Changes of Tarot Representation

Thread originally posted on the Aeclectic Tarot Forum on 18 May 2004, and now archived in the Forum Library.

mercenary30	18 May 2004
With the last auction that I won online I got a number of decks that I probably never would have considered individually. I got them as collection enhancement. I have gone through them and find that I am not particularly thrilled with some of them. It has made me wonder a little bit about tarot and the use of it. If the symbolism of tarot is such it is bothersome to some people, why is it that changing the name or the picture make it acceptable? Especially if the meaning is still the same. Different analogy of the same issue: That to me just seems like saying “fudge” as a cuss instead of just saying the right word. The intention is still to cuss. Saying “fudge” is better? Why? “Jiminey Cricket” was always used around me as a kid instead of using JC’s proper name. But I knew what it meant. That is better? Why? Any thoughts?

SongDeva	18 May 2004
I look at it the other way around. I don't feel the changes are simply just for the sake of change, but to speak to people who might interpret differently. For example, if I say blue, some will picture navy, some royal, some sky. If I'm a person who pictures sky, then when you show me navy, it's not just blue, but a deeper more serious blue. There are a gazillion different ways to get one message across, and I don't think one set of symbols from another time is gonna say to me what it said to the Visconti-Sforza family, at least not without alot of study (which I don't currently do). Then again, I read with so many decks, and frequently note a specific interpretation the deck gives me, or a specific cards picture, and how it *so* applies to the specific reading. This is great, and happens all the time.

mercenary30	18 May 2004
But the 13th arcana and the 15th arcana seem to cause a lot of issues for some. I have even heard of some fairs asking readers to pull those out of their deck for readings. As a person, if the symbology of tarot does not suit you at a personal level, why is it that pretending it is something else or that it is not there at all suddenly make it fine? In my life explorations I am finding the lack of truth to be a HUGE problem. Everywhere I look, I see plenty of evidence. Politics, religion, news, commercials all these things are so full of shadow and posturing and SPIN. The truth is nowhere to be found. I have found truth in tarot. I have found that many Eastern philosophies can guide the true seeker to the truth. It has opened my eyes to massive amount of untruths that surround me. Even in personal relationships I find huge amounts of untruth. I am discovering that the simple word and simple meaning of truth is the answer I have been seeking for a long time. Sorry for the soap box……

Imagemaker	18 May 2004
Now that you're seeing the untruths everywhere (indeed, it is), the next step is to look at the intent behind the untruth--usually it comes down to fear. Fear of losing (anything), being rejected, change. Realizing the underlying fear helps you deal with the situation, even dredge up some compassion for the fearful one. Tarot has no fear, it tells you straight out what IS and trusts you to deal with the truth however you can.

lark	18 May 2004
Quote: Originally posted by Imagemaker Now that you're seeing the untruths everywhere (indeed, it is), the next step is to look at the intent behind the untruth--usually it comes down to fear. Fear of losing (anything), being rejected, change. Realizing the underlying fear helps you deal with the situation, even dredge up some compassion for the fearful one. Tarot has no fear, it tells you straight out what IS and trusts you to deal with the truth however you can. Do you think then that people who change the image of a card are trying to mask the truth they don't want to see in it? I too am always irritated by decks thet change the titles or images of a card. I feel like they are trying to push their inability to face the truth of that card into my tarot experience. And I tend to let those decks sit on the shelf. Two deck I can think of right off hand are Wheel of Change and Wild Spirit.

mercenary30	18 May 2004
Robin Wood changed the Devil to show two people greedily pulling a chest in opposite directions. I really didn't have a problem with that plus it was still called the Devil. I actually like the Robin Wood deck and I understand the changes made and why. I also like the ShapeShifter, although it is far enough away as to almost not be a tarot. Those cards speak to me rather well. Even Thoth changes to me were a theoretical change, and I understood that (after reading his book). But those changes to me didn't seem like a "white wash". {Now I am wondering if I am being hypocritical... :) }

le pendu	18 May 2004
Hi Merc, I'm coming to look at all of the decks on an individual basis and to try to use the interpretations for that deck based on the creator's wishes. I'd like to create my own deck, so have been searching to find the "truest" meanings for the cards. I've come to the conclusion that there is no such thing. While it may be heresay to suggest it, I think anyone's interpretations of the cards are fundamentally as valid as anyone elses, including Waite's, Crowley's, et all. Especially if there is an understandable viewpoint/system underlying the meanings. If I look to the Visconti decks, there are no contemporary DMs available. Same for the TdM. We have Etteilla as a root interpration, and Papus, and Mathers, and the GD, and Waite and Crowley. So historically, people have been changing the meanings of the cards since the cards were given documented meanings. So I'm left with choosing one of the above systems or developing my own. Many deck creators seem to use one of the above systems and make alterations to suit their "world view' of the tarot. A good example of this is The Cosmic Tribe tarot, which is based on Crowley, but the author has chosen to change the meanings and interpretations of many of the cards. What am I to do? Try to reintegrate Crowley? And if so, why not reintegrate the GD? I've finally chosen to simply go with whatever meanings for the cards the creator has chosen, and try to gain insights out of that vision, without applying other systems on to it. As for "softening"... it is frustrating that cards like Death and The Tower are so often unacceptable to modern sensibilities. I'm often uncomfortable with "warm fuzzies". I wish we actually knew what the meanings of the cards meant (if anything) to the creator of the first tarot. And while Death is pretty obvious, the Tower is less so, and the Minor Arcana is completely up for grabs. It all comes down to interpretaion, both by the creator of any certain deck, and by the reader. But yes, I like my Death card to me death, my Lovers card to mean love, and Judgement to mean judgement. Edited to add: Actually, I like my Judgement to mean Eternity.. but that's another story. ; ) best, robert

