"Jung and Tarot" by Sallie Nichols ??????

Thread originally posted on the Aeclectic Tarot Forum on 24 Nov 2001, and now archived in the Forum Library.

Freddie	24 Nov 2001
I finally ordered this book. I've debated on it for years, because I didn't know if I was ready to absorb it yet. I feel I've found a deck I'm 150% comfortable with and I am "tarot card meaning" confident enough (though that is a life long journey I never want to stop with) to move on to learning about a deeper "psychological" level with the cards. Any opinions on it. I enjoy reading Jung in general so I'm looking forward to getting my little paws on this book. God Bless, Freddie

JustBlue	25 Nov 2001
I didn´t know that Jung made use of Tarot. But I do recall reading a snippet about Jungs connection to the I ching though. (and astrology I think) Do stop by later on and give us a little "mini" take on the book, if you find the time.

jmd	25 Nov 2001
There are, apparently, a series of unpublished lectures which Jung made on the Tarot, recorded by Hanni Binder. This is mentioned in the Jungian-oriented The Tarot: a Myth of Male Initiation, p125 (published by CG Jung Foundation for Analytical Psychology, 1983). If any-one has access to these lectures, I would definitely like a copy...

Freddie	25 Nov 2001
Hi, I'll let everyone here know my take on it. Jung is one of my all time heros and I wish the man was more well known to the general public. The world would be a better place to live if so. I have benefited greatly from his writings and he has straightened my head out more than a few times. I'm not the only one either, Sting (the rock musician) for example, credits studying Jung for basically saving his life. If anyone here is in moderate "everyday type" suffering and can't seem to get out of the black hole they are in, go to the library and get yourself some Jung books to read. This will help, I promise it will if you open your mind, soul , and heart to it. "With one breath, with one flow, you will know Snchronicity. A sleep trance, a dream dance, a shared romance. Snchronicity". "IT'S SO DEEP, IT'S SO WIDE, YOUR INSIDES, SNCHRONICITY...". Freddie

blue	25 Nov 2001
Freddie; Good choice! I read it years ago and still reread sections to this day. I think you won't be disappointed.

tarotbear	25 Nov 2001
Yes- but this book is not a transcript of those lectures, if that is what you are expecting. Nichols was a disciple of Jung and these discussions are hers based on Jung's system, not writings taken from the master's mouth on his deathbed or something....

Freddie	26 Nov 2001
Hi Tarotbear, I enjoy reading almost anything written by Carl Jung or anything strongly based on his work. I've read books by his former students, friends, and co-workers and found some of them to be quite good. I'll have to seek out his material concerning the tarot someday soon, it sounds very interesting. Freddie

catlin	26 Nov 2001
Hi, I started reading this book some weeks ago as wanted to dive into the subject of Jung and the Archtypes but frankly speaking I was a bit disappointed. There were some interesting points in it but I found it abit difficult to read as S. Nichols seemed to jump from one thought to the next (maybe there got something lost in the translation. I read the German edition as it was a special prize offer) and so I found it diffucult to hang on. Ok, maybe it was not the right book for reding it in hospital. I will give it another try during my Christmas vacation.

tarotbear	26 Nov 2001
Catlin, IMHO - you're not too far off! I bought the book since 'everyone' keeps hearing/talking about "Jung &Tarot, Jung & Tarot, Jung & Tarot". I am no expert here, mind you, but all I ever seem to find is that Jung was 'fascinated' with Tarot since it fit into his theory of archetypes. He was not a reader or anything like that; nor did he do extensive writings about it, either. We, as tarot enthusiasts have taken maybe 6-8 pages of text on the subject and have elevated it into the Encyclopedia Brittanica! I bought the book since I thought the analogies of 'Squeaky Fromme' as the Fool and some of the other connections was interesting, but I too, thought the book jumped from subject to subject. Weren't Jung's writings originally in German or Dutch and translated into English? Thought the book was interesting, but as I have said, it is the compilation of someone's lectures based in Jung's theories, but not a direct writing of Jung himself.

Freddie	26 Nov 2001
Hi Tarotbear, I understand what you are saying. Are you talking about Squeaky from the Manson family? If so, what the hell kind of book is this? LOL.... Oh well, if so, it's not the first time I've been ripped off. I can't stand that Manson Family at all. She's not my idea of "The Fool" at all, the woman is a killer. Freddie

tarotbear	26 Nov 2001
Squeaky Fromme tried to assassinate President Ford and graced a 1975 cover of Newsweek Magazine wearing a 'fool's' cap.

Logiatrix	26 Nov 2001
kewl, freddie! i agree with you about jung. it has been thru tarot that i have learned of jung, at least with any depth. there are numerous books that apply his teachings to tarot, and--agree or disagree--i enjoy those i have been fortunate enought to happen upon. my personal favorite is hajo banzhaf's "tarot and the journey of the hero." nichol's book, IMHO, is also an important work for a tarot enthusiast to at least peruse. all knowledge we can gather is sure to enhance our individual cartomantic journeys. on a more practical note, i believe this book is OOP, so if you have it, hang on to it! i also know how to access several copies at half the retail price, if anyone is having difficulty finding it...

