If you wanted to create a non-traditional deck

I have some questions about making a non-traditional deck. I am curious about the process others have utilized.

Hypothetical scenario: Let's say you have been inspired and motivated to use the traditional imagery from RWS as a jumping-off point to create a new deck, but you definitely do not want it to be a clone. You contemplate the RWS and use it as a base from which to work. You explore the cards' symbolism and the generally accepted meanings, and come up with some keywords and ideas for imagery that would be rather non-traditional.

So, basically you've chosen to focus on certain, specific aspects of each card in your inspiration deck as the essence to be illustrated in your own deck. You give each card a different name, such as Solitude instead of the Hermit, and Abundance for the Empress, just as some random examples off the top of my head, and your imagery is quite different from RWS.

So, here are my questions:

Would you number your cards traditionally so that a reader/user would know which ones from RWS they are based on? Or would you deliberately not want to give such "hints?" Would you rather readers not worry too much about where you got your ideas and work mostly intuitively with it? Would you ever consider not putting any words or numbers on the cards at all, even if there was a risk that, say, someone could mix up the cards you based on The Empress with the the one you based on the High Priestess?

Maybe you would want to add other sources and combine them to express your ideas, like like some aspect of modern life, an element in nature, or what-have-you. How far afield from tradition would you want to take your ideas? Or, IOW, how obvious or literal would you want it to be that the deck is based on traditional tarot symbolism? Or would you want it as odd and unusual as possible?

And finally, I'm curious - have any decks ever been published without a LWB/key/guide? Thanks!

I think, for it to be a Tarot deck, you need to make sure there's some sort of system to the symbolism you use within the cards, no matter which direction you choose to take your vision.

I'd also say that once you're working with non-traditional (non-Marseilles/RWS/Thoth) symbolism, and renaming cards, and considering re-numbering them . . . you'd NEED some sort of accompanying text. Otherwise, it becomes a sort of personal intuitive oracle, and ceases to be a Tarot.

(I know this doesn't answer your questions directly, but it's my immediate response to your questions.)

I agree generally with SJ, but I think that if you deviate too radically from any of the Big Three (TdM, RWS, Thoth), then it might be better to abandon the tarot pattern altogether and make up an oracle deck. However, if you want to start a fourth tarot tradition, then it had better be backed up with substantial documentation of some sort, or it will just be another tarot deck among numerous others.

ETA. I just noticed that I essentially paraphrased SJ's post. Sorry about that.

The Bright Idea Deck was a deck that wasn't an oracle but wasn't quite tarot either. It was totally none traditional, suits and names were changed, colours were used instead. It didn't come with a LWB but it did have a full sized book - you needed the book to use the deck to its full potential.

http://www.aeclectic.net/tarot/cards/bright-idea/

I've tried a few times to get into it but it's like trying to learn a new system. Not quite what you asked in your posting but, if you hadn't come across the Bright Idea, I thought it might be interesting for you.

I don't really have anything to add to the previous posts, only that, as they said, the ordering of the cards is not arbitrary and all decks "say" something, and have a message their entirety conveys. The RWS may seem neutral, but it does tell a certain story in much the same way the Thoth does.

In addition, take care to differentiate between a deck that is for you alone, and a deck that is meant to be used for others. Some symbols may have a certain meaning for you, but it may not have that meaning for others. For example, "doughnut" may mean sorrow, heartbreak and disaster to you, while others may see it merely as a pastry.

Lastly, you said you would concentrate on certain aspects of each card. The Tarot of the New Vision is an example of a deck that does so. However, the cards should also have a certain universality, in order to be used for different situations and purposes. Refining a card's meaning too much could lead to a limited deck. Me, I prefer the abstractions of the Thoth's pips, allowing me far more freedom of interpretation.

Hi

I'm in the process of creating a non-traditional Tarot deck for my personal use only, so I'd like to share some ideas.

I've renamed the suits, and I've renamed many of the Majors. I'm definitely going to keep the traditional numbers (8=Justice, 11=Strength, etc.), at the very least to help myself not to mix up something. I'm also going to put names and numbers on the cards. My Minors and Courts are going to have their own names on the cards too, as well as numbers and suits. I love the idea of putting no names or numbers on the cards at all, but in the case of my deck, I just want to have those names written down on the cards.

I've wandered quite far from RWS already, and I'm ready to wander even farther, wherever it takes me. However, as non-traditional as it is, it still contains very recognizable concepts, which still makes it more of a Tarot deck than an Oracle.

If I ever publish this deck, there will definitely be a LWB or a booklet giving at least some ideas about the cards' interpretation. On the other hand, I don't want it to be too detailed, because the cards' images are really quite expressive, and I'll want every reader to interpret them as literally or as mystically as they see fit. So, a doughnut can mean anything - from a literal dough-and-sugar thing to sweetness, or obesity, or a heartbreak, or even the universal ring of life. The cards are just windows to the world. They need to convey messages, but not to twist them too much.

These are my views on this, anyhow. Hope this helps in some way.

I agree with most of the others, at what point is it no longer tarot.

So, to summarize the feedback thus far:



Have I distilled all that fairly accurately? Anyone care to add more?

geoxena said:

• Whatever symbolism is used in a non-traditional deck, there should be some type of system as a framework that connects all the cards and gives the deck a consistent feel.
  
  
• Even though it could use entirely different symbolism from the traditional, a deck should tell a story, follow a particular order, and have a clear overall message.
  
  
• The symbolism used should not be too narrow, specific, or limiting in its concepts; imagery should be recognizable to a fairly wide audience, and offer many possible interpretations that can be applied to a variety of circumstances.
  
  
• Deviating very far from the established, generally accepted, and well-known symbolism and meanings of the traditional Marselles, RWS, and Thoth decks would require a LWB, or some kind of written guide.
  
  
• Any text or guide that accompanies a very non-traditional deck should give direction on how to read the cards' messages, but yet allow for a great amount of fluidity in interpretation.
  
  
• A really way-out deck without adequate explanations accompanying it could be seen as either very personal or an oracle, rather than tarot.
  
  
• Some people will enjoy learning a new system; some will not.

Click to expand...

(I re-ordered your list, just so I could see similar concepts grouped together.)

The only thing I'd quibble with is the idea that there needs to be an overall story or message to the entire deck.

I think really what it boils down to is when you change so much that is no longer becomes tarot. So long as the structure of tarot is still there it's a tarot deck.For ME tarot is 78 cards, 5 suits, 22 majors, 56 minors. Anything else, for me, becomes an oracle deck. So many decks have tried to mess with that by adding an extra suit, or going with 32 majors and those decks are usually looked upon as a novelty. I would say that most people want something that they can relate their current tarot knowledge too while expanding on it but to start from scratch to learn a whole new system it going to be a tough sell. The MATT is a perfect example of a deck that came up with it's own astrological system and you can choose to use it or not, but it's still readable as tarot.