tmgrl2	18 May 2004
Hey, merc...heavy discussion...I'm too new know where I'm going with this...but I was just PMing another newbie about this very topic...e.g. I'm not into LOTS of decks...I'm trying to work with RWS and TdM...and come up with some universals.. Before I started with TdM, e.g., the 3Swords in RWS meant "sorrow" or "pain"...at least in my very first encounter... Then it came up in a reading and while that element was there...when I looked at the card, my first thought was "a healing heart"....the three (since I have been looking at some numbers) ...was like mind, body, spirit to me, and the swords were intellect and I saw this as a person having to heal these three aspects of her life and using her intellect to understand ...but hurting in the process....that's kind of long-winded...then, I got the 3Swords meaning from Diana for TdM as 3 (Empress) and 3x3 (triple Empress) triple intellect and triple creativity... When I get death card, I think of Judith Viorst...she wrote a book a long time ago about all the "little deaths" we suffer in life... losing loved ones, children growing up, leaving parents, ending school, leaving home,.....life is a series of situations...like acts in a play...with beginnings and endings...and endings can be like "deaths" without being the big "D"....one's own or another's literal death...I'm not quite sure what you were saying about the Death and the Devil? ....The Devil can represent evil, but evil can also be "willful ignorance." Someone having choices between good and evil and choosing the "evil" aspect...we put our own chains around our necks... Am I making sense? I do find, however, that I don't want to order vast numbers of decks, especially decks that go far away from what I consider the older traditions...but Tarot has been and is evolving...The decks that travel too far from the older, more traditional sets...even Thoth with its titles under certain cards...are not for me...at least right now. I have this strong feeling I will be a RW and TdM person...and probably combine elements within myself that will emerge as I read...that's already happening...Even Camoin "added" back the "eagle's white egg" to the deck....while other TdM deck restorers argue this is viable. Change in decks will happen....I'm sure there are readers using traditional decks who have lots of experience...and that doesn't necessarily make them "better." As a "teacher" since that best fits what I do to some extent, I have found that when I mentor young people, there are some who "have it," and some who just "don't get it" no matter how much I try to help them, e.g. ,learn how to lovingly manage difficult behaviors in children. Now that I have had my usual running of the mouth...I know, because I value what you did by starting this thread, you will respond with honesty and we can maybe sort some things out here....it's a good thread. I may never like some decks certain people love...and that's ok. But those and more,newer decks, with more changes, are bound to come forward. How Tarot will evolve is anyone's guess. terri

tmgrl2	18 May 2004
PS, Merc....I agree with you...about JC...but life is filled with "euphemisms" that evolve from people needing to be more polite or politically correct depending upon the situation...If I had your children in school and every day they heard me say %@#*/ or #@#*/.....Whoah! Actually, when I lose my patience in school I have all sorts of things I say that are funny...but keep me from saying what I can't say there. Blatant honesty/truth doesn't mean we say..."What do you mean, How do I like your new shirt? It's ugly...and so are you...so ...." I have this discussion with children all the time, because they want to talk about why we use "white lies"....I tell them, we need to know our intentions when we speak to someone else...sometimes, in order to not hurt people, we have to weigh the words we use...and sometimes, we don't tell the blatant truth if it could destroy... If someone has an affair and it's over...does one tell the spouse to be honest or is the person really trying to salve their conscious? Sometimes, it depends on situation, questions, needs,..... how far we go to be "honest"...It is the motive that is important. I have had people give me feedback here online, that has lovingly nudged me to see the "error of my ways." I have also had online feedback that outright hurt...You have always been so kind and humorous in all your postings.. When you read, how do you handle those "difficult" cards? terri

mercenary30	18 May 2004
Quote: Originally posted by tmgrl2 PS, Merc....I agree with you...about JC...but life is filled with "euphemisms" that evolve from people needing to be more polite or politically correct depending upon the situation...If I had your children in school and every day they heard me say %@#*/ or #@#*/.....Whoah This is a perfect example of what I mean....(thank you tmgrl2 :) ) According to biblical translation that I was taught as a child, using the Lord's name in vain was a sin. Changing words to protect the ears of innocent children is not my concern, but when one changes the words because it is a sin then I would like to know who they think they are fooling. I guess I don't know what goes on in the head of the person saying it, but I know in my head, the substitution didn't work. Does this mean a sin didn't occur? Not that the answer here really matters, what matters is that inside of each person they know the truth to that answer. Quote: Originally posted by tmgrl2 When you read, how do you handle those "difficult" cards? I don't like pulling punches, but I would certainly try to soften the blow. But personally and philosophically, I do not have a problem with seeing those cards as they are a part of tarot. I guess the “white wash” comment I used earlier is more along what I mean about changing of the tarot cards. When a deck is almost exactly like RWS except there is not a Death card or Devil card, ”because we don’t like to talk about those things”, then my question becomes….then why do you use tarot cards?

