Understanding the RWS Tarot

[Teheuti]

Ross -

Thanks for the response. There's no specific conference yet - but I've talked to several people who are considering doing one and who asked me for recommendations for speakers. It's a big committment to put on a conference. I didn't want to put any constraints on people's responses, and, as a result, no one seemed to take my query seriously, except Crystal.

Off hand, Kaplan, Jensen, Volley, O'Neill, (you)

I'm sure they top the list.

I'm personally curious how many people would prefer historical info to practical experience? Of course, asking the question in a history forum might not be the best place to get a balanced perspective.

Mary

 

[Teheuti]

The problem with what Waite wrote is that he probably was trying to hide things from his readers. Some of what he was trying to hide we know. Some of the things he was trying to hide he was successful at hiding. I also find his writing almost impossible to read.

Actually he was a lot clearer and more specific than he sounds. Sure, stuff is hidden in his writing, but that's because he was an occult (i.e., 'hidden') author who believed in the magical value of hiding things in plain sight that can only be perceived by the person who has reached a certain 'level' of perception. Most people aren't really interested in the deeper stuff anyway as it takes far too much work and study to become sensitized to the patterns. The brilliance of the deck (and where PCS outdid Waite) is that it works at so many different levels.

I think right now just about everyone is trying to learn Tarot using books written by people who are explaining what they know from their own viewpoints

I agree with you. So, given that, are you more interested in contemporary author viewpoints or in understanding Waite's original intent? And who best, in your opinion, can present these two perspectives (from among living Tarotists)?

Mary

 

[Ross G Caldwell]

Hi Mary,

Thanks for the response. There's no specific conference yet - but I've talked to several people who are considering doing one and who asked me for recommendations for speakers. It's a big committment to put on a conference. I didn't want to put any constraints on people's responses, and, as a result, no one seemed to take my query seriously, except Crystal.

Well, I'm sure the ball will get rolling if there's something to it. There's no way a Centennial for the RWS won't get subscribers - when there's something to subscribe to. And think of it - a book/catalogue could follow. It would be the first international conference (maybe the first conference) dedicated to a single tarot deck.

I'm personally curious how many people would prefer historical info to practical experience? Of course, asking the question in a history forum might not be the best place to get a balanced perspective.

LOL. I'll try to be balanced... I think it has to have both, heavily weighted on the practical side however, since RWS means "tarot reading" to the vast, vast majority, and the conference will be weighed to the English speaking world anyway. The historians don't have to be pre-RWS historians, but they should be historian enough to talk knowledgeably about the GD and Rosicrucianism and Celtic mysticism... as well as biography. (I should have added Decker in there - I'm sure he'd like to invited to speak at a conference, and he co-authored the "History of the Occult Tarot").

Ross

 

[Starling]

Actually he was a lot clearer and more specific than he sounds. Sure, stuff is hidden in his writing, but that's because he was an occult (i.e., 'hidden') author who believed in the magical value of hiding things in plain sight that can only be perceived by the person who has reached a certain 'level' of perception. Most people aren't really interested in the deeper stuff anyway as it takes far too much work and study to become sensitized to the patterns. The brilliance of the deck (and where PCS outdid Waite) is that it works at so many different levels.

I think that the deck truly is both brilliant and a lot deeper than people give it credit for. Yes, beginners can find a way into the deck pretty easily, but there is so much more going on in those cards. You could drown in the layers of meaning.

I agree with you. So, given that, are you more interested in contemporary author viewpoints or in understanding Waite's original intent? And who best, in your opinion, can present these two perspectives (from among living Tarotists)?

Mary

Thinking about it, I realize that I want both. I'd also like more information on what Smith intended, since I think the deck's success has more to do with her than with him, even if he taught her everything she knew.

And frankly I don't have a clue as to who can do this the best. I haven't read all that many books on Tarot. And there is so much out there now that wasn't there even the last time I was studying it.

 

[roppo]

Roppo - you might also want to check this book: Ernest Fenollosa's The Masters of the Ukiyo-e (1896). I would imagine that PCS mostly saw the works in reproduction through this book and especially Dow's book Composition. Fenollosa was the curator of Japanese art at the Boston Museum of Art that I mentioned before.

Mary

Thank you for the information, Taheuti. Now I find Stieglitz held a Ukiyoe exhibition at his 291 studio in 1909, which means PCS had a chance to examine many ukiyoes firsthand. I sense some Sharaku touches from PCS's portraits of Henry Irving.

and RWS Centennial? Great!

 

[Umbrae]

If you could study the Rider-Waite-Smith Tarot with any living person, who do you feel would be most qualified to give you the real low-down on the deck?

Would you want to learn from
1) someone who truly understands what Waite wrote in his book, or
2) someone who has their own, truly inspiring 'take' on the cards?
What contemporary authors/books most embody these two options?

