The Take-Over of Historical Research into Tarot

[ravenest]

Ravenest, to be honest I don't know enough about what has been difficult to fully understand the problem.

.

I believe it stems from a perceived disparity in moderator issues in the forum ... what the guidelines say and how they are policed. Some seemed annoyed that posts were not moderated that seemed outside the forum guidelines and some (me actually) went ; "Well if it is good for the goose its good for the gander ... why should I be restricted if others aren't?" and slipped in some suspect posts as well, which of course upset the self appointed guard dogs ... (who appear to have run off somewhere) and all this was seen as some type of 'take over' when in fact it was actually moderator allowed (probably because all the complex moderating seemed too difficult ? ) ... or something like that

 

[momentarylight]

You do not need a guide to realise this is true. You need an understanding of History.
What people do not seem to realise, is that gentle persuasion and politeness can deviate someone away from extreme ideas in an historical context. ( I speak English see my s'sss)
I have had extreme ideas....not of the Atlantis genre, but not accurate historically.
I do not mind a polite correction, or a pointing toward another area on the forum. Some are excellent at that....some are dreadful. Dreadful makes me stay on the wrong track, even if it is detrimental to what I am trying to prove or believe.
So I ban "Crackpot" "delusional" and all put downs.
~Rosanne

I agree with you about the understanding of history but I have an education and my teacher does not have that kind of education. I mentioned that as a kind of bemused acknowledgement that I may have been wrong about spiritual guides not making historical predictions . The woman who is my teacher lost her children many years ago when they were abducted by her Irish Catholic husband and taken to Ireland where the family was protected by that Catholic Church based society. It was a heart breaking experience.

This particular teacher has marvellous skills that I don't have, which is why I see her. She would never, ever be intentionally unkind to anyone.

There can be a kind of conscious or unconsciousness exclusiveness in groups of intellectuals or educated people. I would certainly not put Mary Greer in that group, however. She is one of the kindest and most generous tarot scholars we have.

I feel a similar frustration in my own country when people talk about contentious issues like asylum seekers. They don't know the history or the facts and they probably never will. Their positions often come from lack of awareness or education, fear, and deliberate manipulation by the media and some politicians. Changing those opinions is really difficult and can't usually be done by derisive argument. I don't argue with some people any more but turn my energies elsewhere. Change what you can kind of stuff. People move on in their own God's time, not mine.

I must have a more thorough look through the tarot history forum to see more of the sorts of things that are discussed. To be honest, some topics are quite uninteresting to me and even detract from the mystique I like about the cards themselves

Discussions about the origins of tarot and the way it has been used over time are of great interest, however.

.

 

[momentarylight]

I believe it stems from a perceived disparity in moderator issues in the forum ... what the guidelines say and how they are policed. Some seemed annoyed that posts were not moderated that seemed outside the forum guidelines and some (me actually) went ; "Well if it is good for the goose its good for the gander ... why should I be restricted if others aren't?" and slipped in some suspect posts as well, which of course upset the self appointed guard dogs ... (who appear to have run off somewhere) and all this was seen as some type of 'take over' when in fact it was actually moderator allowed (probably because all the complex moderating seemed too difficult ? ) ... or something like that

Thanks for the explanation. I'd hate to be a moderator .

 

[Rosanne]

Hi momentaryLight!
I think what you say about the Mystique of Tarot is important.
There are four distinct groups (probably more). Fun, tool users, and new age beliefs, and history buffs
I accept what Tarot has become and I have a schizophrenic attitude. What it has become and what it was do not impact on each other.
Example is the scythe of Death. I use a lawn mower these days, but I understand what it means symbolically. Death to long grass with a lawnmower is my tool, but I am fascinated with the scythe.
So if you have New Age beliefs, it seems only logical that those beliefs have a history- but actually not in Tarot history before the 18th century.
~Rosanne

 

[momentarylight]

Hi momentaryLight!
I think what you say about the Mystique of Tarot is important.
There are four distinct groups (probably more). Fun, tool users, and new age beliefs, and history buffs
I accept what Tarot has become and I have a schizophrenic attitude. What it has become and what it was do not impact on each other.
Example is the scythe of Death. I use a lawn mower these days, but I understand what it means symbolically. Death to long grass with a lawnmower is my tool, but I am fascinated with the scythe.
So if you have New Age beliefs, it seems only logical that those beliefs have a history- but actually not in Tarot history before the 18th century.
~Rosanne

I think there is a continuum of interests and development in tarot. It's like a spider web really.

Also, I think that tarot is a vehicle for symbolic language so you can be interested in symbols and their use going back to pre-history in many cultures. There are historical parameters around how symbolism was used in the early tarots, however.

