Elemental Correspondances

Thread originally posted on the Aeclectic Tarot Forum on 25 Jul 2003, and now archived in the Forum Library.

Butterfly	25 Jul 2003
I'd love to get the Nigel Jackson tarot, but I'm used to swords/air and wands/fire. I'm comfortable with these correspondances, they just feel right to me. I do understand the argument for the opposite corespondances. What I'm wondering is how do the correspondances attributed actually change a reading? Do the meanings change? Do they have a slightly different perspective. What influences does correspondances actually have on tarot? My point is not to argue which attribution is right, but rather- so what does it mean? What effect will different correspondances have?

firemaiden	25 Jul 2003
I think it's a great question, Butterfly, unfortunately, I can't answer it. :( All I can say, is, I have often wondered myself, in decks that use the attribution of fire to swords instead of to wands, does that mean I should read all the usual wands' meanings for the swords? and the traditional sword meanings for the wands??? I mean, after all since much of the meaning is sort of justified in someway by the number and its relationship to the element, you'd think that switching the elements would also require switching the meanings! Well??? dunno... all I can say is, it must surely be up to you. :)

Kissa	31 May 2004
Hi, I have the very same problem as Butterfly. I went thru my Nigel Jackson deck yesterday as it suddenly called me from a corner of my crowded bookshelf... It all went fine and i was really looking forward to doing a reading with it (the first one!) till i litterally froze as i understood what good'ol Nigel was up to: trying to ruin three and half years of intense (but fun) learning... Naughty man! As far as i know, he doesn't justify the switch. I read earlier threads about elements and suits and the switch makes sense, even if i have used the GD traditional fire=wands and air=swords until now. Yet it has always bugged me that the Fire can actually consume the Wands... But then again, passions consume us... Obviously, if i want to read with the NJ, i have to go with its system (including traditonal Marseilles naming and numbering BUT traditional GD scenic pips... the guy is really vicious ;) ). Is the wands=air a traditional attribution for the Marseilles type decks BTW? The pictures of the deck seem intuitive enough to make sense by themselves and the use of numerology might be of help too. I seriously WANT to read with a deck where the Fool walks with a CAT. It will take what it will take... another three and half years maybe?! Kissa

lunalafey	31 May 2004
I, for what ever the reason, payed no attention to the elements of my first deck. The correspondences where Sw/air Wd/fire. My second deck switched them. I aknowledged the elements then. Years later I discover that my deck is a 'switched' deck. I study the Wd/air Sw/fire aspects- they make sense- so did the other way around. Swords and Wands, to me, are very simular and maybe this helps me to be able to not get confussed- how do I do it? well- for starters, I have not really noticed any drastic differences in the traditional meanings of the individual cards. Take what is of the card, suit, number- etc. leave out the elements for a moments. See what is going on with the cards- OK this is a love Q? and the Knight of Swords is on the table... the deck assoc. with fire. We know that this guy can be a shady fellow- so perhaps this guy is going to burn whomever he's dating. If the deck assoc. with air, then I would see verbal abuse. Taking the consistant nature of tarot {not deck} meanings for each card- then use the element as a fine tune of the meaning within the spread.

lunalafey	31 May 2004
Quote: Originally posted by Kissa I seriously WANT to read with a deck where the Fool walks with a CAT. get "Tarot of the Cat People" ~meow~

jmd	31 May 2004
With regards to whether the Marseille deck 'traditionally' associates a particular element with a particular suit, there are various views. From my perspective, the suits are 'simply' the suits. To make elemental attributions is an extra step many of us often take, but not necessarily intrinsic to the suit. There are various traditions which have developed, the most two common being Swords with Fire, and Swords with Air. Likewise, by the way, with colour attributions and the four elements. When I was a young boy in the Parisian region, I was taught by my granparents (who also were interested in esoteric sciences) that Green is (like) river water, Blue the sky, Yellow the light-brown soils, and Red the flames of the candle. These are obviously different shades to the Blue one would use for Water, the Yellow one would use for Air, and the Green one would use for the (wood-)Land/earth. I mention this for various reasons, but basically that I often consider that much is in fact taken away from the deceptively 'simple' depiction of Sword as sword, which leaves to one's own further work its possible elemental attribution(s) - instead than Sword being depicted with a whole lot of associations drawn into the image of either wind or fiery imagery. Personally, I tend to often prefer Swords with fire. After all, fire was required in the extracting of the metal - in the separation of the metal from the Earth in order to bring it into its own. The very blade stings like fire for those unhappy enough to have experienced its bite... and then there is the reference in Genesis of the Garden of Eden's entry being protected by a 'flaming sword which turns everyway'. ...but, to each their own, as long as, to my mind, each reflects upon the suits as implements, rather than merely accept for themself the depiction as presumed by another artist, which they have properly determined to be their own prefered correlation. Or at least, that's my personal view :)

