Ten of Pentacles: the old man's cloak!

Thread originally posted on the Aeclectic Tarot Forum on 12 Jul 2003, and now archived in the Forum Library.

firemaiden	12 Jul 2003
A meeting with the Great Mimers in downtown New York City, a mutual visit to Morgana's Chamber, (the magical disappearing store), and Firemaiden emerges with her first Universal Waite deck to call her own. She likes it! (sorry, Diana). (It's all Mimers' fault) Heavens to Betsy!! Just look at that cloak, will you? I mean, the cloak on the old man in the ten of pentacles! What a cloak! Is it a cloak or a universe? What is that weird dog-monster pattern thingy in the middle? It looks a bit like my Cosmic Toaster, but I bet it's not. I also see berries and holly, strange I-Ching like patterns, tic-tac-toe grid things, moons and stars, grapes, odd planetary things, the moon eating the sun, (or is it a grape?). Heeeelp! Someone, is this supposed to mean something? (please say yes, now that I have gone to all the trouble to notice this!)

Trogon	12 Jul 2003
Hi Firemaiden! I have begun to feel that just about everything that appears in the images in the RWS Tarot decks (including the Universal Waite) have meaning and/or symbolism on at least some level. So, yes, I believe the cloak the old man is wearing does have significance. I can't remember where it was, but I remember reading a comparison between this cloak and Joseph's "coat of many colors"; Quote: 1 Now Jacob lived in the land where his father had sojourned, in the land of Canaan. 2 These are {the records of} the generations of Jacob. Joseph, when seventeen years of age, was pasturing the flock with his brothers while he was {still} a youth, along with the sons of Bilhah and the sons of Zilpah, his father's wives. And Joseph brought back a bad report about them to their father. 3 Now Israel loved Joseph more than all his sons, because he was the son of his old age; and he made him a varicolored tunic . 4 His brothers saw that their father loved him more than all his brothers; and {so} they hated him and could not speak to him on friendly terms. (from Genesis, chapt. 37, vs 1-4. New American Standard Bible - from http://www.biblestudytools.net/ ) How strong this connection is, I'm not certain. I suppose it might help if I could remember where I had read this. :| To me, this appears to be the cloth of his life. His prosperity and long life represented by the grape vines and grapes pictured on the cloak... basically it is made up of his experiences, knowledge, wisdom, etc. Thats my thought on it anyway.

Mimers	12 Jul 2003
My fault??? }) Well, I am going to start calling you, 'Firemaiden the Enabler'! LOL I left with a large Thoth deck, Golden Dawn Magical Tarot, and a book by James Wanless! I wanted so much to buy the Kaplan Encyclopedias they had there, but Firemaiden says, "well, think of all the decks you could buy if you don't buy these books". OK, back to the cloak. I read somewhere, and I can not remember where, that the old man is the King from a story that leaves for many years and comes back to his kingdom disguised and only the dogs recognize him. Maybe the cloak is a disguise? I don't know what all the symbolism means. Maybe if we had found the Tarot Symbolism book by Robert O'Neill yesterday, we could have looked it up ;) Mimers

firemaiden	12 Jul 2003
Cool, Trogon, Joseph's manicolored tunic. That could mean something. You are thinking of Odysseus, returning to Ithaca, Mimers, and recognized only by his dog. Specifically, does anyone recognise I-ching hexagrams on the cloak? and seriously, do you see that dog pattern thing? It looks a bit like the Queen of Cups' tabernacle thing.

Trogon	12 Jul 2003
You've got me stumped on the symbol thing in the middle of his back... I don't see any i ching hexagrams though. I gather you're referring to the geometric symbols such as the one by the nearest dog? I remember seeing something about them too somewhere... can't remember where though. :( Its got to be in one of my books somewhere...

firemaiden	12 Jul 2003
..well, they might not be hexagrams, but then again, they might be - I see patterns of lines and dots arranged in rectangles.

firemaiden	12 Jul 2003
Tell me, are these lines and dots something from the I-Ching?

