karen0205
Everybody's really hard on that 10 of swords. Hey, 10 of swords is supposed to be a little dark. Dark things (like bullfighting, for example) really exist, so it seems to me that including it in this manner is quite appropriate. The fact that its a bit disturbing means its doing its job well.
I think it's more disturbing because you normally don't see the face of the person in
the 10 of Swords, let alone swords through their eyes. It's just kind of over the top for
me. .... I would have preferred a more subtle version of this card.
I agree that there have to be dark cards but they don't have to be vulgar, which I think
this is. I would feel the same way if it was a person's eyes or an animal's eyes. It's not
the fact that it's an animal shown in the illustration. I mean the Fool card doesn't show
a duckling splattered all over the ground after it fell off the cliff to get the point across, lol.
It seems to stick out from the rest of the deck's overall tone. Just my opinion.
It's a deal breaker for me with this deck. Whenever I try to use the deck, that card
jumps out at me and is distracting during a reading. I know I won't use the deck if there's
a cards like that. It's disappointing, I like the deck. It seems to be such a 'nature' deck
and all. I wonder the thought process behind the image.