tmgrl2	18 May 2004
We are 100% on the same page here, Merc...I agree with you and don't get me started on "sin." I went to all-Catholic girls hs and college...EEK! so my current definition of sin is...I'm not sure I believe in it....but as a child..ouch! I couldn't wear shiny shoes.. and I got hit with the ruler more than I care to remember. Sin for me now, would be a deliberate choice to either do something evil or hurtful or a deliberate ignorance when I could learn a better understanding of something...and I don't even know where I stand on heaven and hell....I think I believe we may go around more than once...and I want to do a good job this time of living as good/kind a life as I am able. I believe, too, that if I learn after-the-fact that I hurt someone, I am quick to say "I'm sorry, " if I believe I did something wrong knowingly...usually, it's not intentional for me, so I say "If you were hurt by what I said or did, I am so sorry that happened....I would never deliberately hurt someone." That's the truth. I don't use the word "sin" any more anyhow. I still remember challenging the tribunal from Rome when I had my annulment hearing and they asked me whether or not I would get married in the church and return to Mass...I said I really didn't know if I would or wouldn't...maybe..I got my annulment...(did it mostly to please my elderly mom) Quote: Not that the answer here really matters, what matters is that inside of each person they know the truth to that answer. I don't like pulling punches, but I would certainly try to soften the blow. But personally and philosophically, I do not have a problem with seeing those cards as they are a part of tarot. Here again, I agree, I actually think that without those cards, a whole piece of this thing called life and living would be missing. Quote: I guess the “white wash” comment I used earlier is more along what I mean about changing of the tarot cards. When a deck is almost exactly like RWS except there is not a Death card or Devil card, ”because we don’t like to talk about those things”, then my question becomes….then why do you use tarot cards? Couldn't agree with you more...It would be to me like leaving out a mother card and keeping a father card...or leaving out emotional aspects and keeping intellectual...There is a reason for the 78-card deck, for the 22 Majors and four suits of minors. I'm with you here... but still have to say...."whatever floats your boat..." If others wish to use decks that are minus some of these cards, fine for them...but not for me.... terri

punchinella	18 May 2004
Quote: Originally posted by mercenary30 In my life explorations I am finding the lack of truth to be a HUGE problem. Everywhere I look, I see plenty of evidence. Politics, religion, news, commercials all these things are so full of shadow and posturing and SPIN. The truth is nowhere to be found. I have found truth in tarot. I have found that many Eastern philosophies can guide the true seeker to the truth. It has opened my eyes to massive amount of untruths that surround me. Even in personal relationships I find huge amounts of untruth. I am discovering that the simple word and simple meaning of truth is the answer I have been seeking for a long time. Mercenary, are you sure you aren't on a Justice year??? :D Quote: Originally posted by robertmealing If I look to the Visconti decks, there are no contemporary DMs available. Same for the TdM . . . I wish we actually knew what the meanings of the cards meant (if anything) to the creator of the first tarot. --You know, I don't. I think this lack of explanatory material is largely what makes, of late, TdM my divinatory method of choice. I'm not bogged down with any predeterminations. The 'creator' having, to my knowledge, established nothing . . . all I have to study is the deck itself! (For divinatory purposes, that is . . . historical appreciation is another matter altogether :| )

MeeWah	18 May 2004
Mercenary30: I also see that Tarot represents truth; the spiritual, cosmic law truth. I also agree that Eastern philosophies tend to serve as guidance to truth. Perhaps because they stress a focus on the inner life of an individual; whereby one works on an inner level to attain self-knowledge, acquires self-responsibility & detachment from things figurative & literal. Western philosophies tend to focus on the exterior life & towards materiality (though that may be a personal perception). Perhaps what it all boils down to are actually two things--the seeking of truth & the intent with which one speaks or acts. Actions speak louder than words; words do not always. Hence, the discrepancies & dichotomies as evidenced by the myriad of activities in the world, whether in business, politics, medicine, education, etc more representative of the dilution or distortion of a concept. I do not see "sin" except for the sin of omission. What is seen as truth may be in the eye of the beholder, just as what constitutes beauty is in the perception of the beholder, subject to the finite which applies to us all. When one substitutes one word for another to protect the possible sensitivities of another, the intent is well meant. Sort of like covering certain parts of the human anatomy with a fig leaf. These, however, are all *learned* or *acquired* response mechanisms more than the result of a recognition of the sacred. Rather, the result of particular perceptions; possibly from ignorance & not necessarily of an intent to obscure or obstruct truth. Each deck creator is as anyone of us--of the individual standpoint subject to the accumulated assocations from which each contributes or interacts. Hence, what may be seen as "changes" wrought in any deck may merely be an expression of the particular creator's view of Tarot &/or understanding. That does not make the changes invalid or inappropriate but can offer another view not only more expressive of the creator's psyche/mind/creativity. Also contributes towards a wholistic picture for a broader understanding as Tarot encompasses layers or different levels of consciousness. Besides, virtually impossible to know the "original" Tarot. The study of each card, however, can lead to glimpses of the conceptual origin & its purity therein.

mercenary30	19 May 2004
Quote: Originally posted by lark Do you think then that people who change the image of a card are trying to mask the truth they don't want to see in it? Not in all cases, but in some it just seems silly to me. Like Robin Wood for example, a pagan based pack. They took out all the religious context including the devil as an entity. That, to me, is fair. They did not substitute some flowery meaning or picture to cover the change. The change was legitimate according to their own truth. That is cool. But in Connolly, they put in two totally different cards for death and the devil.......Transition for Death (which is a legitimate translation, I agree) and Materialism for the Devil (which is also a legitimate translation). All the rest of the religious references are there. Now you have a nice fluffy deck with no Death and no Devil. (Child safe :) ) Quote: Originally posted by MeeWah What is seen as truth may be in the eye of the beholder, just as what constitutes beauty is in the perception of the beholder, subject to the finite which applies to us all. When one substitutes one word for another to protect the possible sensitivities of another, the intent is well meant. Sort of like covering certain parts of the human anatomy with a fig leaf. These, however, are all *learned* or *acquired* response mechanisms more than the result of a recognition of the sacred. Rather, the result of particular perceptions; possibly from ignorance & not necessarily of an intent to obscure or obstruct truth. An interesting point; the only part I would like to take further here is the reference to the fig leaf and to ignorance vs. intent. I used that example earlier yesterday, about someone painting leaves over the nudity in the Sistine Chapel and calling it perfect. No, it is not perfect. It is edited, changed the meaning now totally obscured; similar yes, but not the same. How would we look at the Aztec and Incan societies today, if the conquistadors went and removed all blood and violence references off from all the buildings in South America? Would we recognize the amount of violence and blood sacrifice that occurred? History would show them as much kinder civilizations than we know them to have been, and it would be wrong. There is certainly something to be said for ignorance vs. intent, and that does fall right into the mix that I am concocting here. Many things are done in ignorance, and ignorance is specifically lack of knowledge, which can certainly prevent the finding of truth. That is how whole societies are kept that way, by shading or hiding the truth. Using the same technique used to protect children, against people who don’t know any better, to create ignorance. How is it done? History books; Translated Bibles; One sided news casting; all influenced by propaganda. One of the things most intriguing about tarot is the chance that for the most part it has not been changed too much, that is MIGHT be the same thing it was 500 years ago, just like the contents of some of the Egyptian tombs.

