Tarot & Theme Decks - When is it not Tarot?

[Cerulean]

I did some re-thinking about fantasy and comic tarots....extreme examples

I am thinking about the original question again as it applies to tarot art.

Although I would have never in my small world really really would have ever chosen Tarot of the Cat People as a 'tarot' of choice, it can work in mixed tarot card readings and even has enough tarotlike indications to recognize what the character was on the card. That's a stretch where the image had to have enough of what I defined as 'tarotlike' for me to recognize the icon as viable. I recognized the Emperor card, the only one that I remember from that deck.

Tarot of the Cat People
http://www.aeclectic.net/tarot/cards/tarot-of-cat-people/

On the other hand, I really have winced when I see the comic "Tarot of the Black Rose" and do not want to even read it...yet I liked the "Tarot Cafe" manga and recognized the scattered Lo Scarabeo tarot cards drawn from decks as the Secrets Tarots (Nizzoli) and Art Nouveau (Castelli) as related to the story theme. I recognize many LS tarot decks as tarot decks I can read with--as I believe as recognizable tarot themes.

Secrets Tarot
http://www.aeclectic.net/tarot/cards/secret/index.shtml

Castelli Art Nouveau
http://www.aeclectic.net/tarot/cards/art-nouveau/

I was also inspired to also look at the Aquarian Tarot by Palladini again as a recognizable divinatory tarot... because of the Tarot Cafe and seeing illustrations in older tarot books...and even a museum presentation!

Aquarian Tarot:
http://www.aeclectic.net/tarot/cards/aquarian/

Still thinking on this fun topic,

Cerulean

 

[Bat Chicken]

[...]It is rich in cultural, historical, numerological, archetypal, magical, mythological, alchemical (etc., etc.,) references that work together coherently and give access to all those dimensions in myself.

[...]Furthermore, it offers, at least in part, a set of easily-recognizable pictorial images whose symbols often appear in Western culture with a generally-agreed-upon set of meanings, and that they represent values that are lauded by similar pictorial representations in that culture's churches, temples, public buildings, art and literature.

This is part of what gets me so excited about Tarot. Teheuti, in just a couple short posts, I am reminded how much I have to learn!

Or maybe the idea is not to refine, but to expand these concepts... to their broadest, most universal, archetypical meaning... to truth.

Expand - yes! To personal truth at least...

 

[Debra]

I was also inspired to also look at the Aquarian Tarot by Palladini again as a recognizable divinatory tarot... because of the Tarot Cafe and seeing illustrations in older tarot books...and even a museum presentation!

Aquarian Tarot:
http://www.aeclectic.net/tarot/cards/aquarian/

Still thinking on this fun topic,

Cerulean

Ah, interesting to hear you say this, Cerulean. I find the Aquarian lovely to look at and wish I had the clothing to go with it.

Looking at it as a tarot deck, I feel that the most important element is missing from almost every single card. I recognize the cards, but as close-ups of the wrong parts of the greater image.

Compare the Tarot Nova, which seems to me to have much more meaning packed on to each card: http://www.aeclectic.net/tarot/cards/nova/index.shtml

 

[Teheuti]

Once you get to know the tarot structure, symbolism and meanings, then any deck that even hints at these—like index cards with only a number & suit designation, or perhaps a minimalistic icon, like the Hermit's lantern—could, for some people, serve as a tarot deck. But, would someone else be able to relate to it as tarot? I've tried and index cards leave me cold.

I'm willing to concede that a lot of decks that I can't use are tarot, but I'm uninterested in them except as a tarot artifact (I collect).

 

[Cat*]

But, it's fine with me if they call it tarot because a lake is still a lake even if you are just getting your toes wet. But, when is it a lake and not a pond, puddle, sea or ocean?

Now that's an analogy that works for me. Thanks!

For instance, what is one to do with the "science-fiction, mystery- thriller, multi-partner, bi-sexual, paranormal, BDSM, romance"?

Delightedly read it?!

