Tarot Reviews

Thread originally posted on the Aeclectic Tarot Forum on 20 Apr 2002, and now archived in the Forum Library.

Kiama	20 Apr 2002
Whilst a review, naturally, will be subject to some amount of the writer's viewpoint, it should also be mostly objective, telling the reader what is on the cards, if there is any symbolism, what numbering tradition is used, etc... That way, the reader can decide for themselves whether or not this deck would be good for them, without being hinred by somebody else's opinion. Thanks for the points, Lee and Faunabay! I love it when we can have an intelligent disuccsion about things! Kiama

Talisman	20 Apr 2002
"Now, onto Wilke's 'Review' of the book. (I'd prefer to call it an opinionated rant personally. A review should be mostly objective.) " -- Kiama Sorry, Kiama, but I really have to disagree with you on this one. Too often, when someone decries a review for not being "objective," it simply means they disagree with it. There are some reviews which come very close to being objective, as if the writer never had an opinion in his life. And, they are usually such bland goose wipe, you wonder why they were written in the first place. Or, they sound as if the reviewer popped everyone else's opinions in his mouth, masticated them, then spit the soggy gray lump out on the page. It's easy enough to tip toe through the tulips and write a review that will never trigger a reaction in anyone, but why would anyone want to read it? No, no. Give me Kiama in full war paint, firing off flaming arrows. Now, your review of Diane Wilkes' review -- every bit as subjective as it was fun to read. (I liked Wilkes' review for the same reasons.) Great stuff, Kiama! Anyone have any doubts about where she (subjectively) stood? Print it out. Take a black felt marker and cross out every subjective opinion. What do you have left? Just poodle puddle, soggy and uninspiring. Try this: Poppy Palin's tarot cards -- gorgeous and wildly creative. Poppy Palin's writing -- pompous, pedestrian and patronizing. Objectively speaking, of course. Talisman

Kiama	21 Apr 2002
Talisman: My writing wasn't supposed to be objective, It isn't a review, its a rant. (I don't often rant, so you'll need to forgive me if it was a poor rant!) When I read a review, I don't want that reviewer's personal opinion. I want to know about the deck. I don't care what someone else thinks of the deck, cuz in the end, I could think something totally different of it! Take the Medicine Woman deck for example: I adore this deck, but I have read reviews where people haven't liked it. Now, if I had read that review of it before buying that deck, I wouldn't have bought it, and would've been entirely worse off because of it. Diane Wilkes' 'Review', whilst including some useful information about the deck, is largely taken up by her rant about her dislike for Poppy's method and apparant 'agenda'. Sorry, but I don't really care if the creator of my next deck has an agenda. I want to know about the deck. Subjective writing is always interesting, and objective writing can be down-right boring. Yet, you pick up an essay written about the Cosmological Argument by a Philosophy student, and compare it with a personal opnion of Swinburne's Cosmological argument, I can honestly say I know that you will undertstand the Cosmological argument much more because of the essay, not the personal opinion. Kiama Ps- Talisman, I still love you! :)

Lee	21 Apr 2002
Well, now I feel like I need to go into a little bit of detail about what I think a review should be. This is not to argue with Kiama, who of course is perfectly justified in stating what she would or would not like to see in a review. I feel strongly about this because for the last few years I've spent a rather large percentage of my free time writing tarot reviews. I've written about 45 of them, they're all on the Tarot Passages site if anyone wants to see them. They're not just a few paragraphs each, either; they run between two to five pages each, and each took two or three hours to write. This doesn't mean I know any more about reviews than anyone else, but I just want to state why it matters to me. The reason I spend so much time and energy on this is not merely because I like to hear myself talk (although who doesn't?), but also because I truly want to provide something useful to the tarot community. Let me give an example. In my review of the Celtic Wisdom Tarot, I do describe the deck and book and give my very positive reaction to the artwork. At the same time, I expressed my extreme disappointment that the pictures on the cards did not match well with either the divinatory meanings given in the text or the stories that the pictures were based on. This makes the deck, in my opinion, practically impossible to read with. I felt that the artist had done her work without the proper guidance from the author or the editor, and had illustrated the cards as if she were illustrating a book, by taking small details or scenes from the stories and putting them on the cards without regard for the fact that people would be looking at the pictures, trying to intuitively derive a meaning. The artist didn't seem to be aware that each card has to communicate something of both the divinatory meaning and of the card's story as a whole, not just one little facet of it. Now, should I have simply described the deck and completely left the above opinion out of it? If I had, readers of the review would have missed out on what I felt was an important thing to understand about the deck. And that is why I write reviews; I truly want the potential buyer to have some idea of what it is they'll be spending their hard-earned money on. Of course, it's subjective; someone else could look at the deck and see something totally different. But before I plunk down my $35.00 for a deck/book set, I want to know if other people have found things particularly positive or negative about the deck. I may end up agreeing or disagreeing with them, but at least I'm making a more informed decision. Interestingly, most of the reviews of the Celtic Wisdom I've read don't come to the same conclusion as I did. However, I'll note that several people on the Aeclectic forum have expressed the same concerns I had, and I'd be willing to bet there are not many people out there who are actually reading with this deck. My point is that a dry, objective recitation of a deck's features is going to lack what to me is really helpful in trying to decide if I want the deck. Otherwise, there wouldn't need to be reviews at all; if that was all we wanted, we could simply read the blurbs the publishers provide on the back of the box. I think the main disgreement here is on what the definition of "review" is. When I use the word, what I have in mind is the kind of book/movie/play/music/dance/restaurant/art reviews that I grew up reading in various newspapers and magazines, and which I enjoyed so much. In those reviews, the reviewer didn't hesitate to criticize or extoll whatever was being reviewed. Movie reviewers, for example, can be quite vicious about the film, but that won't stop millions of people from going to see it if it's something they want to see. But it's interesting and fun to read, and it gives the moviegoers an idea of what to expect, and gives them one person's opinion to measure theirs against. Why can't we have the same thing for tarot decks? Finally, here's the definition of "review" according to my American Heritage Dictionary: "5.a. a report or an essay giving a critical estimate of a work or performance." And the definition of "critical": "2. characterized by careful, exact evaluation and judgment." -- Lee P.S. I guess by the length of this post, I really do like to hear myself talk. Oh,well! :)

