the tarot as old school testment. (almost like bible if you will) time for new tarot?

Thread originally posted on the Aeclectic Tarot Forum on 02 Apr 2003, and now archived in the Forum Library.

HOLMES	02 Apr 2003
i for one comes from a rider waite loyalty when it comes to the tarot and so i relate everything to that. and others relate everything to the toth, and to the golden dawn which was the basis for the for both the toth and the rider and the paul foster case deck though of course modified by the creator of the respective decks. i was thinking to myself today about how much people love marieles and how much i myself love the rider waite (there was a deck there called beginner tarot but the deck was a newly illustrated rider waite deck full of colour which was made me retrospective) and i thought to myself we are hierophants, in a way. 1. marsieles old testment 2. riderwaite, golden dawn, toth, even bota (in that era) froms the new testment. 3. and the 70s to now was a reinterpation of the new testment era of the golden dawn era and off shots. morgon greer, robin wood, the wheel of change tarot, the ancient egypt tarot, all of them follow a system though slightly changed in the tarot. 4. we get mad if there is an extra card added to the minors, or the court cards, or OH MY GOSH AN EXTRA SUIT ALTOGETHER. 5. one night umbrae and i were discussing the enochian tarot and were talking about it isn't a true tarot. for far as i could tell it didnt follow the systems but i only half heartedly read the books and the parts i couldn't understand i skimed over not giving it a chance as i had a predetermined mind set it wasn't the rider. for of us who hasnt' learned the marsilies and don't have the affection of the marsiles (are rider based) could look at it as a primite dark age form of the tarot but is it ? it has so much history and has been told me to me it is pure tarot not diluted by culture or by time by differnt interpations. i for one see it as an old school obosolete deck (not really but i had those thoughts when people were telling me about it ) and having it been called the true tarot i was feeling like then what am i studying ? mud ? isn't this tarot a reliable form?. the qabalistic tarot which robert wang compared the marsilies to the thoth and the rider helps one to see that despite the differences, they are greatly the same, and have the same meaning. still the marsilies doenst have any pictures but old school symbolism(and way of understanding that symbolism of course) . should that be held against it by us new people used to new pictures. ? reading in my new edition of the tarot for yourself which was updated with a tarot history , she admits that she may of interpated the history to fit her views as a joke (forgive me those who don't know, tarot for yourself was written by mary k greer). she says that the tarot definatly didn't have any egypts links, but instead was almost certainly made in italy around 1430 to 460 i am not looking it up to get specifics as i dont' want to lose my trian of thought or edit it. does this here statement make the thoth with all its egyptian symbolism any less a tarot. it works :O) she even says since no one knows who really added the majors to the minors (she says it almost certianly comes after the minors) it can be imagined that the ones who did were astrologers, and perhaps one a kabbalists. ? (i laughed at that as one doens't know until definate proof is discovered) still it could be possible that one who added the trumps were well scholares of their day and at least educated into the mysticism of their day which would include astrology and the kabbalah. she also says that though the early cards had no numbers or title,they were described in their order they were supposed to appear soon after. this would disagree with racheal pollack statement that it is certain that the tarot and the kabbalah are two differnt sytems and have no relations but were added together as a way of understanding . (or there abouts paraphraising from the forest of souls ) if two friendly experts can disagree (though they probaly didn't know it) it is clear that we have clear mandate of what is the true tarot and so have our own ideals. is the rider a new updated marsiles ? is the marsiles the true tarot being purer? or are just heirophants sticking true to the systems we learned, and compare everything to the testment we have learned. (i may come back to edit to what really racheal pollack said as i may of got it wrong but i think i got it right ) i think with the changes made to the marsieles, through the over hundred plus years at least to arrive at the golden dawn and get changed into their system and get changed further into the rider waite, and then the thoth, (for i understand that the toth went more revealing as he felt that waite was keepign too much vieled of his tarot ) to paul foster case (who i can't really comment on as i never really read up on him ) to the new tarots of the late 20 century. now we are in the 21 century. do we stay true to our old tarots or reimagine in some totally new way or have we pushed the tarot far as it can go ? do we pull a purfying while retaining essence of new things we learned into a new reimagined marsiles , but if it is a new reimagined marsieles it isn't a marsieles, or am i wrong. i just wanted to point out how much we are hieorphants though we dont' realize it when we show our loyalties to systems of the tarot. be it toth, marsieles, my precious rider. i admit it am a heiropant. i think it is within our natures. and so we should strive to not become too much a heirophant while strying true to our roots. (the marieles gots roots that can't be denied. ) i feel we should strive to envision what the tarot of the new ages (not the the term new age in that sense) but of the true new millenium how it must change but stay true but be a vision to form new tarot minds. but who determines that ? i like to think our aeclectic tarot is a big stepping stone for it has influence us who has created in it and those who will take part in part three lol if there is a aeclectic tarot three, i liek to think there will be. even here, we learn something new about the tarot every day and we can agree that we will never agree about it all, for we have our own beliefs our own visions, our own knowledge that the others , our friends even dont' have. perhaps take a golden dawn two or new dawn or something of that sort to make the new tarot? who knows, or perhaps just some visionary who understands the tarot on the level we never thought off and while staying true to all that has come before it will revolutionize it to be reflect something totally new ? or will the old tarot testments remain suprme ?

