Comparative Tarot
Thread originally posted on the Aeclectic Tarot Forum on 02 Jan 2003, and now archived in the Forum Library.
| Cerulean |
02 Jan 2003 |
|
Four decks in one says my collector eye.
Lo Scarabeo's Universal (Rider-Waite-Smith style); updated TdM (similar to N. Convers?); Tarot of the Origins in tribal scenes and Tarot of the Sphynx (or likened to a non-gilded Nerferteri with scenes facing a different way).
My husband's non-tarot eye found the major cards as a novel or movie scene that shows different points of views. Minors and courts...different story. Not easy to know what is going on.
My questions...first, any intuitive readers able to read it right out of the box? Second, any other questions, likes, dislikes?
At first glance, the LWB seems quite useful, but I grabbed my Nerferteri and Origins LWB from those decks and a Legends of Egypt book...as my experience with the Lo Scarabeo Egyptian decks is they don't name any archetypes specifically.
|
| Pollux |
02 Jan 2003 |
|
I will keep brief so as not to clutter up.
I am really interested in this discussion, and hope more people will join us. :)
As for the minors and courts, I partially agree with you, it's hard to discern the trend and detect what influence is weighing more...
Probably I just need to spend more time with the deck, since I have none of the fours.
But the Origins always catches my eye. I have a tendency to lean on it instead of the others. I find it really fascinating, and often a help when trying to realise what shade the other cards are covering...
I could read with it very soon indead - I waited to read the LWB a bit and put the cards at the open air, that's all. The readings were fine, and fairly accuarate, and felt at ease withthe deck at once. I repeat that I have a bias, though, for the Origin deck, and drew on its energies much more than I have on the others: it seems as if it is the strongest, never out of energy and opinions, while the others sometimes look bland or "weak" in comparison.
The LWB is so well done, so concise and comprehensive.
(But they could have done less languages with more room IMHO *LOL*)
|
| Cerulean |
02 Jan 2003 |
|
I am fascinated that someone could pick up on the Origins first.
The Origins minors are color-coded similarly to the Fey tarot and have these color schemes:
Pentacles-material achievement/knowledge gained- yellow
Chalices-spirituality and magic- blue
Wands-green-natural world
Swords-red-blood
The Origins minors follow this structure for each suit:
1-Etching - drawing/representation
2-Age - elder teaching apprentice
3-Mask - a masked representation of the suit
4-Bones - actual bones used to connect to spirit of suit
5-Stone - stone used as tool
6-Rite - action or observation an act related to the suit
7-Era - an emblem, symbolic or representation of the time
8-Spirit - a scene evoking the spirit or mood of the suit
9-Birth - culminating time, almost a harvest
10-Environment - fruitful results, ideal conclusion or completion
The courts are Child, Animal, Woman and Man.
Hope this helps begin to mesh it for others.
Mari H.
|
| JC |
02 Jan 2003 |
|
I don't have this deck, but the pics make me like the idea.
|
| Macavity |
02 Jan 2003 |
|
I wouldn't mind a copy of the LWB, just to SEE how they approach the problem of "unification" I think there is good agreement between the SYMBOLISM of the Nefertari (OK, a Sphynx?) and a RW deck in some of the suits, but (imo) it's rather poor in others e.g.
Example: Three of Pentacles:
Universal(!) Waite LWB: Great skill in trade or work. Mastery. Perfection. Artistic ability. Dignity. Reknown. Rank. Power.
OK, The familiar "man at work" card! :)
Nefertari LWB: Celebrity, Glory, Acquired nobility, Skill, Trade, Magistral Ability.
To me the Nefertari card just looks like three people having a good time :D
Please don't see this a big downer, merely an observation. But I do think it might echo a certain haste or "independence" of production in the LWBs? Or maybe artists give up / become "inspired"? ;) But it does seem sometimes that an individual decision is needed on a deck to deck basis as to whether to go with the accompanying LWB, use some generic (Waite) scheme or simply intuition.
That said, perhaps this deck indeed fosters just that kind of GENERIC skill. That must be good? I must admit it was/is something I'm trying to work on - Economy of effort and (these days) limited memory are an influence! If it "looks" like a Waite, that's how I reads 'em :D
Macavity
|
| Cerulean |
02 Jan 2003 |
|
I've just located my Clive Barrett's Ancient Egyptian book and am doing majors comparison with Sphynx/Nerfertari and another deck (Laura Tuan)...it's going to take me awhile...