Talisman	21 Apr 2002
Lee, and Kiama (love you too, and itchin' to disagree with you just this one time), You are a moderator, know the secret password, and all that stuff. I really want to respond to what you've said about reviewing, and what Kiama said. But, here we are, on the tail end of a sparkling, interresting, entertaining thread -- on a whole 'nother topic. And maybe a lot of people won't participate. I'd really love to read people's reactions to this topic. Have a thousand questions and arguments, stuff to say, starting with Kiama's and Lee's last posts. Can the last couple of posts be moved to a new thread? Or, will one of you start a new thread on this topic? Think it could be fun stuff, what Kiama calls "an intelligent discussion." Well, bet'cha it would be, could be. Talisman

Lee	21 Apr 2002
The above posts were originally posted at the end of the "Wild Spirit - I Got It!" thread in the Tarot Decks forum. Since the thread seemed to be evolving into a discussion of reviewing decks in general, Talisman suggested we start a new thread, so as per his suggestion I've broken off the above posts and placed them here. The other posts in that thread remain there, in the Tarot Decks forum. -- Lee

truthsayer	21 Apr 2002
i really enjoy reading deck reviews. it's really helped me analyze decks and figure out why i had problems relating to certain decks. for example, lee's on target about the celtic wisdom deck. i love it--the book and deck set is wonderful but it's impossible to read w/o the book. i've been reading tarot many years so i know there's a problem when i can't read a deck. usually it's b/c the system the deck uses goes totally against the thoth and rws--the decks i learned on. i'm still glad i've got the deck but at least i have feedback as to why i have difficulty w/ the deck. some decks i've bought despite bad reviews and liked them. some decks had rave reviews and i hated them. reviewers are human beings. it's difficult for humans to be objective b/c we have to reach thru all that human experience before we can create an opinion. an opinion is the sum of all we have learned. a review is simply opinion. while i may not like diane wilkes words about wild spirit, she has been right about other decks i took a chance on. i have to recognize and respect the many years of experience she has rating decks b/c she has inspected and reviewed far more than i have. i do agree w/ her that the stories of the cards have a distinct self-righteous tone and that's a bit of a turn off. the self-righteous tone give the impression that she feels defensive about her position and opinions as if she feels the need to protect herself before an attack occurs. i understand how it is to feel that way b/c others seem to always disagree w/ what i believe. it does create a certain defensiveness in you. she does live the life of a wild spirit and my guess is that she has been subjected to much criticism. if something starts sounding preachy to me, i just skip over it and read something else. the deck is still excellent. i think diane does have an interesting idea of what a deck collaboration b/t poppy and the authur of the merryday deck. they both seem to have similar ideas.