Tarot began as a card game and may have metamorphosed into a vehicle for the use of symbolic language in divination, in spiritual development, for fun, for art. History is relevant in all of these domains

It is relevant to look at the early art, use and meaning of the cards, just as it is to look at the development of the book and printing in the current information age.

I looked at the discussion in the symbols thread and, although I could sense the tension and frustration, there were some good outcomes in the exploration of those for people who have not been immersed to date and who are very much still learning.

Contributors such as Mary Greer, Dain, Ross Caldwell, Kwaw, Conversus, Kenji, Huck and others have much to offer and I hope they can be patient with those who may seem to stretch the boundaries with good motivations. I hope they stay around and that that this particular forum remains inclusive of those who come from different perspectives and educational backgrounds.

From what I know there use to be some blow outs on other tarot sites, including TarotL, on occasion but most people were civil to each other.

.

 

[Richard]

Boo! Here comes the big bad . (BTW, I did not introduce the term 'crackpot' into the discussion. All I unfortunately did was to popularize it.) My personal views on the use of the Historical Research subforum is very flexible, not at all those of a historical purist. They are pretty much expressed in my responses in The Tarot Symbols Origin thread (along with some posts by others in New Age jargon, which are uncomfortable because totally inappropriate).

May I present for your consideration three statements? Two of the three I consider appropriate for the forum. One is not, and I will explain why.

1. Court de Gebelin thought that Tarot originated in Egypt.
2. Tarot originated in Egypt.
3. The Goddess revealed to me that Tarot originated in Egypt.

Statement 1 is historical fact. Statement 2 is historical conjecture. These two can be logically analyzed, and evidence can be gathered to support or refute them.

Statement 3 is of a different semantic type. It is incapable of being either verified or refuted. Maybe it is true, but it is impossible to tell whether it is true or false. Wittgenstein (who was not an unbeliever in mystical things) would consider the statement as inadmissible in philosophical discourse, because technically it is not a proposition (i.e., it does not have the property of being verifiably true or false).

If you can't see the difference between statement 3 and the other two, then I withdraw all my other comments and resign myself to the fact that irrationality must prevail here. That is not in itself a bad thing, but I'm glad that it doesn't generally rule in the medical sciences.

ETA. Since people seem to be so fond of misconstruing statements, I think that I must emphatically insist that I do not reject Statement 3 merely because it appeals to the supernatural. I'm getting tired of explaining that I believe in the supernatural myself, in spite of the fact that my profession was that of a mean, nasty, atheistic mathematical physicist. (Some day I may do a post about those of my profession who were active in the occult.) Statement 3 is rejected because it is semantically not verifiable. What good is a 'historical' statement if there is absolutely no way of telling whether it is true or false?

 

[Rosanne]

Well that was only a little Boo.
I agree with you.
OH I see, I did not crack on to the jargon I just thought you had gone mad.

I think the problem is not so much spirit guides and the like, but philosophy of areas outside of Tarot.
It is like trying to connect the Dugon tribe with Tarot, just because they had a king and Queen and hung people up bungy style.
I think there is a m8iddle road, and that has nothing to with History, but politeness and less arrogance.
~Rosanne

 

[conversus]

I accept what Tarot has become and I have a schizophrenic attitude. What it has become and what it was do not impact on each other.

Rosanne: I have come to hold you in such high esteem because of statements like this one. Tarot is a continuum. That long-lost ur-deck which we may one day discover and the newest riff on the Egyptian Mysteries each have their place. <I once heard that the cards were lovingly painted by the BVM on the journey out of Egypt as a keepsake of the land that took them in.> Both ends of the spectrum deserve respect if not down-right admiration.

CED

 

[Richard]

Well that was only a little Boo.
I agree with you.
OH I see, I did not crack on to the jargon I just thought you had gone mad.

I think the problem is not so much spirit guides and the like, but philosophy of areas outside of Tarot.
It is like trying to connect the Dugon tribe with Tarot, just because they had a king and Queen and hung people up bungy style.
I think there is a m8iddle road, and that has nothing to with History, but politeness and less arrogance.
~Rosanne

I routinely go mad, but I haven't been locked up yet. Sorry if I come across as arrogant and impolite. Unintentional.

 

[Rosanne]

Conversus- That is a high compliment, and from the heart I thank you. It is a fascinating journey this Tarot Road. It reaches everywhere in my life. I just finished a History crossword, and because of Tarot exploration I was able to answer all 200 questions. I was truly chuffed, just as I am now.

LRichard, I was NOT directing at you about rudeness and arrogance. I just did not understand your posts. I have since re read them and get the drift. Thank you for your explanation.

~Rosanne