jungian tarot changes their meanings,

Thread originally posted on the Aeclectic Tarot Forum on 06 Aug 2002, and now archived in the Forum Library.

HOLMES	06 Aug 2002
the meanings of the minors card in the jungian tarot is greatly differnt from any other tarot i read (toth, and rider come to mind). the three of swords is idealism four of swords is imagination NINE IS SHARING and furthermore TEN IS GAIN THROUGH PARTNERSHIP while ten of cups is sorrow and pain. a reason given for the three of swords is neptune in libra a postive house of venus, it becomes a card of art, of poetry and refinement. it is the flowing neptune force flowing throuhg the swords. five of wands which he says has been changed from strife to assertivness, due to mars in aries it tolly changes the meaning. at the back of the companion book, he says aries is wands, cups is cancer, air is libra, and the root o eath is capricorn. (he says he did a modern tree of life ) and furthermore an number like ace is given a planet association so he makes t. aces=pluto twos= uranus threes=neptune fours=jupiter fives=mars sixes=sun sevens=venus eights=mercury nines=moon tens=saturn. that is how he says three of swords becomes neptune in libra the court cards are according to the placement of sun and moon in a natal hart so the kind of wands becomes sun in aries and moon in aries, while queen of wands is is sun in areis and moon in cance. this he says this systemtends to descrie more specifichuman qualities and perhapsmore human frailities then the idealized schemes of the past. king of wands, sun in aries, moon in aires queen sun same , moon in cancer prince of wands, sun same, mon in libra princess of ands, sun sam and moon in capricorn king of swords, sun in libra, and moon in aries, queen , sun same, moon in cancer i think you can see the pattern. no where is numberlogoy mentioned or colors, or nothng but astralogy, and psychology based on the astralogy. it is primilary a deck of medition and not of divineship yet it can be used as such. yet they must be included as the mandala on each card is set up for your subconcious to understand . and he says that tarotologist say the minors are more important to some then the majors or court cards due they are pure numbers under spirit forces, his major cards are opposites male and female forces in opposites (i even took my mother and father meanings from the emperor and emperess cards, ) example devil is the dark son, justice the mother who punishes, the sun the child, jugment the son who judges, the world, the dauher who hides her face, magician is just called son, and high preiest is called daugher, fool spirit an source. thus he says he majors are the varous overview of the human condition by realizing the various aspects of the male and female. the court card represents personalities(not people per se) and furthermor the minors show the behavoiors and activities of these personalities. he claims anyone who understand astralogy will understand these cards like that *snaps fingers* is it possble to change meanings so much ? i am refering to the minors and maybe the court cards ? for those of you who use astralogy, are these true meanings? and those of you who know numerlogy are these true numbers under spiritual influences.?

Laurel	06 Aug 2002
My personal opinion is that different decks can have extremely different meanings suggested by the authors and still be "right". But when that deck comes into my hands, I'm probably going to be using an amalgamation of traditional meanings, author-suggested meanings, and personal ideas and revelations. What's more, the question being asked, the spread, the querent, my own mood... all these factors are going to conjoin together to affect how I interpret a card. Laurel

Minderwiz	07 Aug 2002
Quote: Originally posted by Laurel My personal opinion is that different decks can have extremely different meanings suggested by the authors and still be "right". Laurel Yes, I have to agree that there is no such thing as 'the correct' deck. When someone designs a deck they put their own interpretations and beliefs into it. In this case the designer has used only the Cardinal signs, Aries, Libra, Capricorn and Cancer - which narrows the range of possible interpretations and also seems to have given the same weight to the generational planets, Uranus, Neptune and Pluto, as the rest. In terms of sign placements (as opposed to House placements) related to an individual few modern Astrologer would do this. But if he wants to and sees something in it then he can do this. Incidently Thoth treats the Three of Swords as Saturn in Libra, which gives it a harder and darker edge, Whereas A. T. Mann treats it as Uranus in Libra., more independant and unpredictable. I have doubts as to whether giving each card such a precise placement works, not all Tarot readers are interested in Astrology enough to tease out the placement meanings and those that are will know enough to use their own. Minderwiz

isthmus nekoi	08 Aug 2002
HOLMES, may I inquire as to who authored the deck?... As far as I know, Jung has not done much work w/tarot, although he did write about astrology and the I Ching...