Thirteen	12 Jul 2003
Quote: Originally posted by firemaiden Tell me, are these lines and dots something from the I-Ching? Nope. Not I-Ching. I-Ching would be much simpler--a triple row of plain, thin lines some which may have a gap in the middle. No nobs or squares at the ends. There would be a total of two such rows, top and bottom, for a total of six lines. I also doubt this cloak has to do with Joseph and his coat of many colors. Joseph's famous coat was given to him when he was a boy, and caused his brothers to hate and envy him (daddy's favoritism there). It ended up being ripped to pieces and bloodied as evidence that he'd been killed by a lion (he'd actually been sold into slavery). A very symbolic cloak to be sure--the many colors indicative of the rainbow and God's promise to mankind; also emblematic of Joseph's future as the ruler of all the tribes as well as his abilities to prophesize. But this is for a young man with a complex future, not an old man at the end of his life. And it is also a symbol of favoritism, lies, betrayal, sorrow and innocence lost. Again, not a cloak for our wise, content old man. The bits and pieces you've shown are far more similar to planetary and Zodiac symbols. As 9/Pentacles is gaining the comforts of the world, so this cloak of 10/Pentacles might symbolize gaining, well, the universe, spiritual wealth as well as material? Any chance of showing us the entire cloak?

firemaiden	13 Jul 2003
the entire cloak

Thirteen	13 Jul 2003
How lovely! Well, let's examine the obvious first: In conjunction with Pentacles, there's a lot of greenery. Leaves, flowers and especially grape clusters. These are emblematic of Earthly abundance and beauty. The grapes remind us of the grape clusters brought out of the land of Cannan, proof of the land's fucundity. A land of milk and honey and wine. Rich symbols for a rich cloak on a rich man. Next, let's look at the emblems that arguably resemble certain things. They're not so obvious and we might not absolutely agree on what they are--but we can agree on what they resemble, like clouds in the sky. The trio of red curves at the very center resembles, to me, the fan of a peacock, the crescents could be moons or horns. A peacock fan is, again, richness, wealth. If the crescents relate to horns that would connect to Taurus and/or Capricorn, the earth signs. Finally we have the real mystery symbols: the checkers and lines that you displayed eariler. One thing I can tell you, squares are an Eastern symbol for Earth. Another thing is that the "tree" of branching squares near the arm (you asked if this was the I-Ching) resembles the Qabalistic tree of life. And then we come to Alchemical symbols. While none of the emblems look like any particular alchemical symbol, they really resemble such symbols more strongly than just about anything else. If anything, they might be an alchemical "sentence" of emblems indicating, as all alchemy does, a transformation from one earthly substance to another. Beyond that, it might just be modern art ;)

Trogon	13 Jul 2003
Yes... that is the cloak that appears on the older Rider-Waite-Smith deck, though with more colors and shades of color... much prettier. One thing that comes to mind is the red crescent at the bottom of the "doggy-monster". To me it is reminiscent of the red-crescent of the middle east. This is equivelent (today) to our red-cross for medical and disaster relief. I wonder what it might have meant as a symbol before this? Or, as a symbol in other contexts? The symbol it cradles, appears to me to be some sort of structure. A temple? A castle? Darn it... I know I've seen a discussion of this somewhere before... where was it???? Aaaarrrrggghhhh!

Thirteen	13 Jul 2003
Looking at it again, it also occurs to me that the lower half (entirely green with most of the leaves and grape clusters) could be the back of a chair or low couch he's sitting on. It matches the cloak, but the cloak has more off-white and red. The black outline there curves up in a way that suggests a mahogony frame and the very bottom of the red crescent of the cloak seems to be partically hidden behind it. Also there are striations--here only we see a sketching of horizontal lines indicating that this part might be something different; not the cloak but perhaps the rich fabric at the back of an upholstered chair? Then again, some of the leaves pop out and cover what would be the upper frame of a chair. If a chair, then it has real leaves and grape clusters growing out of it! Looking at the original Waite card it's hard to tell (in the original, the cloak et al is entirely yellow and red). The old man certainly seems to be sitting on something.