tmgrl2	31 May 2004
And in any given reading...a card can represent Air/Intelligence...even it is is a Pent minor, for example. Depends upon the card, the spread, the question....all the usual combination of elements in a reading. I am trying to trust what comes forward with a suit card, even when the first images and thoughts I have are not traditional. tmgrl

Rusty Neon	31 May 2004
Quote: Originally posted by jmd There are various traditions which have developed, the most two common being Swords with Fire, and Swords with Air. .... ...but, to each their own, as long as, to my mind, each reflects upon the suits as implements, rather than merely accept for themself the depiction as presumed by another artist, which they have properly determined to be their own prefered correlation. Or at least, that's my personal view :) I agree. In regards to the Marseilles, I'm tending to focus on the suits as implements. However, as far as I can recall, for what it's worth, in terms of elemental attributions, every French-language book written on the Marseilles deck in the 20th century I've seen matches Swords with Air, and Batons with Fire, if it makes elemental attributions. I haven't looked enough at pre-20th century books, though, to comment for pre-20th century.

oceanpoetry	31 May 2004
Butterfly, I have the NJ deck - I love the illustrations - and I personally prefer the association Swords/Fire and Wands/Air. Even though the elements are different than tradiitional RW, the meanings are essentially the same, so don't let this be an obstacle. It is a wonderful deck to work with!

Ravenswing	04 Jun 2004
Kissa-- that cat is something, isn't it?? I don't see it taking near three years to read 'em. Just shuffle up and dive in... This is a great deck-- it's my primary-of-the-moment. I really like the blend of the Marseilles-like pip arrangement towards the top and the RWS-ish illustration on the small cards. Jackson may say that the elements for sword/wand are switched, but this isn't reflected in the card's illustration-- except for the two Aces. And the bunches of birds in the background of lots of the wands. Those are the only 'reminders' I see. (Oh yes, the flames on the King and Queen of Swords...) But on the whole, the cards appear more or less the same as RWS; I don't see any drastic changes. fly well Raven

Mojo	04 Jun 2004
Quote: Originally posted by Butterfly What I'm wondering is how do the correspondances attributed actually change a reading? Do the meanings change? Do they have a slightly different perspective. What influences does correspondances actually have on tarot? Every time this topic comes up I ask the same question and no one ever answers it. Here is the question: Why does it matter? I have been reading Tarot for close to forty years now and I have never, ever been even tempted to talk about the elemental relationship of a suit. Can somebody please help me understand why this issue is so important to people? I'm assuming it must have something to do with meditation on the cards or some other esoteric use of the cards. Since I only read cards for others, I can't see where this information helps in the least. Can you give me an example of how you would use the elemental references in an actual reading. Maybe I've been missing out on something all these years.

Ravenswing	04 Jun 2004
Mojo-- I see your point here. It might be a matter of taste I think. Right now, elements seem to be a one-step-removed sort of thing to me. You've got a reading that's heavy on Cups. You say "Cups are Water. Water is emotional. and so..." N-oo. You say "Cups is emotional, and so..." You might start with the two-step method. But as we learn, we outgrow it. I'm learning piano. Three months ago I looked at a note, then I said to myself: "that's middle C", then I plunked my finger down on middle C. Now I look at a note and I plunk my finger down. The more you practice, the less you have to think. fly well Raven

The Elemental Correspondances thread was originally posted on 25 Jul 2003 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.