HOLMES	08 Aug 2002
it was robert wang the person who also made the golden dawn tarot.

lupo138	10 Aug 2002
and who is Robert Wang ? was he living in the times of the Golden Dawn and a member there or is he contemporary with us ? I merely guess the second possibility. So he did a nice deck that he put a lot of interpretations in, that have nothing to do with "common/orthodox" tarot. I think that´s pretty ok, but I would not use the deck for myself for divination. :)

isthmus nekoi	15 Aug 2002
HOLMES, thanks for clearing that up! As for changing the meanings, I suppose it's all valid to a point. There are a number of decks that deviate from the 'standard' decks that I'm sure many ppl still find useful. Granted, I think there's something to be said about a tradition that's been distilled through time/space and still works in a myriad of contexts, cultures, epochs etc.

Brammetje	16 Apr 2003
wasn't Robert Wang a member of the Golden dawn? I greatly appreciate Robert Wang's Books and Imagery! Thank you Holmes for the nice background information... I will see to it that I get the book. Love, Brammie

lupo138	17 Apr 2003
I do not know. In " A History of the Occult Tarot" by Decker/Dummet he is not mentioned. As they claim to include the history until about 1970, I would say his work is later. Jung was a "pupil" of Freud and I think he did not start publishing somehow esoteric ideas until the 50ies or 60ies, so Wang must have been very young when he was accepted a member in the GD. Thank you for your reply, brammetje, and bright blessings !

HOLMES	26 May 2003
starting a jungain tarot study group with my intial thread as the overview (and it will have the background information for all the cards , and minors included, ) and others are to start a differnt thread for every card and which we can offer feedback example i just did the emperess card. so it would be ok for the person who wishes to join in to provide feedback in the jungain tarot emperess thread eh

Pagan X	11 May 2004
Robert Wang is contemporary to us, and worked with creating a deck within the Golden Dawn system. He also wrote a book about how Western Christians "raped" Jewish Mysticism, so it looks that here in the Jungian Tarot he has created a non-Jewish Tree... These attributions fit information in Agrippa's Occult Philosophy (with the exception of the first three planets and Saturn).This would make this deck more appropriate to some occultists than that of the Golden Dawn system. aces=pluto twos= uranus threes=neptune fours=jupiter fives=mars sixes=sun sevens=venus eights=mercury nines=moon tens=saturn.

Pagan X	11 May 2004
I consider myself pretty educated with respect to symbols, so can anyone tell me why there is a roast turkey on the Magus' table?

Vincent	12 May 2004
Quote: Originally posted by Pagan X I consider myself pretty educated with respect to symbols, so can anyone tell me why there is a roast turkey on the Magus' table? It symbolises the prospective buyer of this particular deck. Vincent

HOLMES	12 May 2004
for i havne't recieved my detailed book on its way here,, but i definatly dont' think it signifies that *walks off in a huff *

TemperanceAngel	12 May 2004
Quote: Originally posted by Vincent It symbolises the prospective buyer of this particular deck. So Vincent are you saying if you but this deck/book you are a turkey and if so, don't you think that maybe considered a bit personal and rude? XTAX

jmd	12 May 2004
Took me a while to try to figure out what may have been taken for a 'turkey'! The implement depicted is a standard representation of an alchemical tool, along with the pelican and double-pelican. It can be used for the distillation of various substances. In that sense, Vincent may in fact be far more accurate than he possibly realises... but in a more profound sense than surface reading. As the Alchemist as work, part of the task is to distill elements in order for their eventual transformations.

jmd	12 May 2004
PS, for those who do not have the deck, the card may be viewed on Mark Filipas's site.

