If you wanted to create a non-traditional deck

I think you meant to say four suits?

In my hypothetical scenario, I only mentioned substituting symbolism, changing titles, and depicting alternative interpretations of the traditional decks. I never mentioned having a different number of cards, suits, or basic elements.

But that doesn't mean I wouldn't consider doing so!

What I'd most like to know is: How far-out and freaky would you go in making the deck non-traditional? With what would you like to experiment? And would it really bother or worry you if someone thought, "Ugh, that's not tarot deck - that's an oracle!" ?

If I ever wanted to create a non-traditional deck, I would (to paraphrase Sir Winston Churchill) "lie down until the feeling goes away."

SarahJoy said:

(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.

Click to expand...

Thanks for re-ordering it - I originally just went down the thread and summarized the posts in the order in which they had been posted.

Can you elaborate a bit on why you would quibble with having an overall story or message?

I am NOT making these bullet points into rules per se, btw. Just a distillation of what's been said, in order to perhaps develop some sort of idea list or framework about approach and execution.

Would love to hear from more people who are into the non-traditional!

geoxena said:

Can you elaborate a bit on why you would quibble with having an overall story or message?

Click to expand...

Oh, I'm not against an overall story or message -- I just meant that it's not required.

A couple more ideas

First of all, this:

starlightexp said:

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.

Click to expand...

There are indeed some Tarot decks adding Majors, or suits, or whatever. But as a user, I'd expect your additions to be properly justified and explained. Why 24 Majors instead of 22? What does the suit of Skillet Lids add to my interpretation - and the framework of your deck?

For me, the most important thing is, the deck's non-traditionality shouldn't be for its own sake. IOW, a deck's concept might or might not require some weird features to be present, but it's not the goal. If I'm creating, for instance, a bees-inspired deck, I might want to make the cards hexagonal. But this shape is dictated by the concept of bees, not by my mere wish to be super-original.

dancing_moon said:

. . . as a user, I'd expect your additions to be properly justified and explained . . . the most important thing is, the deck's non-traditionality shouldn't be for its own sake. IOW, a deck's concept might or might not require some weird features to be present, but it's not the goal. If I'm creating, for instance, a bees-inspired deck, I might want to make the cards hexagonal. But this shape is dictated by the concept of bees, not by my mere wish to be super-original.

Click to expand...

I hear ya. However, I don't think the wish to be original is "mere" or that non-traditionality shouldn't be one of the deck's goals.

For me, the reasons for creating a non-traditional deck are mostly to express, depict, and represent as much of the archetypal ideas, metaphors for the stages of life, dualities and rhythms of nature, and psychological and emotional processes that usually (or possibly) can be found in tarot imagery, along with the concepts of the deck's particular theme, without feeling obligated to rely upon all the generally accepted traditional, familiar, esoteric symbolism. The goal would be to spark the reader's imagination, intuition, and ability to access their unconscious knowledge, in a fresh and stimulating way, by using imagery that is perhaps unexpected or simply from an unusual perspective. I don't think that's a bad thing. Tarot isn't sacred to me. It's a tool, and I see nothing wrong with purposeful innovation of tools.

geoxena said:

I hear ya. However, I don't think the wish to be original is "mere" or that non-traditionality shouldn't be one of the deck's goals.

Click to expand...

Sure, I agree with your point here. I just wanted to make it clear that personally for me, a meaningless trying to make something 'original', for the sake of being noticed or praised, for example, makes no sense. But expressing everything you've mentioned above using innovative ways - yes, absolutely makes sense. I hope that explains my position.

Yeah! This is all good feedback!

Anyone else care to contribute some thoughts on creating a tarot deck that doesn't closely follow tradition? I would love to hear more.

How about size issues? Large cards? Or mini's or standard? Rectangular or square, circular or triangle? Or hexagon? We've seen decks with all of these shapes.