tmgrl2	19 May 2004
Merc and MeeWah I like very much what you have both said in your last posts...I dowloaded parts to remind me... For example, Meewah, referring to changes as an expression of the creator's view of Tarot and/or understanding... But, Merc, if ignorance is an underlying principle, then that, in itself offers some support to what MeeWah is saying..in other words, if I am reading your intents.....provided the creator of the deck has "enlightened purpose" and "creates with knowledge" as opposed to creating a deck with ignorance of some possibly critical background knowledge...then, of course, the purpose of that Tarot may not be faithfully manifested in the newer deck. terri

mercenary30	19 May 2004
I want to make sure it is understood that I am not saying that ignorace is the reason that changes are being made to modern tarot decks. What I AM saying is that changes being made now can cause FUTURE ignorance to the original meaning or intent of a card or a pack. A thousand years from now, jmd and Diana would be turning in their graves if the only surviving decks were Thoth or Connolly. (While the copies of ToM that they were buried with lie safe and sound, never to be discovered......)

tmgrl2	19 May 2004
Quote: Originally posted by mercenary30 I want to make sure it is understood that I am not saying that ignorace is the reason that changes are being made to modern tarot decks. What I AM saying is that changes being made now can cause FUTURE ignorance to the original meaning or intent of a card or a pack. A thousand years from now, jmd and Diana would be turning in their graves if the only surviving decks were Thoth or Connolly. (While the copies of ToM that they were buried with lie safe and sound, never to be discovered......) LOL...yes, they would. be turning over in their graves......I am saying that I agree with MeeWah that some changes may reflect a creator's view....but ignorance may come into play here at times... and that may unwittingly add to an evolution the strays from at least some basic underlying principles of Tarot. terri

Khatruman	19 May 2004
Quote: Originally posted by mercenary30 But the 13th arcana and the 15th arcana seem to cause a lot of issues for some. I have found truth in tarot. I have found that many Eastern philosophies can guide the true seeker to the truth. … I understand what you are saying about name changes that euphemize or otherwise attempt to sugar coat the message; however, it is not always for these reasons that "changes" are offered. For example, as Diana would tell you (were she not on hiatus), Trump 13 was originally un-named, not labeled "Death." Therefore, naming it death in the first place is a change in its "name." Secondly, you speak here of Eastern philosophies, which don't have the "Devil" that Judeo-Christian philosophies use. Therefore, a deck with an Eastern influence would be incorrect to use the label "Devil" for the 15th Trump. Same goes for pagan or Wiccan decks. Since the Judeo-Christian "Devil" is not present in the informing philosophy, keeping its name would be counterproductive. I always look at the intention for the change when a deck veers from the standard designations, especially for those two cards. If the change was given to illuminate a deeper meaning according to the decks informing philosophy, then the change is an improvement. If the change is done so as not to "scare" someone (or worse, eliminated--as in your example), then the intention is to hide something, to cloud something, and that can only weaken the whole system.

mercenary30	19 May 2004
Thank you Khatruman. You are dipping into portions of tarot history that I do not yet know, but have every intention to get to. In doing so, show that I am also ignorant of the changes in tarot, which is exactly my point. :D I still have much to learn......

le pendu	19 May 2004
Of course, assuming that the the TdM are based on the Visconti tarots or their system, NONE of the trumphs should be titled or numbered! And there were countless other changes to the iconography between the two, and many changes to the order before the TdM. If you include the Cary-Yale Viscontis, you have the addition of Faith, Hope and Charity as trumph cards as well. robert

MeeWah	19 May 2004
The English language has undergone many changes over time as the result of usage & socio-economic influences. Thus, some words have not only changed in spelling but also changed in meanings from their original. Consider also that much of the English language is actually borrowed from other languages--including from the ancient Sanskrit, Arabic, Latin, Greek; also German, French, Native American, etc. The antecedence of many words evident upon examination whilst others not as clear. Based on what Tarot represents--a body of knowledge whose true significance belies its images on paper--the possible dilution &/or distortion of the principles underlying Tarot (to which both Mercenary30 & tmgrl2 also referred) through continuing changes is inherent & may have occurred already. This need not imply a suspect intent to rewrite or revise history; nor of an opportunistic intent (though there is some evidence of the latter), but to generally be expressive of a natural creative instinct &/or an evolving human perception or consciousness. I am not very familiar with the Connolly, only that it was intended to represent a certain spirituality/theme & perhaps to address certain sensibilities, too. The assumption is that changes to the archetypal card symbols for death & the devil were instituted to support that theme & interest. On the one hand, the changes have encouraged an audience where there may otherwise not be; also pillorized opinions over the loss of integrity (to which Mercenary30 has pointed out). The Robin Wood has consistency. Its images adhere to a Pagan/nature-based theology well-supported throughout its card imagery (which Mercenary30 also pointed out). It popularity or effectiveness as a deck may be due to its adherence to its theme & also to the perceptions of its viewers. (I acquired it upon viewing a demo deck, based on imagery that resonated & with no prior knowledge of its theme.) The sustaining quality of any deck depends not only on the concepts expressed within it, but also on its continuing impact on its viewers & the value of that impact. Inherent within any change is the possibility of preservation, improvement (using this term loosely) or detriment; however, Tarot has an intrinsic essence that preserves its integrity--its truth self-sustaining.

