Wildwood Tarot

[seven stars]

I just looked up this deck out of curiosity. For just me personally if it's not the regular RWS standard type tarot I wouldn't be able to use it for reading (I'm like a one trick pony here...so not versatile, it's pathetic) but I love the art. I really love the art. I don't think anyone who hasn't attempted painting a whole deck of cards can truly appreciate what a STRUGGLE it is to get through painting that many images. Even 78 small paintings are still sevvvvennnty eiggghht images that all have to go well together - it's tough to do with so much detail. Every time I see a beautifully hand painted deck by someone I'm just in awe & think man, that does deserve kudos here.

 

[gregory]

However it has definitely been a well discussed deck, and of course there were the tarotistas who felt the deck was disrespectful and not in good taste to it's mother deck the Greenwood and Chesca Potter the artist and co-creator of the deck.

No that's not the point.

The point is that it is NOT a child to the Greenwood. It was the prepublication hype that suggested it was. ILIKE the deck.

But I was one of the lead angry tarotistas in that argument, and my only point was that it was not what it was being advertised as. I do know someone who almost bought one, on the strength of that stuff, as she believed - from what was said on the blog of - let's not start naming people again - but one of those involved in putting it out - that it actually was a reissued Greenwood. It is a nice deck - but that it is NOT.

 

[Verity]

The Wildwood is the first deck I've ever owned. I ran across it on happenstance and hadn't heard of the Greenwood deck until afterward but I must say I'm eager to look into that one now, too. Although it's a bit difficult for me to parse out the meaning of some of the cards based on the descriptions in the book, I am thoroughly enjoying learning my way around the Wildwood deck. The few personal, very small readings I've done so far have been very poignant and surprisingly accurate. Not to mention the gorgeous artwork, as noted further up the page.

 

[Carla]

The Wildwood is the first deck I've ever owned. I ran across it on happenstance and hadn't heard of the Greenwood deck until afterward but I must say I'm eager to look into that one now, too. Although it's a bit difficult for me to parse out the meaning of some of the cards based on the descriptions in the book, I am thoroughly enjoying learning my way around the Wildwood deck. The few personal, very small readings I've done so far have been very poignant and surprisingly accurate. Not to mention the gorgeous artwork, as noted further up the page.

You may struggle to find a Greenwood and if you do find one, you will be shocked at the cost. The deck is OOP, probably forever, and has become something of a fetish property.

I had the Wildwood briefly but traded it. It's the only Will Worthington deck I haven't got on with. It just wasn't for me.

 

[Eyebright]

No that's not the point.

The point is that it is NOT a child to the Greenwood. It was the prepublication hype that suggested it was. ILIKE the deck.

But I was one of the lead angry tarotistas in that argument, and my only point was that it was not what it was being advertised as. I do know someone who almost bought one, on the strength of that stuff, as she believed - from what was said on the blog of - let's not start naming people again - but one of those involved in putting it out - that it actually was a reissued Greenwood. It is a nice deck - but that it is NOT.

Thank you for clearing that up Gregory. I was not into Tarot at the time when the Greenwood came out, and so I wasn't truly aware of this fact. To me it had always been touted as a sort of sister deck to the Greenwood, which I can now see was just the marketing ploy of one of the creators!
I still like the deck and would have bought it regardless, but that is misleading to say the least. Though perhaps in his mind he really does think of the deck in this way!

 

[CheapShoes]

I bought this deck looking for something available in the bookstore that wasn't overtly Judeo or Christian. After opening, I was soo disappointed in the hokey-pokeyness, white hippie people although it uses and misunderstands technology from Paleo and Neolithic peoples (so where are the darker people? - and our real ancestors?), and somehow inserts them into hippie versions of Amerindian life.

OK.... then a few months later I did some readings with an open heart and open mind. OMG. Great deck, super readings, and first impressions I had are too biased for what I was expecting. As the book says, read it then forget it and go forth. The cards carry sufficient imagery the book technique isn't really necessary IMHO. So forget all your pre-notions and let it be what it wants to be. I am going out to get a second copy for when this goes OOP and I lose or damage a card or something.

 

[Starshower]

The 'ancestors' referenced in this deck are northern European & white ... of Saxon, Celtic, Irish, Scottish, Norse & Viking stock - drawn mainly from the Druidic, shamanic, pre-Roman, pre-Christian culture of the British Isles. That is why they are fair-skinned rather than dark. They are nothing to do with 'Amerindian' culture. Will Worthington & John Matthews are English, & at least one of them is a neo-Druid.
I find the 'modern' kilts, hairstyles & squeaky-clean sanitisation a bit hard to swallow ... but the deck, though too 'cartoony' for my taste, does read well & easily for me.
And I really love Will Worthington's intricate depictions of nature!

 

[CheapShoes]

Starshower, your explanation helps. Thanks. I was also keying off of what looked like mesoamerican stone work images on the Green man & woman's large vessels, and the North American plains people's picture writing on skins which the Wheel seemed to be directly based on, complete with Hawk feathers, but I can see all that from a different angle now and feel better.

 

[Starshower]

Wow - how fascinating! I need to look up & learn about mesoamerical cultures now (of which I am woefully ignorant!)
Isn't it amazing how many similarities & crossovers of decoration, dress, spiritual practices & even linguistic coincidences there are between cultures we thought had no contact with each other?! Either they did after all, in pre-history ... or perhaps certain things are endemic to humans across the globe and pop up almost everywhere at some time. Very intriguing indeed! Thanks.


eta I stand corrected - you are totally right about this weird concoction of cultures! I was just re-reading this thread, & in #47 found that apparently someone posted that Mark Ryan, who was working on this deck with the English Celtic scholar John Matthews, DID say on his blog that he was using "linkages and roots shared with the Native American Indian Medicine Wheel"!
Understandably, this strange mish-mash stirred up much dismay & discussion in the following posts ...

 

[Extoria]

Woops, completely forgot about this thread, eek! And haven't used the deck much either (it's packed up in storage...)

Read through the last couple of pages, with the discussion about what cultures the deck draws from. And I must add, I was kind of disappointed with the casual appropriation and lack of explanation of which cultures were drawn from in the book. The author uses the word 'shaman' often and without any real meaning behind it, and the art does seem to draw on many non-European cultures without any apparent reasoning (especially considering what CheapShoes pointed out - all of the humans are fair-skinned, which may have been acceptable if the cultures the deck had drawn from had been entirely Northern European, but they're not).