TemperanceAngel	12 May 2004
Can someone explain it to me please I keep reading and trying to understand, but it's sinking in like an Anatomy and Physiology lesson...lol....turkey :confused: where?? Now when someone explains it to me, please do so in very easy terms so it sinks in for me...doh...XTAX *Is it just me...or does someone else not get it either????*

crystal cove	12 May 2004
Quote: Originally posted by TemperanceAngel Can someone explain it to me please I keep reading and trying to understand, but it's sinking in like an Anatomy and Physiology lesson...lol....turkey :confused: where?? Now when someone explains it to me, please do so in very easy terms so it sinks in for me...doh...XTAX *Is it just me...or does someone else not get it either????* It's not you. I wouldn't take the image for a turkey. Looks like flames, as in fire, to me.

Vincent	12 May 2004
Quote: Originally posted by TemperanceAngel So Vincent are you saying if you but this deck/book you are a turkey and if so, don't you think that maybe considered a bit personal and rude? XTAX No, I don't see it as personal, unless you are Robert Wang, or maybe Sallie Nichols. Rude, perhaps. It was a one-liner which maybe should have read; "It symbolises the prospective buyer of this particular deck from Robert Wang's perspective" Robert Wang, amongst a host of others, has sought to make a connection, between those two great new-age passions, Tarot and Jung. Jung, in his writings, had almost nothing to say about Tarot. So why the connection? Why not a connection between Tarot and 22 episodes of "Queer Eye for the Straight Guy"? Or has that already been done? Having said that, Robert Wang's book 'Qabalistic Tarot' is a reasonable read, if you don't try to take everything he says as gospel. Which, for me, makes The Jungian Tarot, seem even more like a cynical money-spinning exercise, because he does for the most part, know about Tarot. As to the question of what the turkey may *really* symbolise... who knows... make something up that suits you... after all, that is what Wang did. Vincent

Vincent	12 May 2004
Quote: Originally posted by jmd Took me a while to try to figure out what may have been taken for a 'turkey'! The implement depicted is a standard representation of an alchemical tool, along with the pelican and double-pelican. It can be used for the distillation of various substances. Yes, it is a retort, sometimes called the Philosophic Egg. Probably symbolising here, the start of the Great Work. Vincent

HOLMES	13 May 2004
well jungian archtypes like astrology , and numerology and qabbalah can be applied to the tarot to help us undertand it more. such is the universal nature of the tarot. and so robert wang saw this and made a deck of that as his theme. so i dont' see it as a money spinning excerce, turky symbolizes the magican cooking himself supper and looking after himself. :O) i disagree that wang made something up that suits him,, the same could be argued for waite, crowley (mr tzaddi is not the star himself). instead he added on to what was with his own knowledge like waite did (mr change the strenght and the justice numbers for reasons that suited himself ) and that is what every great tarot (and not so great we have to add ehhe ) creator does , take what is and added something new. otherwise they just mae a whole new system of understanding for the tarot without a basis , it wouldn't be a tarot anymore. the truth is for me he added on to the golden dawn meanings, which was the basis for the toth, and the waite. the differnece was adding in the new planets while keeping the old planets assocated with the qabbalah spheres (the decantes is a differnt matter and doesn't seem to incorpate them) i would equate robert wang with waite and crowley just that his decks hasnt' reached the mainstream,, but it may in 20 to 30 years,, it is still young having been published in the 90s. as for his qabalistic tarot , i am sure it could have some basis for the jungian tarot as it does use the spheres, and the paths,, but i would study the archtypal imagery book (which i don't have yet i have to admit i just have the handbook that came with the set when i first got the book/tarot set) ahh calling the turkey the great egg. eh ? since the turkey comes after the egg then the great work was done already eh ?

jmd	13 May 2004
As I have mentioned at various times in other threads, I do not value jungian thought as much as many do. To my way of thinking, he 'psychologises away' what are deeper spiritual 'truths'. Also, talking of archetypes in a jungian sense shifts the focus from the spiritual context or concept into 'mere' psychological pressure or disposition. Nonetheless, and irrespective as to whether Jung himself has had or has not had much to say on the Tarot (on which I have quoted in other threads), it is not a 'Jung' Tarot, but a 'jungian' Tarot. Ie, one based on some of the views which have been developed out of considerations of Jung's works, and specifically much of his Alchemical 'studies' (which are, of course, mis-directed from an alchemist's perspective). In that sense, it does indeed make sense to not only call the deck a jungian deck, but Wang does do an excellent job of re-creating a deck influenced by Tarot and by jungian thought. Wang, it should be remembered, also worked closely with Regardie in creating - or 're-creating' - the Golden Dawn deck, and both Regardie and himself were advocates of psycho-analysis, Regardie writing also on the matter. Strange as it may seem, I do not think that there was a purely mercenary motive behind creating this deck, but rather reflections (though of course his own) as to how the Tarot, GD & BOTA works, and, principally, jungian thought, could guide a deck design. Personally, I do not like the deck much at all. This, however, may also simply be because I find jungian thought relatively shallow. I suspect, however, that for myself the reasons are more general. Though Tarot may be connected to any other 'system' of thought in one's mind, to see Tarot through the coloured lenses of Alchemy, or jungian thought, or astrology, or GD considerations, or other yet to be postulated reflections, is to not look at Tarot as it is. If anything, I suspect that in 20 years' time this deck will be perceived more as the personal reflections of Wang as a late 20th century product of GD & jungian views. Nothing more. If any 'jungian' deck becomes more broadly available, it is far more likely to be one yet to be designed or published... but chances are, it will not be Tarot.

HOLMES	13 May 2004
that in order for it to be a more jungian tarot , it would have to be made by a person who has a degree in jungian psychology , as well as some experience counsellin in that matter. it is liken if i had made a deck called the numerology tarot based on my system , however since i only use numerology to assocate the cards with each other and not to interprate the cards themselves. it would be misname. perhaps it should be called wangs tarot.. but I still think it could be the jungian tarot for i am learning about psycology assocations with the tarot , in the astrology , and qabbalah (which we agree i think that are his assocations and a phd in transpersonal and jungian psycyhology would see things differnt for they wouldn't have the knowledge of the astrology, qabbalah in it.. ) (unless it{the professor, professional{ was a well studied in those areas as well and it could concievably come up looking like robert wang jungian tarot } i am curous as to what would in your opnion have to be changed to make it more jungian ?

Vincent	14 May 2004
Quote: Originally posted by jmd In that sense, it does indeed make sense to not only call the deck a jungian deck, but Wang does do an excellent job of re-creating a deck influenced by Tarot and by jungian thought. Why do you believe it to be an"excellent job" and what exactly is it a "recreation" of? And how do you see "Jungian thought", as distinct from the writings of Jung? Quote: Originally posted by jmd Wang, it should be remembered, also worked closely with Regardie in creating - or 're-creating' - the Golden Dawn deck, and both Regardie and himself were advocates of psycho-analysis, Regardie writing also on the matter. Then why not call it the 'Freudian Tarot', or the 'Psychoanalytical Tarot'? And even so, isn't it a bit of a crafty conflation to link Regardie and Wang in this manner. i.e. there was some sort of collaboration between Regardie and Wang for the Golden Dawn deck; both Regardie and Wang were interested in psychoanalysis; so therefore...? Also, the question remains as to why Jung or Jungian thought (whatever that might be) should have any link to Tarot, apart from the attractiveness, and therefore marketability, to new-age punters. How is this any more valid than the Crop Circle Tarot, the Alien Abduction Tarot or the Pilates American Idol South Beach Diet Tarot? Quote: Originally posted by jmd Strange as it may seem, I do not think that there was a purely mercenary motive behind creating this deck, but rather reflections (though of course his own) as to how the Tarot, GD & BOTA works, and, principally, jungian thought, could guide a deck design. Fair enough. This is where we probably disagree the most. And, if the person buying the deck is happy with their choice, I wish them well. Vincent

HOLMES	14 May 2004
in regards to the jung vs the jungian concepts, it can be liken to the jeet kune do , and jeet kun do concepts, the jeet kune do adheres to the system bruce taught, while the concepts take the general principles (and i suspect advanced concepts ) and apply them by incorpating new things,, which is what bruce would of wanted for his system to expand just based on my understanding of jeet kun doe which is very little. so i am sure jung would of wanted his own studies to advanced in the hands of those who understand, respect and wish to advance the writings concept themselves. after all, if tarot had stay strictly true to the marsielles we wouldn't have had the waite , the toth, the voyager, and yes the jungian tarot. and so it is with jungian thought, taking what is into a new direction.. sure some traditionalists may wish to stay true to the jung teachings,, but he is dead and so how can they advance ?

firemaiden	14 May 2004
Quote: Originally posted by Vincent Also, the question remains as to why Jung or Jungian thought (whatever that might be) should have any link to Tarot, apart from the attractiveness, and therefore marketability, to new-age punters. How is this any more valid than the Crop Circle Tarot, the Alien Abduction Tarot or the Pilates American Idol South Beach Diet Tarot? Crop Circles, Alien Abductions, Pilates, and the Fab five, do not directly relate to tarot or divination as far as I can see, although if you give me long enough, I could make a link up for you. However don't you think that the work Jung did on archetypes and symbols, synchronicity, etc, has a direct relation to divination? ? Is Jungian thought not at the very basis of intuitive image reading?

TemperanceAngel	15 May 2004
Vincent: the reason I posted as such was that your post sounded like you were saying that if you purchased the above mentioned then you were a turkey... twenty~one: thanks for letting me know it's not me that couldn't see the turkry, lol... I have to agree with firemaidens point about Jungs' work on archetypes and symbolism being linked with didvination, even if that is not the method you choose to use (and I know people who do..), surely his method or way of thinking needs to be acknowledged. XTAX

jmd	15 May 2004
I do think that to be frank (no... I'm not changing my name!), Vincent was having a bit of a dig at whoever decided to purchase Wang's jungian deck. In some ways, an element of our own responses was also a consequence of that: a defense for our own independence as to whether or not the deck will have merit, without needing to be a 'turkey', or mere 'game', for having done so. Why the deck remains properly better called a 'jungian Tarot' rather than 'freudian' or many other appelations is precisely because its creator used not Freud's main ideas, but aspects of Jung's and those who work along his ways of understanding the (psychological) world. If I saw another deck named 'jungian Tarot', I would expect it to have the following: have 78 cards, divided into five suits, four of which are somewhat related to the four elements, and the fifth (the 'Major Arcana') to depict many representations of quartered circles, as well as to some extent reflecting more traditional Tarot imagery. A freudian one, by contrast, would probably have many more 'darker' cards... as well as possibly numerous cigar-like objects (I do believe Freud enjoyed these). One of the social situations we face is also that many who have interests in Tarot also happen to have interests in Jung and jungian thoughts. It seems inevitable, then, that a deck which would seek to reflect these thoughts be created - with or without marketing in mind. I personally do agree that the deck, in its depiction, veers far from Tarot. In that sense, I personally would not recomment it to anyone wishing to deeply study Tarot. For myself, although I consider it important to create, and re-create anew, and experiment, and wear various lenses through which to seek to understand that which manifest, this deck just steps a little too far from what I personally consider important iconographic elements. When assessing and discerning a deck's merit, it is undoubtedly worthy to with-hold judgement initially to be able to make sense of what is being presented and assess its merits. The next step is also, in my opinion, to then discern its peculiar attempts and the particular individual views of its creator. Does the jungian deck meet the criteria which permits an additional step to be made for Tarot? in my opinion, no. It rather makes a step to the side, reflecting also a phase of understanding, much of which I suspect will be shed as jungian thought loses its lustre.