punchinella	19 May 2004
Quote: Originally posted by robertmealing Of course, assuming that the the TdM are based on the Visconti tarots or their system, NONE of the trumphs should be titled or numbered! Oh! for Diana . . . (Diana, Diana . . . can you hear me calling ???)

mercenary30	20 May 2004
I do understand the reasons why people change the depictions and name when creating their own version. I am not going to knock personal interpretation in creation of a tarot pack. It serves a purpose both for the individual and for others who find themselves drawn to it or find better personal association with that interpretation. (I personally want to learn to read all three major types of tarot, ToM, RWS, Thoth) The reason that I bring this up is mostly for a different kind of concern. I am going to use a non tarot related examples to describe my concern. I work in the computer field and work with modern methods and techniques used to automate warehouse distributions. Computers can be programmed to accomplish math computations at many levels. In schools, calculators are allowed to be used by the students to do their math assignments. When I was in school, we were allowed to use calculators to do math work, but only after we were proficient at computing those formulas without any modern convenience. That no longer seems to be happening. Children in most American schools are taught many advanced math techniques at earlier ages, because they are no longer being taught the basics. They are taught short cuts and tricks and then allowed to use technology to do the rest. No long form division, or long drawn out algebraic formulas or complicated geometric proofs. Take away all the technology, and see if the people from that education system can still do what they were trained to do. Now let’s say Thoth tarot and RWS is the calculator version, and Tarot of Marseilles and its brethren are long form division. How long before the basics are no longer taught and available? Then what happens to the truth of tarot?

punchinella	20 May 2004
Aaah mercenary, so very much to respond to in that post! I'm being trained as a High-School teacher right now, & issues you raise are very much a concern in the field of pedagogy. The thing is, most of us doing the teaching (both teachers of kids, & teachers of teachers) learned the old-fashioned way, in an age before available computers . . . but the kids themselves live in an entirely different reality than ours was. They actually think differently than we do, being products of a different environment . . . & this is a difficult thing for us (the teachers) to accept & cope with. By allowing them to function in the way that is most natural to them (via the medium of technology) are we doing them a disservice, or merely accomodating inclinations roughly analogous to what left-handedness was in the 'real' old-days? --Realistically, are these kids ever going to have to function in an environment bereft of technological aid? If not, what use is learning to do so? Is this not simply a waste of their time? (They certainly believe it is . . . & on some level should instruction not respond to the students themselves? --Who are we to dictate what they learn, what they will do & be capable of in a future which is theirs, not ours, to shape & inhabit???) That being said, the thought of literature, of notebooks & pencils & mouldering old libraries being lost & replaced with computer modules makes me feel sick to the very pit of my being. I cannot imagine the old ways not being preserved . . . by a determined few, if by no one else. Looked at objectively, my desire to see everybody preserve these old ways is unfair & totally unrealistic . . . but the notion that somebody might take an interest & preserve them is, hopefully, not quite so absurd. I had never looked at tarot in this way before, but the parallel is certainly clear! New decks, & new systems (new wisdoms) serve new needs . . . which is fine, just so long as the old wisdoms are not lost & forgotten. The danger that they will be is I think what makes many people panic (& proselytize--a certain number of 'converts' being necessary to ensure continuation . . . ) New ways/wisdoms, being new, are not to my way of thinking in the same kind of danger as the old ways/wisdoms . . . & therefore don't require the same kind of passionate or obsessive attention, from those willing to profer it, that the old wisdoms do. :confused: Now how preachy was that!!!

Moonbow*	20 May 2004
Interesting thread My view is that the creators of modern decks use their own take on the meaning and hope that something in their own interpretation with gel with others. Each person, whether a deck creator or not, has their own personal identification with each card.. the Devil to some may mean being lead off the rails into temptation, or maybe to some kind of inner turmoil etc. The image that artist chooses to portray their own meaning for the card is obviously going to be the strongest for them. Like minded people will like the deck for the same reason - I don't think it makes the deck wrong or a cover up or soft option but its the way the creator wants to portray the meaning. But, having been introduced to Tarot through the RWS (clone) door, I found that I was lead to investigate the more historical decks for myself. I think that in doing this I have found a way to appreciate many decks, not just the pretty ones but some that I admit myself are not necessarily my taste in artwork. To me a big part of Tarot is not only the investigation of symbols and the artists depiction and thoughts, but also some of the history. There are times when I have scoured historical sources so much that I feel there is too much to learn, then I give myself a break and go to 'lighter' decks, and find I still enjoy them. I try to appreciate what the artist is accomplishing by listening to their views on Tarot and what caused them to decide on making their own, in the way they did it. As for the meanings of cards being altered, here again I like the digression, but if your worry is that some readers are not going to know the origins of the card - that can never be helped. If they are interested they will find their own way to the Tarot origins and investigate it for themselves.