Kiama	21 Apr 2002
Thanks for starting a new thread about this, Lee! Anyway, onto reviews! ;) I will reiterate a point I made earlier in one of my posts, saying that whilst I think reviews should be mostly objective, it doesn't hurt to have some subjective opinion in there. But, we look at Wilkes' 'review' of the Wild Spirit, and wonder just how far we go until we stop calling it an opinion, and start calling it a vendetta! Wilkes seemed hell-bent on convincing us that Poppy had an agenda, which took up nearly half of the 'review'! If you're gonna give your personal opinion of something, yes, maybe give an example to back up your claim, (Although if it is subjective, which an opinion is, it is very difficult to make everyone see what you have given as evidence!) but don't go wasting half a review of pointless ranting and raving! Lee: In response to films and Tarot decks. Review of films are often easier to find, and there are plenty of them, compared to reviews of Tarot decks. I mean, you can sit reading the newspaper of a lunchbreak, and accidentally come across film reviews, and read them for the Hell of it. You don't do that with Tarot reviews! You make a conscious decision to go find a review of a deck... So, undoubtedly, you'll be more affected by the Tarot review than by the film review. Also, a Tarot deck is a bit more of an investment, and more expensive, than going to see a film at the cinema! One bad review, and you're outta there! (Sometimes!) You're not gonna waste 20 quid on something you might not like (According to the review) whereas you might chance it and say well, 3 quid at the cinema's not gonna hurt... I always find that there are never any reviews about Tarot decks that are 'in the middle'. There are raving ones where the reviewer despises the deck, and there are lovey-dovery- Mills-n-Boon ones,where the reviewer is so in love with the deck! It is difficult to find those 'in-betweens' which are any good. Such a shame. Anyway, in conclusion: Whilst a little subjectivity is okay, and often welcome, in a Tarot deck review, a whole page on all the evidence for the deck creator's apparant 'agenda' being forced upon us is not! Kiama

Lee	22 Apr 2002
Quote: Originally posted by Kiama a Tarot deck is a bit more of an investment, and more expensive, than going to see a film at the cinema! That's exactly why it's even more important to get some info on others' views before making a purchase. Quote: [i] I always find that there are never any reviews about Tarot decks that are 'in the middle'. There are raving ones where the reviewer despises the deck, and there are lovey-dovery- Mills-n-Boon ones,where the reviewer is so in love with the deck! It is difficult to find those 'in-betweens' which are any good. Such a shame. Well, I hate to be disagreeable, but I'm afraid once again I must disagree. :) There are several websites which contain many even-handed reviews which neither despise the deck nor are lovey-dovey, including: http://www.tarotpassages.com http://www.wicce.com http://www.ecauldron.com/bookstore.php http://www.spiritone.com/~filipas/Masquerade/ http://www.advancenet.net/~jscole/tarot.htm I'm sure there are others which I'm not thinking of at the moment. I think it's rather unfair to generalize and say there are "never" any reviews which are even-handed. Personally I think my own reviews are generally even-handed -- at least I work hard to try to present whatever positive or negative sides there may be. But of course it's for the reader to decide how successful I've been. And of course there's lots of great reviews right here on Aeclectic! Including one I saw of the "Pythagorean Tarot" by someone named Kiama. :D By the way, I don't think there's really anything wrong with a review where the reviewer loves the deck or hates the deck. If the reviewer can get me to understand why they loved or hated it, then to me that means it's a well-written review and I'm happy to read it. I think the real point here is that here on the forums we feel perfectly free to express our opinions about decks (and all sorts of other things!). Why is it that we're only free to do that here? A review is simply somebody's impressions of a deck, just like we write on the forums, only in a different medium. It's true that here on the forums people can easily rebut an opinion, but you can also rebut a review by simply writing your own review. In fact, if you, Kiama, were to write your own review and send it to Diane, I'm sure she would be delighted to publish it, since, like me, she loves to see different viewpoints represented. Or, write a review for Aeclectic -- anyone searching for reviews of Wild Spirit will find both yours and Diane's, and can decide for themselves which they agree with more. -- Lee

DeLani	22 Apr 2002
OK, I'm throwing my 2c in here... I agree with what has been said about making a Tarot review like a movie review. I've worked on papers for a few years, and written some reviews myself, and all papers are pretty much the same, whether you are reviewing a film, restaurant, play, whatever. First, you are writing your opinion. *But*, you must explain why you feel that way, so that others can agree or disagree with you before purchasing the whatever. So you are free to say, "I hated blah blah blah, because blah blah." You have to back your opinions up with facts (of some kind). So someone could read your review, and say they totally agree or disagree with you, without ever having seen the deck! So I guess what I'm saying is that it should be a blend of objective & subjective. To me, it seems natural, being schooled in debate since infancy (as in, sure, express your opinion, but you better be able to back it up!). Maybe the moderator could suggest a format for future reviews (all publications do), like, including descripions of the deck, artwork, systems (majors, minors, etc.) and other relevant info. Just a suggestion, DeLani

The Tarot Reviews thread was originally posted on 20 Apr 2002 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.