Variant approaches to the Thoth: Angeles Arrien's book

[Trump Lloyd]

Just got the 1987 edition of this book and, based on Amazon.com's book preview, it appears to be identical (text, typesetting, page breaks, index, bibliography, etc.) to the 1997 edition save for three paragraphs added to the introduction, a lower list price, and changes to the cover, back and verso. And the 1997 edition states that the book is printed on acid-free paper.

The book is marketed as being an updated edition with a new introduction.

Without getting into the merits of the content, I hope this information is helpful.

 

[archer1]

I found mirror of soul by ziegler somewhat helpful, but BoT and Duquette were best in my view.

 

[Cara]

Oh my, I wish I would have done my research before buying Angeles Arrien's awful book!!! It's so frustrating to know that those new to Thoth Tarot may read and learn from this book before reading the Book of Thoth or DuQuette's Understanding AC's Thoth Tarot. I started with Crowley and DuQuette and was looking for some new books and heard Arrien "put a spin" on BoT and was a good resource. Now I understand what that "spin" is...WTH!!! I couldn't believe the garbage in Arrien's book. Unfortunately I have to pay to ship this junk back to the online store...sigh...

 

[gregory]

Oh my, I wish I would have done my research before buying Angeles Arrien's awful book!!! It's so frustrating to know that those new to Thoth Tarot may read and learn from this book before reading the Book of Thoth or DuQuette's Understanding AC's Thoth Tarot. I started with Crowley and DuQuette and was looking for some new books and heard Arrien "put a spin" on BoT and was a good resource. Now I understand what that "spin" is...WTH!!! I couldn't believe the garbage in Arrien's book. Unfortunately I have to pay to ship this junk back to the online store...sigh...

*giggle*

I'm sorry. It isn't funny.

Be equally careful with (well, no, not quite - but try and SEE) Ziegler before buying....

But Snuffin and Banzhaf are worth reading.

 

[Cara]

*giggle*

I'm sorry. It isn't funny.

Be equally careful with (well, no, not quite - but try and SEE) Ziegler before buying....

But Snuffin and Banzhaf are worth reading.

Bwahahahahaa! I definitely learned my lesson. Thanks for the warning about Zieglar and for your recommendations. I have Snuffin's book and Banzhaf's Keywords for the Crowley Tarot. I noticed Banzhaf has a few other books...is there one in particular that stands out? Or are they all good?

 

[skipbosco]

OK.....so, I'm just a couple months into the Tarot, specifically the Thoth. I've read LMD's "Understanding" book 2.5 times (working on the 3rd), BoT once through with a lot of subsequent browsing, Chicken Qabalah....and a bunch of online material etceteras. I mean, I'm studying up on this stuff, ya know? It's fascinating, riveting, powerful stuff.

So.

I was poking around Amazon for something more to read and ran into Arrien's book --hey, cheap used copy...probably interesting...thought --well, okay....why not? So. It arrived today and when I got home from work thought I'd have a crack at it....I mean, I was barely out of the introduction and couldn't continue reading because I was rolling my eyes so much. I mean, damn! So I came here, and after a few pages of posts felt amazingly affirmed by some of the basically brilliant criticisms here.

The book is junk. It's lazy. And her writing is kinda crappy.

I mean, it's like.......what's it like? It's like she's applying her personal rules of baseball to the official baseball rulebook because, well, she just doesn't think it's fair that you only get 3 strikes when you're at bat....why not 4? Why not 5? Or better yet, it's like she's fallen in love with Cricket...but damn, it's SO HARD to absorb all those damn crazy Cricket rules, so she decided to write about Cricket via the rules of baseball. I mean, they're kinda sorta similar games....but.......ugh. UGH!

Only a few pages in and it really felt like she had some kinda anti-Crowley ax to grind.

I'll close with a quick story. A few weeks back I took a Tarot class, just the major Arcana, and although I was already basically fully onboard with the Thoth I took a RWS kinda deck (Fenestra)...cause I was already aware of the Thoth bias in the Tarot universe, and sure enough the instructor said she'd prefer if I would use my other deck. That was fine. At the end of the class someone asked what the difference was between a "regular" deck and the Thoth...interestingly enough the instructor punted to me and said --you probably know more about it than I do, wanna take that question? Now at that point I had only read the Duquette book, but I was off to the races explaining the differences...tree of life...blah blah blah...and it was clear that she kinda didn't know anything about it, just, you know CROWLEY (AHHH!!!! SCARY!!!!). I mean, this is someone who has been doing Tarot for 30 years, who called the deck "controversial," but didn't know basically the first thing about the basic principles of the Thoth, couldn't explain the controversy.

Anyway. Crap book. Ugh.