tmgrl2	20 May 2004
Merc...I hear your concern....in school, here, however, (I work in grades K-12) the children still need to learn all the math without the calculator ...it is a tool for later when they need to do higher level problem solving in order to get the basic calculations done more quickly...but they still have to learn long division and math multiplication tables..they learn by rapping them outloud in some classes... Also, along same lines, they are now required in their state tests to not only solve higher level math but write a desription of their reasoning behind their solutions.... I remember when rental movies came out ...I thought the theaters were history...not so.. I also wondered if people would read hard cover books or paperbacks anymore once there were books on tape, and movies of books...book sales are booming...People seem to want to read it , see it, hear it...and then start all over again...In fact, I often go back and read the book a movie was based on... So, as I get older, and love all the new technology, I find that if something is lovely, ancient, tried and true, it doesn't fall by the wayside...I really believe that of Tarot, too. The traditions and history are too wonderful...it's an art form...When I stood in the Sistine Chapel....I was blown away...and I couldn't stay long enough in front of the Pieta, even though they had to put it behind protective shields... Some things are here for the long haul. I hope that even though "newer decks" come out, the older traditions and decks will stand the test of time and travel forward with the new. terri

hedgecub	22 May 2004
Eventually, the old always gives way to the new. As the world evolves and changes, the way we interact with the world must also change. This doesn't, however, mean that we necessarily forget the old ways. Humans have always been good at keeping records, even in the relatively mutable form of stories passed orally from one generation to the next. And now that we have relatively permanent methods of keeping 'snapshots' of various points in history, such as libraries and online databases, it's unlikely that anything we have now will be lost in the future. Also, it is now relatively easy to access information. Books are now published en masse and widely distributed. Internet access is reaching more and more people. If someone wants to research something from the past, a quick look on Google, a visit to the local library, and perhaps an order on Amazon will quickly provide the required information. I don't think people are likely to turn entirely away from the past and toward the future. Yes, most people will now use calculators instead of abacii, and fewer and fewer people are watching television and favouring divxes and online streaming media instead, but there are always going to be a significant minority of people who will retain an interest in the past. When it comes to tarot, I don't doubt that decks will continue to evolve and grow. People will continue to reinterpret older interpretations to suit their needs, and as the needs of the world changes, so will the decks. I don't think the original ideas will be lost, though. Just looking at the number of Marseilles decks that have been and continue to be published, and looking at the number of Visconti clones that exist should convince you that while many people prefer more modern decks (or indeed 'watered-down' politically correct decks), there are still plenty of people who are interested in where it all started.

Satori	23 May 2004
Just a few things out of the myriad of thoughts this thread inspires- Consider that for our society the act of creating something as esoteric, spiritual, and I might say yes, personal as a tarot deck would have been considered by the philosophers and mystics of yesteryear to be considered the height of hubris. Who are we, modern people, to dabble with what already is a perfect system? Merc, you are standing up now, clapping, saying yes, that is what I mean, right? Hang on, I'm not done yet... There is something very freeing for a modern person to be able to walk into a shop, and freely browse tarot decks without fear of incarceration or burning, and to choose one, take it home and begin the process of transformation. If there were only one or two decks to choose from, and they were all the same, same names and images and everything, how boring! Self-expression as we now experience it is a freedom hard won by our ancestors. I'm all for the variety of decks and names and meanings...I need all the help I can get transforming myself! LOL! We really don't know what the tarot is, what it meant to the creators, and what it might have done for them. We only know what it does for us and we embrace it because truth is truth and we who read tarot are seekers of truth. Warning: lots of questions ahead, not many answers.... Okay, so why mess with it? What if every deck, every interpretation of the tarot, every person's "spin" on what a certain card means at a certain moment in time is bringing all of us closer to the truth? I agree with a previous comment about intent, Mee Wah I think, if the intent is to understand, to learn and grow, and the meaning works, regardless of card name, then goddess bless, be on your way. The morass of card names, Devil, Chaos, Disorder, disks or plates or coins or pentacles or wands or sticks or swords or knives or spears or pointy thingys....yikes! Tower of Babel stuff....exactly. We all have our own language, our own symbol set, much of it is shared, cultural, and we need to honor and embrace it all. If a set of symbols, meanings words, doesn't work for me, that deck is unused, given away, honored and blessed and passed on to someone who will love it. So is the Tarot in danger of being overwhelmed by new names and new meanings? No more than it was when we received it those many years ago, with so little to guide us. We are in the process of creating Tarot for our world, and every deck has its place. There are decks I would never dream of buying, and yet they have found their way into the physical world, so they are here for a reason. Okay. That's my two cents. I don't think the Tarot Baby has been thrown out with the bathwater...and I don't even think what we are seeing is cloning gone awry. I think we are seeing spiritual development freely experienced. This is what it looks like when people are allowed to play with spirituality and to create what they are inspired to create. Isn't it beautiful?

tmgrl2	23 May 2004
Well said, elf, and welcome...I see 5 posts...do sign in as a new member.... Your words certainly resonated with me. I believe that we study the history and iconology for a purpose of its own, at least in part, but that separate from where we came from and where Tarot came from and what it meant "originally" to its creators, that anyone today who comes upon it as a tool for guidance can probably use a deck and come up with some amazingly intuitive and helpful information for oneself or a Querent. So, while the threads of the old and the new may mix, there may simply be an "evolved" cosmic spirituality or guidance that can be tapped into by those living in this time and space separate from any history one has learned. I enjoy learning, and so love to participate in discussions where I know our experts in history and iconology will add to my inner knowledge...I'm sure some of it becomes quite integrated with my inner guide. Other parts, probably don't resonate and never will...but there are many paths toward the same purpose. Therefore, I too, agree that as newer decks come forward, it doesn't mean that they are missing some elements necessary for the good "reader." But personally, I find the journey backwards quite enlightening and fun, as well. I may never delve into the study of Hebrew or the alphabet or astrology as I learn about the decks I own now...although I am finding some of the work with numbers and geometry fascinating. Being somewhat of a traditionalish by nature, I know that my two study lines together will probably be the Tarot de Marseille and the Rider Waite... terri