Richard	02 Apr 2003
I think the Thoth is definitely TRYING to be a Tarot for a new era, sometimes obviously (The Aeon instead of Judgment, for example), sometimes not so obviously (The Hanged Man as a symbol of worthless sacrifice). I think a lot of what you say is definitely worth thinking about, although I think one should resist falling into the trap of thinking that because we're in a new millennium, we have somehow changed and the old rules no longer apply. I think people are still basically people, with the same wants, needs, and fears. That said, it would be cool if there were someone who could come and shake everyone up a bit. I think deck designing has become somewhat like sonnet writing...the tight scrictures are the very thing that allows creativity to burst forth. However, I think that there are very few truly worthwhile post-1970 decks out there (Sturgeon's Law and all that...), so maybe it is time to do something different. The problem is that there are lots of non-Tarot cartomancy decks out there, so how would one distinguish? If there were some brilliant James Joyce of Tarot who could come up with new archetypes, great. But isn't a new archetype itself a contradiction of terms? And it could very easily fall into the trap of merely renaming the old cards, updating them for our era but being worthless for any future era. I'm tempted to say, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it," but that just shows how conservative I am, I suppose...

skytwig	02 Apr 2003
I think deck designing has become somewhat like sonnet writing...the tight scrictures are the very thing that allows creativity to burst forth. from Richard's post Excellent point! Years ago, I forced myself to write 10 sonnets before I could write any more poetry. It took me about a month and a half. It was tough, but such a place of learning. I studied Keats and Shakespere and I learned!! There IS something magnificent about structure that forces the plazma to the surface; then the fire contained within those images ignites the sky in a way we may not have imagined without all that 'containment'. Plus there is the aspect of history in archetypes, as if they move through our (many) lives gathering moss and mildew and tales that have been told a thousand times, changing with each repetition. And isn't that where the growth is, isn't that where our current milleniom shows up? As I read Holmes musings, I pictured a Fool card with a Camaro traveling a winding Interstate and, yes, i felt sick. There IS something about telling the story again 'round another Sacred Fire..... I think, too, that the imagery catches a depth in us that we may not be consciously alert to. Do I believe that I have been around for many lives before.... yes. Is it true, i don't know. But, if it is true, then yes, those images are going to stir something deep in me. If i were a gypsy before, maybe many times before, and i held one of those original decks in my hands, you can bet something is gonna click!!! I am an eclectic reader. I can ' read' anything and do - i read bark, i read rocks, I read the movement of birds across the sky. But my preference is going to be an olde, olde deck of images that have been around for a century or two!!!

divinerguy	02 Apr 2003
I think it would be fun to read faces. Consider the subtle nuances of makeup, the wisdom of wrinkles, the profound depth of eyes, the unabashed sexuality of lips. A thousand details in each face, with each one changing with mood and fatigue and a million other factors. That would be fun. And no decks of cards to buy.

skytwig	02 Apr 2003
I read faces too.... and auras and the wind and the feather riding slowly to the ground like a kiss.....

rota	02 Apr 2003
The last 3 writers are saying that any set of phenomena can be read, and they're right, of course. Like the fall of shuffled cards, maybe some new set of phenomena peculiar to this odd new digital age will lend itself to interpretations beyond their physical facts. ...and it may even be that if there is to be a 'new tarot for a new age', it could be so different that we tarotholics might not even recognize a new tarot for what it is.

skytwig	02 Apr 2003
We olde gypsies read everything - tea leaves, candle wax, fire......

Richard	03 Apr 2003
Just as long as no one here reads animal entrails... But for me, Tarot is not really a method of fortune telling, but a psychological tool and meditational aid. I'm with Skytwig: tea leaves may be fine for certain things, but I don't think they can quite allow you to peer into your soul the way the Lovers next to the Ten of Swords can. The Fool in the Camaro made me laugh, but that's not too far off from the Rohrig Chariot, is it? The funny thing about all this is that I think if someone DID come up with a completely new and original Tarot with only a few, minor connections to previous decks, most of us here would reject it, and it would only be the next generation of Tarot readers who would embrace it...

skytwig	03 Apr 2003
You may find The Tarot Handbook, by Angeles Arrien, a good read. she uses the Thoth deck to determine opening of the spirit through psychological means.

The the tarot as old school testment. (almost like bible if you will) time for new tarot? thread was originally posted on 02 Apr 2003 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.