Macavity	13 Jul 2003
(From memory) It put me in mind of the Hebrew letter Shin... but it isn't really that, is it? ;) Some of the decorations seem to be more medieval Heraldic than anything else. They look like the cadence(?) marks that are used to "difference" coats of arms on shields i.e. a "label" for first son, a crescent for second son etc. One senses that PCS (like me!) did some of these things from memory? :laugh: Macavity P.S. The squared-off "Robo-Dog" remided me of the artwork of Mid thru South America e.g. The "amazing" lid of the Palenque sarcophagus: http://wingedmammal.com/bat_stuff/lid_of_palenque.shtml :D

firemaiden	13 Jul 2003
Oh my! Macavity, I checked out those links. I see a ressemblance indeed. Spooooky!

firemaiden	16 Jul 2003
New thought. The old man is not Odysseus returning and recognized only by his dog... no the old man is Wotan in his disguise as the Wanderer! His is the cloak of the universe, and gives him the power of invisiblity. The two dogs are his hunting dogs. :) The doggy monster thingy is a W. It always struck me odd in the Ring to see God himself (Wotan) appearing in disguise as an old wandering beggar. If they only knew, if they only knew who was in their midst! I like this cloak, because it is all at once a sort of raggedy old patchwork looking thing, and a great magical object containing the entire universe. I like what thirteen said about the chair back. The cloak and the chair back almost blend into one, making me think again, that here is the cloak of invisibility, or at least of camouflage... A magician's cloak par excellence.

carrielynnsim	27 Jul 2003
Hmmm... I have been pondering your question, & now I have a question of my own... I use Robin Wood most often and I see a real big difference, why? In fact, because the cloak is all purple, I have always thought of him as wealthy, not someone disguised as a beggar. There are birds, which I thought meant peace. Any thoughts on this??

Thirteen	27 Jul 2003
I like the idea of him being Wotan in disguise with his hunting dogs. First, because Wotan is a very earthy God. Right for Pentacles. He's also the one who hung from the world tree in order to gain knowledge of the runes. That connects those leaves on his cloak to him. And, finally, because it would seem that he's been given this nice cloak and told to sit down and be comfortable. Invisible he may be, but as an old man in disguise, he's been welcomed by these rich folk, given a seat of honor. That follows with the meaning of 10/Pentacles, as having money to give away--and in giving that money away you gain something greater than the money could ever buy you. Like gifting a library or a hospital with a new wing--or being generous to an old man who turns out to be Wotan. It gains you immortality.

divinerguy	27 Jul 2003
Methinks we're reading as bit much into this card. I see him as a wealthy (the fancy coat) medieval (coats of arms) patriarch (family, dogs) who is enjoying life with his progeny and his favorite dogs. I kinda follow Thirteen, in that it could be just a fancy coat. When I hear hoofbeats, I first think of horses, not zebras.

firemaiden	28 Jul 2003
LOL Divinerguy, how can you ever read too much into a card?? what's the point of having them then, if you don't read into them?

divinerguy	28 Jul 2003
The point is, are we straining to find meanings which may not be there. Picture if you will, a dark haired woman, hurrying across the street, carrying a violin case. The range of inferences is endless. She could be an assassin for a Colombian drug lord, carrying a weapon to do in her target. Or, she could be on her way to her violin lesson. Or any one of a thousand other possibilities; a real life example of Schrodinger's Cat. There is simply not enough data in the card to suggest a firm conclusion. Accordingly, until other cards in the spread enlighten me, its just appears on the card - an old man who appears to like dogs.

firemaiden	28 Jul 2003
....hmmm...which may not be there? it is not the act of searching for meaning that creates it being there? We imbibe the cards with meaning by our thinking and delving, otherwise, they are just...cards.

divinerguy	28 Jul 2003
Firemaiden - a very good point, and ultimatekly, one with which I would agree. As for me, however, its just an old man.