Freddie	26 Nov 2001
LOL... Thanks Tarotbear for warning me. Oh well, I'll read it anyway and maybe I'll get a little something out of it. She's kind of like Lizzy Bordon here in the U.S.A., they know she helped (or did it alone) with a couple of (family) murders, but the court could never prove it. Look what happened when Squeaky was let go. Charles Manson would be a good "The Devil" archetype, in my humble opinion. I just can't see Squeaky as "The Fool", I would have picked someone like James Dean or Janis Joplin, a gentle talented soul that holds all the elements, but is still at a loss to make the right (wise) choices.... or something like that. I guess I'm wrong again. LOL.... Freddie

Melvis	26 Nov 2001
I must agree with metaz on the Hajo Banzhaf book. It goes through the Majors and talks about the archetypes they represent, and relates them to mythology from around the world. I've gushed about it before, but I really did enjoy it. As tarotbear says, Jung didn't really say a great deal about Tarot specifically that I've ever seen, but I think he is referred to quite often in Tarot literature because he originated the term 'archetypes' (I read that somewhere...I might be putting too much trust into what I read, though...someone correct me if I'm wrong! ;) :P ) Peace, Melvis

AmounrA	26 Nov 2001
One thing I think Jung should be especially thanked for is the term 'synchronicity'. The taro work because of 'synchronicity', its where universe makes meaningful connections (some people refer to it as 'magnetiks).

purplelady	29 Nov 2001
I think Jung might have coined the word "archetypes" , developed that idea , and also synchronicity. Those writings fit in and explained the tarot so well that other writers , writing about the tarot applied His ideas. But Jung himself didn't write much about the tarot at all . Jung also wrote a lot about dream interpretation ,The subconscious, unconscious, collective unconscious, the ego , conscious , and superconscious, all of where archetypes apply.

jmd	29 Nov 2001
Quote: purplelady (30 Nov, 2001 07:29): I think Jung might have coined the word "archetypes"... The term 'archetype' was in use prior to Jung. For example, Goethe used it in his botanical studies. I'm probably at odds with many people on this forum, and though I realise the incredible influence Jung has had, I do not value his work as highly as many (though I have read and studied a reasonable amount of both his works and work arising from it). In a simplistic nutshell, he sought to understand the spiritual from a psychological perspective. In that sense, it is reductionist. For example, the striving of the Alchemists (see his two volumes specifically referring to this theme): though one can strive to understand them from either a chemistry or psychological perspective, is not limited to such... and their spiritual strivings transcends the workings and limitations of the psyche (through which the former undoubtedly operates and is limited by). In a similar fashion, Jung's description of many diagrams and depictions, for example, Michelspacher's diagrammes from his book Cabala, really seem to only superficially penetrate their meaning. Again, I consider that this was because he sought to see and undertand the world from the theoretical construct he was in the ongoing process of developing, rather than allowing each area of inquiry to reveal its own secrets. I probably also hold a similar view with regards to Tarot, Astrology and Kabalah: each has incredible richness, profundity and beauty, and though there may be points where their paths cross, modifying one of these to make another 'fit' is, as well as possibly adding some of the depth of the other to the now correlated 'system', is also taking away from intrinsic merits of each. Anyway, I now would like a copy of this book... so thanks so much for the thread.

Freddie	07 Dec 2001
Hi All, I got the book yesterday. I found it to be a very interesting read. I think the title is somewhat misleading (your right Tarotbear), but I'm still enjoying the book (this one is a large book and will require rereading parts to grasp the authors intention, at least for me). I like the history of the archtypes she gives. It's neat to find out about the historical/cultural background of the pictures of the 22 tarot keys (she does mention some minors). This book is a good read for those interested in the history/archtypes/symbolism/pictures of the major arcana. Nichols uses various decks for examples, but mainly the Marseilles is featured. She suggests taking the 2-10 pip cards out before reading them, she says they are unispirational because they lack a picture. I really disagree with her on that, she should have studied the "whole" tarot and she would have found out how they "speak to the reader". From what I understand in reading the book the writer may have never learned the pip cards (?). It's fine with me to read with as many cards as you like, but to say that some cards are not good to read with is misleading. Maybe I'm wrong. Freddie

Melvis	10 Dec 2001
Has anybody else read Discovering Your Self Through the Tarot by Rose Gwain? It goes into much more detail about archetypes and includes several original spreads that help you discover how the cards (specifically the Court Cards) relate to your anima/animus, your dominant personality traits, and so on. I haven't reached this part yet, but she has quite a bit about the Qabbalah, too. There are also many quotes from Jung and his followers. I'm wondering what anyone else thinks of this book? Peace, Melvis

The "Jung and Tarot" by Sallie Nichols ?????? thread was originally posted on 24 Nov 2001 in the Talking Tarot board, and is now archived in the Forum Library. Read the active threads in Talking Tarot, or read more archived threads.