Are the images in RWS themselves interpretations?
Thread originally posted on the Aeclectic Tarot Forum on 24 Apr 2004, and now archived in the Forum Library.
| closrapexa |
24 Apr 2004 |
|
When I read in the RWS I read directly from the images themselves, but I'm beginning to wonder whether that in itself is not a false presumption.
I haven't reached the Marseille-style decks in the course of my studying, but when Dr. Waite decided to create his deck he interpreted the pips in the Marseille or Golden Dawn or whatever and formed his images.
Now, heavan knows I'm not a Marseille purist (not that there's anything wrong with that), because as I'll be the first to admit, I don't get them at all. But for those who do use them, isn't it right to say that they are the Tarot decks which, in the pips at least, have the least creator's interfererence and interpretation?
|
| jmd |
24 Apr 2004 |
|
In terms of closrapexa's question, it may be noteworthy to comment that the pips of Tarot probably arose from Mamluk decks - which only had pips and courts.
The four suits, then, depicted quite clearly and 'simply' - though there is much which can be reflected on in terms of is peculiar design and its mathematics - the number of items to be considered. In an equivalent fashion, our modern 'standard' playing cards depict in appropriate number the suit (for example, eight diamonds are depicted on the card we thus name).
Partly because of this, I would agree that a deck which depicts its pips as is done on, for example, either the Marseilles, the Visconti-Sforza - or indeed, myriad older and modern decks which do not scenically embellish its pips, have the 'least' interpretation already depicted.
Of course, it could be argued - as it has been done here and elsewhere - that even with scenic depictions the interpretation in the moment of reading is still quite open to the reader. Though I agree with this, it does make it somewhat difficult to 'see' a four of coins as, to give an example I once gave, a car with an engine within its main body (the Marseille depiction has four coins and a standard-type 'shield' at its centre).
|
| TemperanceAngel |
24 Apr 2004 |
|
I think it might be fair to say that Waite left Smith completely to her devices re: Minors. He had no pre-requisites that he wanted her to paint on the cards.
Pamela was known to be a psychic artist, meaning she channelled the images. Maybe not all of them, that we will never know for sure.
So the RWS Minors are Pamelas artistic interpretations of the cards and perhaps some of the interpretations were channelled in.
I think it is true to say the images themselves can be interpretations, but not for everyone and not always. If one wanted to look at the RWS Minors from a surface level then hey sure you could use the images.
For me, I think if you want to look at the Minors a bit deeper or a lot deeper, then the images don't neccessarily play any part in the interpretations.
XTAX
|
The Are the images in RWS themselves interpretations? thread was originally posted on 24 Apr 2004 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.
|