 

[JSNYC]

Once you get to know the tarot structure, symbolism and meanings, then any deck that even hints at these—like index cards with only a number & suit designation, or perhaps a minimalistic icon, like the Hermit's lantern—could, for some people, serve as a tarot deck. But, would someone else be able to relate to it as tarot? I've tried and index cards leave me cold.

I'm willing to concede that a lot of decks that I can't use are tarot, but I'm uninterested in them except as a tarot artifact (I collect).

So I guess the conclusion would be that the Tarot structure is what makes a Tarot deck a true Tarot deck. But the conclusion is also that strict structural designations are not the authority either... So has anyone asked and answered what that structure is? What exactly is it about the Tarot structure that makes it a Tarot deck?

One thought always nagged at me, if Waite really knew what he was doing when making his Tarot deck, why did he switch the 8 and 11 major arcana cards? The answer I came up with is that he knew they shouldn't have been switched. However, no one seemed to see the pattern when it was left in its natural, or true state, so he made the most hideous violation of the pattern that he could think of, in order to expose the pattern.

And Waite even left us a clue as to what he was doing. Look at the sign over The Magician's head, and Strength also bears the same sign. The Magician is card 1, and Strength should be card 11. The Magician begins the journey through life, and Strength beings the journey through the next stage. He is showing us the pattern.

I actually think Waite did kind of the same thing with the 6 of Coins, he corrupted the pattern. Jung focused on the distortions (the sick people) to see the true pattern, Waite created the distortions (or the "corruptions" of the pattern) so that we could see the truth, or the pattern.

However, I know that Waite's Tarot deck structure is off-topic for this thread. My point and the question I am proposing is, what really makes a Tarot deck a valid Tarot deck? It is obviously the pattern, but what exactly is that pattern?

 

[JSNYC]

It's funny what works for some of us and what doesn't. That same quote didn't make the least bit of sense to me... :yikes: (No offense JSYNC-- just saying...)

Doesn't understanding lead to either acceptance or not? I can see how people have acceptance without understanding (though I choose not to), but the other way around doesn't make much sense to me....

I was re-reading this thread, and this comment stuck out to me.

Do you know and understand that you will get old and die, zan_chan? Have you really accepted it yet?

"sooner or later you're going to realize, just as I did, that there's a difference between knowing the path and walking the path." - Morpheus

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/The_Matrix

 

[JSNYC]

But even more than this, for me, the key is meaning. What is the meaning being expressed in the language?

This question has been puzzling me.

Once you understand the meaning of the cards, and once you recognize the Tarot as a wonderful and powerful tool as well as beginning to recognize the patterns, and then once you begin asking new questions... How can meaning not just come rushing in?

What do you think the meaning or the message is? That is certainly what I have been referring to.

 

[Teheuti]

Once you understand the meaning of the cards, and once you recognize the Tarot as a wonderful and powerful tool as well as beginning to recognize the patterns, and then once you begin asking new questions... How can meaning not just come rushing in?

What do you think the meaning or the message is? That is certainly what I have been referring to.

Sorry but I can't look go into this further as I'd have to read back over all the relevant posts, which I can't do right now. But, I think that I was referring to the difference between simply applying book interpretations and arriving at a sense of deep personal meaning in the moment:

High Priestess = Inner Wisdom; Memories; etc.
versus
High Priestess = One's Inner Priestess opening a curtain on an old memory of ____ and suddenly knowing how that memory is the inner source of or key to the current situation, so that she "means" something very personally significant to one's life. As per Victor Frankl's Man's Search for Meaning.

 

[WingspreadPhoenix]

To me, tarot is:
A deck with 78+ cards consisting of a Major and Minor Arcana, and a Fool card, and is used for fortune-telling, advice, insight, etc. The Minor arcana is divided into 4 suits, and each suit has 14 cards in it: Ace-10, and four court cards. The Major Arcana has 21 cards, or a few more depending on the specific deck.

Where the deck goes from there is the deck's business. But honestly, if the deck is like that, it's tarot to me.

Wow, I have such low standards D: