Clarifications on seeking meaning in Tarot imagery

Thread originally posted on the Aeclectic Tarot Forum on 14 Sep 2003, and now archived in the Forum Library.

gonkulator	14 Sep 2003
It was very clear from some of the responses I got to my first two posts that I did not have a good understanding of the history and evolution of the images portrayed in the Tarot card deck, and also was ignorant of the role of symbolism in the earliest decks in ranking the cards in the game of Tarot. I got myself some additional learnin' on these topics, and feel I can now pose my questions in a more meaningful way. My premise is that the symbols depicted on the Tarot trumps (in particular) have human meaning (whether or not the cards have any power of divination). The broad scope of my question is, "if these images are archetypal, and reveal basic meanings in human existence and conscousness, how do we understand and describe the power of those symbols?" The best site I found on Tarot history and intelligent discussion of Tarot imagery is: http://www.tarothermit.com/index.htm This gentleman ("Tom" I think) has prolific, well-researched, and very well written commentary on Tarot history. In my earlier posts I described the impact and power of the Tarot images as "crude" implying "lower level." This was not the best choice of words -- I did not mean "less sophisticated." What I was trying to get at is the archetypal level of impact, which should be the most base and core level of human conscousness -- part of what Jung theorized as the collective unconsciousness. If the Tarot images have impact at this level, and they sure seem to for many people myself included, then it is this phenomenon I wish to explore. I learned also in my research (not without a good helping of embarrassment) the very large deviation from previous images that was taken in creating the images of the Waite deck -- and yet much similarity maintained as well. It is almost as if the Waite deck spray paints a pastiche of oddly assorted occult imagery over the original archetypal symbols to further its own agenda. I had assumed the Waite deck (the only one I was previously familiar with) was much more true to the intent of the earlier images, which it is not. And, since I really enjoy Pamela Colman Smith's artwork, this was a disappointing realization. I have some specific topics to present from the general discussion above, and I will make them in separate posts...

HudsonGray	14 Sep 2003
"I had assumed the Waite deck (the only one I was previously familiar with) was much more true to the intent of the earlier images," The question, then, becomes -- which version of Tarot are you taking as the definitive one? The Marsailles types from the 14/1500's? The Thoth? Obviously not the RW. They all have their own 'world' build up around and in them (the cards), and they do overlap the others if you look backwards in time. So...your basic question is...? (Just for clarification's sake) If it's still "if these images are archetypal, and reveal basic meanings in human existence and conscousness, how do we understand and describe the power of those symbols?" That would, I think, depend entirely on what culture we currently live in. It's one thing to live in the middle ages, see one of the cards (Death for example) and see it literally, whereas in the year 2003 we see the Death card mutated to current times--not AS physical death, but as a basic changing of pathways from one thing to something new, a new direction, new options,new life. It no longer stands for physical death at a time when so many died before age 30. Each deck out on the market has the artist's own view of which symbols to use to get the basic meaning of the card across to the culture it's being presented to. That's what makes the South American/Mexican decks fascinating (their slant or 'take' on a card can be shifted enough to be rather strange at times), or why there's a wide variety of decks offered. Who are they connecting to? They connect enough to be published in the current world's market en masse.

Cerulean	15 Sep 2003
1. From what I am guessing, you are asking: --you are thinking of the 22 trumps as passages or stages along an archetypical journey --Jungian concepts --Fool's Journey or Hero's Journey analysis would be helpful --You like the Rider Waite deck The book that does this is Hazo Banzhaf's lavishly illustrated book. http://www.tarotpassages.com/journeybkdw.htm Twentieth century decks are not a bad place to start, because you are talking about a 20th century concept and want to look backward, broadly speaking. Rachel Pollack also has a far-reaching, modern and beautiful Illustrated Guide to the Tarot that touches on many different decks and the 'comparative' flavor. Her Forest of Souls book also has that slant, as well. 2. If at some point you enjoy a creative deck with a huge range of esoteric symbolism and can stand the art deco abstraction, the Crowley Thoth deck has many books and sites available that touch on Jungian archetypes. Hope that helps. Mari Hoshizaki

firemaiden	15 Sep 2003
Quote: Originally posted by gonkulator The broad scope of my question is, "if these images are archetypal, and reveal basic meanings in human existence and consciousness, how do we understand and describe the power of those symbols?" To this question, gonkulator, I would answer: any way you like. If you wish, we could get into a discussion about what is meaning... (but then I would have to leave, because that is one of the reasons I left graduate school in French literature... the "death of meaning"...) There is a sense in which the study of meaning, implies a search for deeper, hidden and therefore occult meanings, and this in turn implies that there is aways a secret... and beneath that secret another secret, which discloses another... until we finally reach the great untold truth, or... the holy grail, or the divine essense, or something. But if you remove belief in the divine essense, or belief in a 'plane above' from the equation, does the whole house of cards collapse, and leave you just looking at pretty pictures? I think not: it is what we personally seek from the cards that drives our search for meaning. If the purpose of reading is to invite spiritual growth, than we see in the tarot steps in the initiatory voyage of the spiritual quest. We may always look for and find, a spiritual interpretation for the images. But if we wish to access psychological depths, we may see illustrations of the id, the ego, the super and subconscious, and their connections... Jungian or Freudian, I am sure the cards will accomodate. If we wish to make money on the stock market, we will look for financial applications of the allegories of growth. (we'll have to ask a stockbroker). And so on. The possibilities are endless.

jmd	15 Sep 2003
HudsonGray and Mari_Hoshizaki and firemaiden make such wonderful posts! gonkulator's general comment that it is the impact of Tarot at its archetypal level which is sought in this discussion is such a wonderfully broad area. For the sake of cross-references, a fascinating thread, started by firemaiden (Of Tarot, Dilogun, and Incarnated Beings) also discusses the issue, and my first post in that thread also links to yet an earlier thread on a similar topic. Of interest is also a wonderful book by a Jungian psychologist, Irene Gad, titled Tarot and Individuation. A number of other books also address the Tarot from quite Jungian perspectives. Personally, I tend to find that the more I study the cards, the more I enter realms forever unfolding. This, to me, suggests more than Jungian-termed 'archetype'. It would be interesting to discuss this further...

The Clarifications on seeking meaning in Tarot imagery thread was originally posted on 14 Sep 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.