Satori	23 May 2004
Quote: Originally posted by tmgrl2 I enjoy learning, and so love to participate in discussions where I know our experts in history and iconology will add to my inner knowledge...I'm sure some of it becomes quite integrated with my inner guide. Other parts, probably don't resonate and never will...but there are many paths toward the same purpose. terri Right on! That's why I'm here, to learn! I think knowing where we come from is vital... This has been an amazing thread, and the posts have been so intelligent and thought out. My cup runneth over...

tmgrl2	23 May 2004
Search and read...you will soon become "addicted" to the vast library of stored knowledge and insight in the AT Forum threads. Welcome! This one re change is an excellent discussion. Thanks, again, Merc. terri

jmd	23 May 2004
A wonderful discussion indeed... to allow me to enter this wonderful discussion, I'll use one of elf's comments (with which I agree, by the way), and weave through some various considerations. Elf writes (four posts above) 'there are decks I would never dream of buying, and yet they have found their way into the physical world, so they are here for a reason'. Part of the considerations are the very 'reason(s)' they may be here. It could be, for example, that they reflect particular impulse, and have found their way into the world via the wonderful artistic hand of its human creators not to further the spiritually transformative and ascending aspects of Tarot, but to sow seeds of stagnation and confusion (I am not claiming that this is generally the case, by the way, quite the contrary). As an equivalent example, one may very well question the 'reason' behind the manifestation of Pokémon, or even, from my personal perspective, far worse, the 'tamagotchi' (I realise some have positive views of these things, by the way - the point being simply that just because there may be reason for something's manifestation does not make it a positive reason, except perhaps to develop discernment ;)). On the one hand, I stand with a foot in the camp which values and encourages the creation and re-designing of decks as an extremely valuable way by which to more deeply penetrate the 'being of Tarot'. On the other, I value very much the very precise structure and imagery it reflects. Where I suppose I disagree with many is in calling the Visconti deck a Tarot deck - though the close proximity is certainly worth noting. There are, in far earlier days as there are now, numerous decks, some of which are reflections of Tarot, some close cousins, some distant relatives, and some having only visual similarities. Images printed on cardboard are not sufficient to make the set a Tarot deck. Neither are images, though closely similar, painted or carved in relief on Cathedrals, themselves Tarot. For myself, this very discussion brings to absolute focus that so sensitive but also so important investigation into determining for oneself what Tarot actually is... Are titular changes acceptable (over and above translations from one language to another)? certainly - though there is always the indeterminacy of translation which will generate its own problems - witness various discussions on, for example, 'Bateleur' to 'Magician', and, within the French itself, 'Mat' & 'Fou', or even 'Papesse' and 'Pances'. Are re-ordering and re-numbering or cards acceptable? To my mind, no. One may very well point that some early cousins of Tarot, such as the non-78 card Visconti-Sforza and its cousins were un-numbered, or that variations did arise in early decks which are in many other ways similar to the Marseille (for example, the Hermit as XI). These, however, are, as stated, early variations, and the precision of Tarot may indeed be reflected in its ordering. This does not prevent one from making personal changes based on the numerous reflections one may have (of the two very popular decks which have done this, the Etteilla and the WCS are of course the most important and influential, the first for the 19th century, the second for the 20th). The changes remain, however, also problematic, in that an altered sequence masks or buries also possible reasons to be discovered as to why the sequence was as it was. For reading purposes, of course, the divinatory ability may indeed be unleashed by the imaginatory, inspirational and intuitive faculties being open. Whether cloud patterns, or the evocative imagery from Tarot or otherwise be used. Using Tarot, however, also catalyses, in my view, a transformative spiritual journey for its beholder - and for this, alterations may be as signposts twisted by adolescents which point in altered directions.

le pendu	23 May 2004
jmd, As always, I learn so much from your thoughtful messages. I understand that no one knows exactly who/where/when the tarot was created, but don't most authorities consider the Visconti decks as not only "Tarot Decks", but as the ancestors of all other tarot decks? Are you suggesting that only TdM decks and afterwards are truely tarot decks? Perhaps this discussion should be in the history section. robert

Satori	23 May 2004
Quote: [i] , alterations may be as signposts twisted by adolescents which point in altered directions. [/b] Whew! I am no tarot scholar, but this last line is pretty poetic dude! alterations may be as signposts twisted by adolescents which point in altered directions Ummm, obviously this isn't part of the discussion, so to that end let me say that I feel your passion and having said that want to ever so tentatively ask, as long as people are going about the business of deep thought, artistic expression and creating a new formula whereby to understand tarot, does it matter if things get tweaked? Don't you think the Ancients, the Universe, the Cosmic mind would want us to expand and grow and learn and tinker? Isn't it good to tinker? Isn't that what creates revolution, change, chaos....Enlightenment?