 

[Teheuti]

There are many different Tarot traditions that have nothing to do with each other. For instance, the Brotherhood of Light 'Egyptian' tradition, or the Marseille tradition. All of these are made up systems that were added on to the Tarot. People keep adapting the Tarot to their own beliefs, mythologies and worldviews. A deck like the Thoth has been designed to reflect a particular system. I believe you can get the most out of the deck by learning that system (the GD modified by Crowley) and Crowley's personal perspectives. OTOH, I believe that deck is so powerful because it transcends the personal, expressing archetypal themes (both Platonic and Jungian) extremely well. Angie Arrien's book focuses on the latter. In the process she totally misses many of Crowley's obvious references and deliberately ignores his world view, making the deck more symbolically open-ended in the process. Personally, I got a lot from Angie's teachings, but I would have missed far too much if I hadn't studied a great many of Crowley's writings (not just books on Tarot), as well as the original Book T. Please read Duquette and Snuffin and Banzhaf, but Crowley's Book of Thoth is really the essential work for that deck, and it should be read over again every couple of years!

If you look at Crowley's personal readings, as recorded in his journals, it's easy to see that serious Crowleyites today have taken the divinatory reading of this deck far beyond anything he appears to have done himself.

 

[ravenest]

OK.....so, I'm just a couple months into the Tarot, specifically the Thoth. I've read LMD's "Understanding" book 2.5 times (working on the 3rd), BoT once through with a lot of subsequent browsing, Chicken Qabalah....and a bunch of online material etceteras. I mean, I'm studying up on this stuff, ya know? It's fascinating, riveting, powerful stuff.

So.

I was poking around Amazon for something more to read and ran into Arrien's book --hey, cheap used copy...probably interesting...thought --well, okay....why not? So. It arrived today and when I got home from work thought I'd have a crack at it....I mean, I was barely out of the introduction and couldn't continue reading because I was rolling my eyes so much. I mean, damn! So I came here, and after a few pages of posts felt amazingly affirmed by some of the basically brilliant criticisms here.

The book is junk. It's lazy. And her writing is kinda crappy.

I mean, it's like.......what's it like? It's like she's applying her personal rules of baseball to the official baseball rulebook because, well, she just doesn't think it's fair that you only get 3 strikes when you're at bat....why not 4? Why not 5? Or better yet, it's like she's fallen in love with Cricket...but damn, it's SO HARD to absorb all those damn crazy Cricket rules, so she decided to write about Cricket via the rules of baseball. I mean, they're kinda sorta similar games....but.......ugh. UGH!

Only a few pages in and it really felt like she had some kinda anti-Crowley ax to grind.

I'll close with a quick story. A few weeks back I took a Tarot class, just the major Arcana, and although I was already basically fully onboard with the Thoth I took a RWS kinda deck (Fenestra)...cause I was already aware of the Thoth bias in the Tarot universe, and sure enough the instructor said she'd prefer if I would use my other deck. That was fine. At the end of the class someone asked what the difference was between a "regular" deck and the Thoth...interestingly enough the instructor punted to me and said --you probably know more about it than I do, wanna take that question? Now at that point I had only read the Duquette book, but I was off to the races explaining the differences...tree of life...blah blah blah...and it was clear that she kinda didn't know anything about it, just, you know CROWLEY (AHHH!!!! SCARY!!!!). I mean, this is someone who has been doing Tarot for 30 years, who called the deck "controversial," but didn't know basically the first thing about the basic principles of the Thoth, couldn't explain the controversy.

Anyway. Crap book. Ugh.

Apparently one doesnt need a lot of knowledge to to write a book or run a 'tarot class' , as you appear to have found out.

These things can distract with a type of 'glamour'. As far as books and 'teachers' go (and people that give classes or seem to have some authority or 'special voice'), I would take some advise from 'The Art of War' ... which says (basically) just because someone SEEMS important or knowledgeable , that may not be so, they might have achieved what they have done by skill and worth or they may have been lucky, paid for the privilege, have good connections with friends or family or bribed their way to the top ... you will be able to tell by careful examination of the content of their work and their tactics.

 

[Teheuti]

Angie died just two weeks ago. There are some wonderful tributes to her on the web. She taught Tarot since the early 1970s or even earlier, but is far better known for her other work including a foundation for cross-cultural education and studies. Here's a TED talk by her https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2kDRRBK95no .

That said - her book does not replace Crowley. However, just as both Mathers and Crowley turned Tarot to their own uses, she also turned Tarot to her own preferred applications and approaches, as so many did before and since. Remember that divinatory Tarot is a totally made up system (or rather many different systems).

Or for some of her earlier work - here she is with Terence McKenna (2nd half): http://youtu.be/mMn4LX8_dtA

 

[Zephyros]

Although I myself said some pretty harsh things in this thread, it might also be mentioned that Arrien, like any other author, was a product of her time. It is easy to snub "just another" intuitive Tarot book, but in the seventies and eighties that was mostly what there was. DuQuette's book was published only in 2003, and her book was published in 1987. Chances are that many resources that were available both to DuQuette then and to us now weren't at the time, or at least not as easily as looking it up online. RWS books that are wholly subjective in nature are the norm (no one has done for Waite yet what DuQuette did for Crowley), and while I wouldn't want that to happen to the Thoth, it seems a double standard to judge Arrien in a different way. I've never read the Book of Thoth without the benefit of supplemental material, so I really can't say how someone in that time would have approached it. It would probably be much more baffling than it is today.

So, Arrien's approach can be understood, if not accepted or agreed with.