TemperanceAngel	15 May 2004
Quote: Originally posted by jmd I do think that to be frank (no... I'm not changing my name!), Vincent was having a bit of a dig at whoever decided to purchase Wang's jungian deck. In some ways, an element of our own responses was also a consequence of that: a defense for our own independence as to whether or not the deck will have merit, without needing to be a 'turkey', or mere 'game', for having done so. Except that I am not thinking of buying the deck. I think it was more of a defence mechanism because HOLMES is a really good friend of mine.... XTAX

HOLMES	15 May 2004
Quote: Originally posted by jmd I personally do agree that the deck, in its depiction, veers far from Tarot. In that sense, I personally would not recomment it to anyone wishing to deeply study Tarot. For myself, although I consider it important to create, and re-create anew, and experiment, and wear various lenses through which to seek to understand that which manifest, this deck just steps a little too far from what I personally consider important iconographic elements. When assessing and discerning a deck's merit, it is undoubtedly worthy to with-hold judgement initially to be able to make sense of what is being presented and assess its merits. The next step is also, in my opinion, to then discern its peculiar attempts and the particular individual views of its creator. Does the jungian deck meet the criteria which permits an additional step to be made for Tarot? in my opinion, no. It rather makes a step to the side, reflecting also a phase of understanding, much of which I suspect will be shed as jungian thought loses its lustre. hence the title jungian tarot changes their meanins as title of the thread however there isn't no extra card, no extra system to study , just a differnt allocation then golden dawn and waite associated with their onw tarot decks. i would agree that it wouldn't be what i would advise the beginner tarotist to study .. not until wang publishes a good minor arcana book which might be forthcoming as part two . it really is a good deck if one approaches it with no prejudgement. example after i told one of my best friend of the differnt meanings of the tarot deck they decided to trade it rather then study a whole new system in their eyes. which i tried to explained it wouldnt' be a whole new system just a chance in the minor arcana of a sort which colours some cards differntly . alas their decision was made. and it is good for why take on too much at one time. *walks away virgo like holding the ten of wands in his hand hmm *

jmd	15 May 2004
...and for what it's worth, Holmes, I thought the title of this thread quite appropriate to the wonderful discussions it may lead to. Your specific questions - which I admit I have only but indirectly addressed as I came in later in the thread - are well worth re-visiting. Specifically, you asked: is it possible to change the meanings of the pips and also possibly the courts so much ? are these, in terms of the astrology presented and internally linked, fair representations ? and, thirdly, are the numerological correspondences or meanings within the realms of traditional understanding ? Personally, I would have to reply both in the affirmative and the negative to each of these. It is possible for anyone to design a deck and represent what they wish to represent on the cards. The question which then needs to be asked is whether, in terms of Tarot - if a Tarot deck it is claimed to be - those representations are fair to the Tarot tradition or spiritual impulse: to the Ür-Tarot. With regards to the pips, this is also, of course, precisely where there are varying views as to the 'legitimacy' of the innovations in the Waite/Colman-Smith deck... though this is, and has been, a very sensitive subject! If I look through the jungian deck carefully (which I haven't for many years), then it may be that new insights about the Tarot may indeed emerge. Conversely, however, it may be that insights which may quite appropriately arise as a result of contemplating the spiritual underpinnings of Tarot are prevented as one instead focusses on the peculiar (and in this case more psychological) representations of the deck. Even the elemental, alchemical, and astrological depictions may, instead of deepening one's understanding of Tarot, lead one in directions away from it. This, of course, may be very useful indeed - for some individuals, it may be that at a particular time, the insights gained by non-Tarot decks, and the journeys it leads along, are also quite appropriate...

