Art vs Tarot

jumptothemoonyea

I often wonder, what is the difference between Art and Tarot. Or there is no difference and they are just 2 names for the same search of divine fulfillment? Both use harmony of symbols to tell the story. And both have the power to take you into beautiful, magical spaces. What does tarot have that art cannot fulfill? And otherwise?
 

Ilithiya

I think that they're two different journeys with similar roadmaps. Who cares about the destination? *wicked grin*

Tarot has one up on art because you can stick 78 pieces of loveliness in your pocket for around $25 or less... art has one up on tarot because of the uncountable ways that something can be expressed - painting, sculpture, music, textiles, paper arts, and so forth. (Really, who needs 15 zillion RWS clones?)
 

Owlface

art and tarot

Just some thoughts, a bit random as I've just got out of bed !


Tarot cards teem with art-at least, they should do. Tastes vary, as do styles-I believe there's something for everybody.

I agree that Tarot cards can be had much more cheaply than even an inexpensive "work of art". And they take up much less room, are portable, etc. They are very democratic-Art isn't always. Having said that, it's not essential (fortunately !) to actually own art-think of all those wonderful galleries where you can get in for a very reasonable cost, or even free. And, of course, there are books containing wonderful reproductions.

What does art have that Tarot lacks ? SIZE. At least, sometimes. I can't imagine Georgia O'Keeffe's flower paintings having much of an impact if they were scrunched up into a 4 by 4 inch format. :)

What they both do, of course, is tap into the archetypal thingamijig, thus exploring matters of deep interest to us all. That's why I love them.



blessings to all,

rosyelf
 

Emeraldgirl

I think that tarot decks are art or at least artistic creations. Some may not be to everyone's taste but then what art suits everyone? Tarit so far is limited to 2D pictures on paper where as art has texture and can come in 3D forms such as sculpture. At the moment that puts a lot pros in art's corner however with people constantly developing new and inovative designs for tarot cards and Cirom's tarot of Dreams with it's interactive CD who knows how far tarot could go?
 

Cerulean

I believe tarot is more 'communicative' as an art form

and people can rate modern decks as systems to communicate meaning. The harder a modern tarot is to read, the label of "artsy or self-expressive" might not be a friendly label to a tarot reader.

An especially personal esoteric system that doesn't appeal to many people can still be a meaningful tarot. But I believe in general that readers of today's tarot also like to rate decks on some ideal/standard of appeal and friendliness.

I don't think I can rate other art forms of today on the same level of 'meaning' or 'readability' standards as modern decks. The value characteristics of design in "line, form, color, etc.," might be personal and unique to every artist.

What is interesting to me is thinking about historical tarot decks. Are they pieces of folk art/court art that we modernists are trying to read meaning, to add value to the art of the past?

Just some odd thoughts, hope they seem related.

Cerulean