tmgrl2	23 May 2004
jmd, point well taken...I, too, like the comment about the signposts being turned .... In another thread I started today in Chat, I indicated that I went to a Pyschic Fair and that the reader (I gave a full description of the experience there but for purposes of this thread) did four quick draws of a tattered RW deck four cards, meditated, never mentioned any of the cards, quickly covered them with four more and did this four times...each time telling me what the four told her. When I asked later if the positions or the particular cards in any position or the spread itself carried particular direction for her, she answered that she "doesn't do spreads" because it's too much logic and she doesn't look at individual cards, just meditates and comes up with a few statements. Meanwhile, I am flipping out being quiet as she requested, seeing the 10 Pents come up three times and one draw of four Wands at once. I was reading for myself as she meditated, but it was too much energy to continue by the second drawing of four...she did the same thing with my question about Tarot at the end and drew eight cards, looked at them at once, and said I would be better off without using cards, and she saw me doing hospice work. Mimers suggested that perhaps she was a good psychic who really isn't a Tarot reader, but somehow she uses the cards. I can accept this since I felt she gave me some good spiritual guidance and she was on target. She also said I didn't need Tarot cards and I could read for her and anyone else in the room as well if not better than they. Why am I working so hard to understand card meanings, positions, decide on which decks and traditions are for me... And we were talking RW here...the room was full of readers elbow to elbow, with various size RW decks out...I love RW, but am also very interested in TdM as AT members know...but today left me confused to some extent....Is Umbrae right about the toothpicks? What do I make of today? Does it make any difference what "new" or "traditional" Tarot tool is used or if any is used at all...Does it all come down, eventually, to the reader's ability to channel? I might even have felt better if she had pulled out Merc's Robin Wood (is that right?) deck and gone to it, since I wouldn't have known what she was doing anyhow. As a person, I believe she uses her spiritual guidance well and for good, and that was what ultimately mattered.

tmgrl2	23 May 2004
I just wanted to add, I don't have anything against the Robin Wood deck...I have never seen it...I was just mentioning it since it came up as a newer deck....Whatever people choose to use, is their right and not my place to judge. I have some decks I own just because I love the look. I may read with them one day. I just feel a bit confused today, like Merc, with the questions about meanings being the same across decks and traditions. Obviously on any given reading, at least for myself, I notice sometimes a small element that I never noticed before in a card and up pops some meaning. So can one go with completely intuitive no matter the deck? Does one need any study at all? Some very gifted readers, have not "studied" the traditional meanings...and, I am sure, vice versa. terri

jmd	23 May 2004
Is Tarot principally about divination? toothpicks are indeed great for this. Is Tarot principally about a path of spiritual ascent? then why not work within the confines of a specific system, whether it be Kabbalah or the Catholic Church! Is Tarot about one's personal spiritual journey - which perhaps includes the other two? in many ways, I would suggest that it is - and of course here is where we return to the difficulties in whether and in what ways alterations within the deck are enlightening.

Satori	23 May 2004
Quote: Originally posted by jmd Is Tarot about one's personal spiritual journey - which perhaps includes the other two? in many ways, I would suggest that it is - and of course here is where we return to the difficulties in whether and in what ways alterations within the deck are enlightening. I would have to say I agree with you on this last part....I suppose some changes can detract from the message by being too hard to get...but that is personal taste isn't it? This whole topic fascinates me because I've never used the purist deck(s) you all refer to. In fact, I'm not up on the abbreviations for the decks at all. So here I am chiming in on this topic and I have only used decks that are the so-called wanna-bes. Except for maybe the Rider-Waite, and again I use the newly colored Universal RW. I like the pictures. I can't relate to a card covered in arrows. Not that I relate to a guy pierced by 10 swords, but hey, it speaks to me in a way I understand. "Don't play with knives..."

tmgrl2	24 May 2004
jmd, you guided me toward what I already know...I can't separate out nor should I, the elements within that led me to Tarot and to the decks I use. So, I do have a very strong Christian background...Catholic for all of my schooling till graduate school...but am leaning more toward a Christian philosophy....I have saved the website you posted: Meditations on the Tarot..Christian Hermeticism...going to spend some time with that and bought the book...by "anonymous" ........ I know that my path will include my basic inner beliefs many of which I have carried life-long. I have sorted through many of them as I have grown older and discarded what doesn't fit anymore. I also believe the Tarot will be a tool for me...and I must remember progress, not perfection. And, finally, there will be work I do in retirement that will not include Tarot, but will be with people....an extension spiritually of my lifelong career ....that is who I am...and that is what I must remember. So, Merc's question really leads us each down our own path...and we must know our intentions. ty terri

mercenary30	27 May 2004
Quote: Originally posted by jmd Are re-ordering and re-numbering or cards acceptable? To my mind, no. One may very well point that some early cousins of Tarot, such as the non-78 card Visconti-Sforza and its cousins were un-numbered, or that variations did arise in early decks which are in many other ways similar to the Marseille (for example, the Hermit as XI). These, however, are, as stated, early variations, and the precision of Tarot may indeed be reflected in its ordering. According to the book "Tarot of the Bohemians" by Papus, the order of the Major Arcana is indeed, very important. A good portion of the book goes into great detail on the formulas based in occult science as to how and why the majors are in the order they are in. (VIII is Justice and XI is Strength) Here is a online version of the book if someone were interested. http://www.sacred-texts.com/tarot/tob/ Now with that having been said, I am just beginning to explore Marseilles style decks and how to read them. I started off with RWS and clones and I relate to them very well. I have done some studies on Thoth. These studies and all the research I am doing is certainly helping me to understand the myriad of approaches that people have taken to understanding tarot. I really do appreciate studying it, but along the way I have made some personal decisions about what I prefer to see and how far away from the roots of tarot I am willing to explore before I decide the tangent becomes transformational. Those are the boundaries that inspired me to start this thread.

The Changes of Tarot Representation thread was originally posted on 18 May 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.