HOLMES	15 May 2004
Quote: Originally posted by jmd [b if i look through the jungian deck carefully (which i haven't for [i] many [/i] years), then it may be that new insights about the Tarot may indeed emerge. Conversely, however, it may be that insights which may quite appropriately arise as a result of contemplating the spiritual underpinnings of Tarot are prevented as one instead focusses on the peculiar (and in this case more psychological) representations of the deck. Even the elemental, alchemical, and astrological depictions may, instead of deepening one's understanding of Tarot, lead one in directions away from it. This, of course, may be very useful indeed - for some individuals, it may be that at a particular time, the insights gained by non-Tarot decks, and the journeys it leads along, are also quite appropriate... [/b] ok, let me see if i am understanding you correctly. the jungian tarot may stop someone from understanding the spiritual underpinnings of tarot itself as one focuses on the psychologial representations of this particular deck ? i would disagree in the sense that 1. the major arcana remian true to the major arcana of the tarot , just that the titles such as mother and father are given as subtitles to help remember and understand the psychology behind the title . yet i would agree. that it would take a person who would compare the two and see the universality and the differences between the two and learn (i am planning to do this with the soul tidings cards and the osho zen tarot ) 2. the astrology meanings behind the jungian tarot which changes the court cards and minor arcana could improve the standing of old standbys, and i have to admit there is more then just the astrology to the tarot as one could associates elemental world to the court cards and that would colour it further. 3. but that could only help us understand the possible card meanings further. but i agree that it is not standard golden dawn, waite or toth meanings. 4. for true tarot purists who say a system can't be used with the tarot as it is a stand alone system, then the differnces wouldnt' matter.. for they can still read it the way they wish . in arguement of the lead one away from the understanding of the tarot. i think a person then who compares the two , would gain a deeper understanding of the systems behind the tarot , real or implied (implied refering to those who think there are similarities but they are totally differnt ) 5. am i understanding then that in your view the jungian tarot is an oracle and not a true tarot for the changes in the minor arcana. and court cards ? half the tarot would fall into the that defination then. example would be those tarot that dont follow the waite or toth pips pictures and add something totally differnt would be no longer a tarot . yes ?

Vincent	17 May 2004
Quote: Originally posted by jmd Why the deck remains properly better called a 'jungian Tarot' rather than 'freudian' or many other appelations is precisely because its creator used not Freud's main ideas, but aspects of Jung's and those who work along his ways of understanding the (psychological) world. The suggestion of why it might be called the Freudian deck, (or Psychoanalytical deck) came in response to this conflation of Wang and Regardie; "Wang, it should be remembered, also worked closely with Regardie in creating - or 're-creating' - the Golden Dawn deck, and both Regardie and himself were advocates of psycho-analysis, Regardie writing also on the matter" It was not a question without context. Also, there is some question as to whether Wang's ideas about Jung have much to do with Jung at all, (let alone Tarot), apart from 'borrowing' the occasional sexy keyword. It would be interesting to resurrect Jung and ask him whether he recognised anything 'Jungian' in what passes, or sometimes masquerades, as current 'Jungian thought'. Quote: Originally posted by jmd A freudian one, by contrast, would probably have many more 'darker' cards... as well as possibly numerous cigar-like objects (I do believe Freud enjoyed these). Yes, but I don't think he was all that happy about enjoying them. Vincent