Barrett either designed or had a strong enough Golden Dawn background to link Egyptian art with the majors...don't know about the minors and courts yet, these are my next look. Thanks for the notes and letting us all know what to look out for in comparing cards...
|
| Pollux |
03 Jan 2003 |
|
Originally posted by Macavity
I wouldn't mind a copy of the LWB, just to SEE how they approach the problem of "unification" I think there is good agreement between the SYMBOLISM of the Nefertari (OK, a Sphynx?) and a RW deck in some of the suits, but (imo) it's rather poor in others e.g. Hi Mac! :)
Three of Pents... the LWB says:
1 - (core meaning): work and dedication
2 - (Marseille): showing off professional talents
3 - (Universal): trade; masterly art;
4 - (Sphinx): skill; trade; planning:
5 - (Origins): craftsmanship; abundant production
Personally I see a close relatonship between the Universal and the Sphinx as well, which is not common to the other two; but that is just normal since we are presented with four different decks in the same card, and also, similar though they may look, I perceive the two differently, and so will you: even though the basic structure of the images is Rider-Waite-Smith alike for both, the different artwork simply conveys different impressions - and leads you somewhere according to the deck... At least this is my experience. *LOL*
I don't think there was a problem/intention of "unification" to deal with... The intent was not to make a four-figure deck and then try to melt them all together in one: the overall theme will be similar whilst there are four different decks, with their own "personality", and therefore their own different meanings in the LWB.
I am not fond of LWBs, I don't use them at all, but I had to read this one, and it is really well done, giving some good examples of the different energies of each deck. Maybe the formulas are too short and reduced, but they serve their purpose; they are not there to be used as fortune telling guidelines but to trigger the perception and make so that each deck is perceived in a peculiar, concrete (but consistent on the overall) way.
I'll quote Valerie Sim's words in the LWB:
"[i]Each deck possesses its unique voice. All good tarot decks sing a variation of the same song, but each has its own interpretation, arrangement, and style. This explains why one deck will appeal to one person, but not another. (...) When using the Comparative Tarot Method, one has to analyse these voices separately to see how they add to the overall tune. You will see from the keywords that several decks may be singing melody while another comes through with a harmonious voice, one that is not the same as the others, yet complements those other meanings and blends with them overall."
Originally posted by Macavity
But I do think it might echo a certain haste or "independence" of production in the LWBs? Or maybe artists give up / become "inspired"? ;)
But it does seem sometimes that an individual decision is needed on a deck to deck basis as to whether to go with the accompanying LWB, use some generic (Waite) scheme or simply intuition. As for LWBs, Waite and intuition, this is not a dicussion limited to this very deck. Anyway, we all know LWBs are mostly useless, and the best thing is to use intuition or go with RW if they are familiar and intuition is not yet.
Back to the first part, I have no ceratin info on this but I suspect each LWB was developed separately, each for a different deck. Valerie Sims worked a lot on this one, and possibly looked at the "sources" for the four, but she developed it independently - and not really hastily, cos it must have been a hard painstaking work...
|
| Macavity |
03 Jan 2003 |
|
Thanks for the thought provoking post Pollux... and the additional information :)
Originally posted by Pollux
Valerie Sims worked a lot on this one, and possibly looked at the "sources" for the four, but she developed it independently - and not really hastily, cos it must have been a hard painstaking work...
I'm sure anyway ALL the above is true! :) Comparitive methods might be a great way to LEARN Tarot. I'm certainly more and more SOLD on this idea. I suspect, as in learning two similar musical instruments in parallel (think the violin family), it at least avoids the process of "unlearning" e.g. associating the same finger positions with different notes. I certainly baulked initially at the prospect of "78 things" to learn... AND even more, with the prospect of this being multiplied (I thought) by the number of decks! ;) But certainly once ONE deck (RW) had been memorised, it proved invaluable (for me) to "invoke" that memory, when reading from an unfamilar deck. Even "disagreements" can become memorable (maybe more so!) and it is surprising how these do "stick", once there is this BASIC pool of ideas. As an added bonus, surprisingly it will even work (for me) with some "pip" cards. Doubtless, with later confidence and time, it will be possible to add an additional personal interpretation layer - Or, at least, that's my current claim - Heheh :D
Mac
P.S. I think I (for one) would be interested in anything Mari comes up with re. these "Egyptian" decks - if it's not too much typing... :)
|
| Pollux |
07 Mar 2003 |
|
ok. :)
|
The Comparative Tarot thread was originally posted on 02 Jan 2003 in the Tarot Decks board, and is now archived in the Forum Library. Read the active threads in Tarot Decks, or read more archived threads.
|