What are the most important things to know/learn about this deck?

I appreciate any feedback or thoughts on this topic.

Mary

Yes! Absolutely!

Sure Jensen, O’Neil (Eugene or Robert…I just can’t decide), that cutie Mary Greer, Volley would all be good…for starters.

Seems to me there’s a whole other side of Waite/Smith (as people), that’s only slightly touched on – that may have had influence on the final art.

Jensen touched upon it briefly in his ‘Story of…’ book, stating that Waite (I don’t have a copy handy so I cannot quote – and I may be way wrong, please correct if possible) enjoyed writing rituals for quasi-Masonic, and Golden Dawn ceremonies. I believe that both Waite and Smith were Co-Masons.

I want to see the Masonry (beyond the obvious) that was buried in the images.

Forget Waite’s book, or a truly inspired take – I want scholarly exploration into the images.

 

[Teheuti]

Forget Waite’s book, or a truly inspired take – I want scholarly exploration into the images.

I know several people who've been doing this. Bob O'Neill did quite a bit of the groundwork, and also A. Grinder (who seems to have disappeared). I've also been doing a lot of this research over the past few years. I've identified dozens of his allusions - often based on a three or four word phrase in the middle of a sentence. I also discovered the Grail stories that are the basis of the Minor Arcana. However, how many people are truly interested in all this trivia?

Do you know of anyone else who has been researching Waite or Smith deeply? Perhaps Melinda Boyd Parsons?

Mary

 

[Elnor]

I might be completely off the mark in what you are looking for here, but I've always been interested in what influenced Pamela's art, (and that's probably just because I'm an artist) and I was intrigued when I found out that during her time as Ellen Terry's dresser, many of the parts of Shakespearian pages were played by female actresses. (In Shakespeare's day it was of course the opposite- all parts were played by men.)

One of the criticisms I've heard about the RWS is that the Court Cards are unbalanced in favour of the men- three of them vs. only one woman.

But, if Pamela actually intended that her Pages WERE female... influenced by the famous actresses of her day that she must have seen in boys' roles- and how much the theatrical Shakespearian costumes also had on how she dressed her figures in the cards.... might that been an interesting insight into the cards?

I've spent the afternoon compiling these pics of actresses dressed as either pages, or 'disguised' as boys... (once I got started, I couldn't stop- some are so similar to the RWS pages, I was fascinated!)

http://i83.photobucket.com/albums/j284/jaenor363/ActressesasPages.jpg

Another topic I would be interested to know about, (and again, this wouldn't require a Tarot expert... but it's something that must have had a bearing on her art) is that Pamela had synesthesia, and could 'hear' colours, so she was greatly influenced by music.

Just some ideas I had, don't know if this is the sort of thing you mean, though.

elnor

PS. Well, I don't know why that jpeg won't open up any larger... it's actually huge! Maybe Photobucket compresses them? I'll try and make it bigger if possible.

 

[Teheuti]

I've spent the afternoon compiling these pics of actresses dressed as either pages, or 'disguised' as boys... (once I got started, I couldn't stop- some are so similar to the RWS pages, I was fascinated!)

http://i83.photobucket.com/albums/j284/jaenor363/ActressesasPages.jpg

Wow - I'd love to see a higher resolution pict of these as some are rather difficult to make out. Thank you so much for doing this. Melinda Boyd Parsons (Smith's mostly-unpublished biographer) also pointed this out, but I hadn't seen nearly as many images that make this point. I believe PCS did some suffragette posters that included women warriors. Parsons even identified a few of Smith's friends who may have modeled for the knights and pages.
There's a short article on the subject at: http://www.ata-tarot.com/reflections/08-01-04/shakespeare.htm

I think it would be wonderful to get Parsons to speak!

Another topic I would be interested to know about, (and again, this wouldn't require a Tarot expert... but it's something that must have had a bearing on her art) is that Pamela had synesthesia, and could 'hear' colours, so she was greatly influenced by music.

I've read quite a bit about synesthesia in order to understand better what she could do. In the descriptions it wasn't so much that she could hear colors, but that she saw music as images. She said that while listening to music (especially when played by the composer) that it was like the lens on a camera would open to an image which she would then draw. If she tried to change anything it would snap shut - so she had to train herself to not make any changes. This is excellent training for a psychic who needs to be a clear channel of pure information coming through.

Mary

 

[Elnor]

Mary-
I couldn't get the jpeg. to upload onto Photobucket at a decent size, so my boyfriend put it temporarily onto the homepage of a website we're working on, (just to see if he could get it to do it he loves playing around with computers.)

I'm supposed to be doing the artwork for the site, but I'm a bit slow- so the images of the Pages ought to be at this link for a few more weeks....at least you can see them full size this way!

http://crepp.awardspace.co.uk/

elnor