Vincent	17 May 2004
Quote: Originally posted by firemaiden Crop Circles, Alien Abductions, Pilates, and the Fab five, do not directly relate to tarot or divination as far as I can see, although if you give me long enough, I could make a link up for you. I suspect that a Tarot author is working on it as we speak. Quote: Originally posted by firemaiden However don't you think that the work Jung did on archetypes and symbols, synchronicity, etc, has a direct relation to divination? [/b] No, I don't. I am, however, willing to be convinced otherwise, if anyone can make the case. After all, I bought into the case of linking Tarot and Qabalah, and astrology. And this is what I believe to be the real problem here. Just because someone *can* link some paradigm to Tarot, it does not follow that they *should* link it. Of course, they will link Tarot to anything it is possible to link, because Tarot is a big money spinner in the New-Age market. As, of course, is Jung. But, you shouldn't just take my word that Jung and Tarot, have no real common ground, just as you shouldn't take Wang's or any other "Jungian thinkers'" assertion that it has. You need to read Jung, and then Wang, and see if *he* can make the case. I don't think he does. Quote: Originally posted by firemaiden Is Jungian thought not at the very basis of intuitive image reading? [/b] That might depend on exactly what you mean by "intuitive image reading", and also whether you can tie it convincingly to Jung, rather than "Jungian thought". Some people believe that Hitler based, in some part, his master-race theory, on Darwin's writings. At the time, there was a lot of thought about what became known as "Social Darwinism". What might be called "Darwinian thought". This doesn't mean that any of these theories had anything to do with what Darwin wrote, or that he would have agreed with any of them. Vincent

jmd	18 May 2004
Within Jung's own life, he is reported to have said he was not a 'jungian'... so I do take your point, Vincent. Hence also why I distinguished between Jung on the one hand, and jungian thought on the other. I also acknowledge that the comment about a Freudian deck arose out of my own mention of psychoanalysis. That, however, was not really the point... In terms of mercenary motives, there is undoubtedly much to commend a publisher for publishing a jungian inspired, and jungian named, deck. And it may even be that Wang's own motives were in part mercenary ones - unless we ask him, we shall not know. Of course, whether or not that is the case is not, in my view, important, and there would be nothing unbecoming about working on the design of a deck in which one believed was worthy of being designed, and hope that one gets financially remunerated for it. I suppose my comment related more to my view that I consider Wang to have been genuinely motivated by positive dispositions preconceived of the possibility of a jungian deck, rather than purely mercenary ones. I presume that, in order to have been favourably disposed to either Kabalistic or astrological considerations, part of your own reflections were on a specific deck - and presumably one which arises, and thus incorporates, the particular inclinations of the Golden Dawn. If such is the Case, then of course, those very Kabalistic and astrological considerations which you have now 'bought into' are more a reflection of the specific deck you use (I presume, reading between the lines, probably a WCS). The 'jungian connection', then, is precisely found in the jungian deck itself - and only very indirectly in decks generally, by those who wish to see the cards through 'jungian coloured lenses'. I should also note that I personally am in absolute agreement with your comment that 'just because someone can link some paradigm to Tarot, it does not follow that they should link it'... and have numerous times mentioned the same myself - and one of my arguments with the changes made by Wescott. The fine difficulties arise between the discernment which one needs to make as something is considered on its own merit, and the also very important anagogical reflections which occurs as one reflects on important iconography.

jmd	23 May 2004
I was a little hoping to avoid answering Holmes's last question, as any answer I may give - though only a reflection of my own personal current views - may certainly lead to possible strong reactions from others. But if that is to be, than it is to be... So, to return, Holmes asks (as his fifth point-question), whether I consider this deck not a true Tarot as the alterations to the deck are quite significant. My personal view is - to try to be succinct - that Tarot resides as universal or abstract, an impulse with particular form, iconography and structure. Any deck reflects this either proximally or distantly. Some decks further deviate and reflect this Ür-Tarot through the re-shaping lenses of another system or view. This deck, in my personal view, hence not only deviates significantly from what I consider to the the un-manifest Ür-Tarot, but also does so in ways which passes through the altering lenses of, particularly and specifically, jungian thought. In other words, this deck, though being influenced by the Tarot (and by jungian thought), is quite distantly located from the proximity to Tarot certain other decks (especially, but not solely, the Marseilles) find themselves. To return to the 'turkey' imagery, I thought the attachment would add a pleasant addition :)

The jungian tarot changes their meanings, thread was originally posted on 06 Aug 2002 in the Using Tarot Cards board, and is now archived in the Forum Library. Read the active threads in Using Tarot Cards, or read more archived threads.