personal interpretation of the tarot. If you like it, use it. But don't kid yourself that Jodorowsky has somehow re-established a link with the past."

Again Greg:

Can tell exactly hat details in this deck are based on Jodorowsky's own personal mystical conception ? Really I'd like to know.

Are the EGG from arcanas II and IIII, The door of arcana XVI coming from TdB, and the snakes in a. XIIII based on Jodorowsky's own personal mystical conception?

Explain yourself, give the symbolic details of this deck that are, according to u, based on Jodorowsky's own personal mystical conception. Thank u to answer, otherwise we canno't go further.

What I meant to say is that his interpretation of symbols is personal, as is his mental process that determines what is actually a symbol and what is simply an image. When he starts counting toes and believes he sees planets hidden in people's hair, he loses credibility.

The problem with using mystical means to create an historical restoration is that it is a complete and utter contradiction. Maybe it's a language barrier, but in English, a restoration means that something has been restored to its original state, and historical implies that some knowledge of the past was used to aid the restoration. In his book it is obvious that Jodorowsky has very little knowledge of historical matters. Also, he claims to have restored something to its original state, yet the original does not exist -- and may never have existed. To an English speaker this is comical and absurd.

I know that Jodorowsky's work is respected in France, but I have not seen that it can cross the borders easily.

And no, I'm not passing "final judgement" on anyone's work. It's my opinion, and I've given logical reasons why I've arrived at the conclusion I did.

OK Greg I understand u. No problem.

I am not speaking of Jodo's book. It's not my matter. So we are not completely speaking about the same thing: you are reacting against this book when speaking about the deck. I also don't like the terme restoration for this deck, but as I told earlier, Camoin stopped to use this term.

For the remnant, I have nothing against Jodorowsky, I feel he is a FOOL in the good sense of the term, and I didn't read the book. I just know for me, and as far as I am concerned, the Jodo/Camoin's deck is very well "working"! This, in consideration of my esoteric knoledge, that is what it is, no more or less...

Premdas said:

Can tell exactly hat details in this deck are based on Jodorowsky's own personal mystical conception ? Really I'd like to know.

Click to expand...

He may have plucked details from actual decks, but his reasons for picking these details is based on his own mystical system, not for reasons arrived at through historical scholarship. Also, I've noticed details that I cannot find in ANY historical deck -- like the serpent's tail on "The Magician". Where did this detail come from? A historian would be able to answer the question, but the source of this detail has never been revealed.

Premdas said:

Are the EGG from arcanas II and IIII, The door of arcana XVI coming from TdB, and the snakes in a. XIIII based on Jodorowsky's own personal mystical conception?

Click to expand...

His interpretation of these symbols is based on his own mystical musings, yes. Sorry if I was not clear.

Premdas said:

Explain yourself, give the symbolic details of this deck that are, according to u, based on Jodorowsky's own personal mystical conception. Thank u to answer, otherwise we canno't go further.

Click to expand...

Read his book. It's 536 pages of symbols and details that he has picked out of various decks based on his own mystical system. I never said that some of these details didn't exist in historical decks. I am, however, criticizing his methods for choosing and interpreting them -- which are personal. I'd be fine with this deck if he would only admit this. However, Jodorowsky is either arrogant or delusional in thinking this deck is somehow a historical restoration.

Premdas said:

For the remnant, I have nothing against Jodorowsky, I feel he is a FOOL in the good sense of the term, and I didn't read the book. I just know for me, and as far as I am concerned, the Jodo/Camoin's deck is very well "working"! This, in consideration of my esoteric knoledge, that is what it is, no more or less...

Click to expand...

Sounds like we agree then, more or less

Quoting Greg:

"Also, I've noticed details that I cannot find in ANY historical deck -- like the serpent's tail on "The Magician". Where did this detail come from? A historian would be able to answer the question, but the source of this detail has never been revealed."

Yes I also like to know!!! Maybe sometime Camoin will speak about this?

"His interpretation of these symbols is based on his own mystical musings, yes. Sorry if I was not clear."

I completely agree with u! Ouf! Yeah I don't care of their interpretation, I have mine. Tarot is the Book, I don't read other's book on Tarot to uns=derstand it and make my own idea. If "Tarot speaks", it should speak directly to you personnaly, not by second hand interpretations.

"Sounds like we agree then, more or less"

Yes, sounds like!

The detail of the serpent Kundalini Le Bateleur, that if an invention is overtly.
It's like the 3rd person in La Maison Diev, Le pendu showed us
or at least I have not seen elsewhere.

The Jodo-Camoin Tarot, is an independent work of "Via del Tarot", this book can look like a complete ultra-fast food combo that speaks in a very lightweight and psychotherapeutic problems over deep, even with a mystical vision.

All personal and philosophical system based on a perfect structure is nothing more and nothing less than the same Tarot.

Greg, if the Book of Jodo did not like, nor will want to know theories of Camoin, there if it falls on his back, gets up and runs away, haha.

A very good book on our good friend that unites us "The Tarot" is the book: the Tarot, as, because, so far, "Unger Tchalaí, simple and effective.

As she says "the Tarot is in the Tarot".