Thirteen	28 Jul 2003
I actually have always though of the old man as the family patriarch, too, and not much more. However.... Playing Devil's advocate here: Quote: Originally posted by divinerguy Picture if you will, a dark haired woman, hurrying across the street, carrying a violin case. The range of inferences is endless. She could be an assassin for a Colombian drug lord, carrying a weapon to do in her target. Or, she could be on her way to her violin lesson. A smart observation, but I'm afraid the comparison is not apt. If there's a tree where lovers have carved their names, and it gets struck by lightening, you might say, "Oh, well, no one knows where lightening will strike." But if it happens in a book, you don't take it for granted, you take it as a sign that the relationship is in trouble--and likely the story will bear it out. Similarly, if we see a Western with a gunfight between a guy in a black hat and one in a white hat, we know the guy in the white hat is on the side of good, the black hat on the side of evil. Whereas, a real gunfight in the old west wouldn't be color corrdinated--nor its combatants purely good or bad. In real life, occam's razor applies. But ART is a completely different thing. In a painting a dove isn't a dove but a stand-in for Jesus or a symbol of Peace; an apple not an apple, but the fruit of knowledge. So too, even more so, in the artwork of Tarot cards. 10/Pentacles is not a photograph of a real family. We don't look at it and say, "There's grandad, there's mom and the kids...." The old man isn't JUST an old man--he's emblematic of the origin of the family's wealth, an archtype of wisdom and time, and he certainly could stand, as well, for mythic elders like Wotan or Saturn. Because, again, unlike real life, in Art, ALL these things could be true. In real life, our girl crossing the street has to be ONE and only one of those possible things you named. But in art there are layers upon layers, and all can be true. This is Art, not life.

carrielynnsim	28 Jul 2003
Thirteen, I must say that was brilliant. I have a question for you now. Because I have always thought the man was peaceful, wealthy, and kind... do you think some of my readings were wrong, or off the mark?? (Again, I use Robin Wood) Carrie

firemaiden	28 Jul 2003
Quote: Originally posted by divinerguy Firemaiden - a very good point, and ultimatekly, one with which I would agree. As for me, however, its just an old man. I prefer to think of him as a stealth God, a beggar who is God in disguise, wearing however, the cosmos on his back, so that we are clued into the secret. Only the dogs recognise their master. This way he symbolizes the spiritual richness that is there, close at hand, but not always recognised.

divinerguy	29 Jul 2003
Quote: Originally posted by Thirteen Similarly, if we see a Western with a gunfight between a guy in a black hat and one in a white hat, we know the guy in the white hat is on the side of good, the black hat on the side of evil. ... 10/Pentacles is not a photograph of a real family. We don't look at it and say, "There's grandad, there's mom and the kids...." The old man isn't JUST an old man--he's emblematic of the origin of the family's wealth, an archtype of wisdom and time, and he certainly could stand, as well, for mythic elders like Wotan or Saturn. ... Because, again, unlike real life, in Art, ALL these things could be true. In real life, our girl crossing the street has to be ONE and only one of those possible things you named. But in art there are layers upon layers, and all can be true. (edited for brevity) Let me preface this by saying that I have the deepest respect for you as a Tarot reader and student. However ... (other shoe dropping) ... One question for you. Who is the "we" in the conclusions above? Who says the 10 of Pents isn't just a picture of a real family? Why should we accept as a truism that good guys wear white hats, or any other symbolic reference? I'm not saying this to be mean or to boast. But I read cards differently. My reality and my truth are my own. Similarly, your reading style works for you, and all things being equal, I wouldn't dare suggest that your technique or methods better or worse than any other reader. About art I agree - all things can be true, but for different reasons. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, or the Tarot reader as the case may be - and that reader is me. I believe that minimalism in a Tarot reading is every bit as valid a reading method as some of the painfully tortured analyses in which we all engage in from time to time. I love the debate as to significance of an item in a particular context, but in reality, who is to say that any form of analysis is more "true" than another? When we start telling other people what to think, and what values are significant, we have tread upon the most fundamental of rights - the right to think.

firemaiden	29 Jul 2003
DG, I took Thirteen's " we" to mean, we, the general tv viewing public, and not any kind of imposition vis a vis tarot reading. I thinking Thirteen was simply saying that, as a member of the tv viewing public, I (we) (one) know(s) there are a bunch of movie conventions that filmakers exploit . (And some make hilarious fun of, as in Altman's " The Player" - I remember a full pan view onto a huge photograph of a snake on the wall, with ominous music, to parody the self-consciously telegraphed symbol: " UH oh, look out! here is a *SYMBOL* ) So, DG, if I understand you, you question the legitimacy (or necessity) of exploring the symbolism on the cards, especially with regards to reading tarot, is that right? So be it, understood. Let me be the first to say that none of this need implicate your, or anyone's way of reading. I must confess, my interest in dissecting these cards has nothing to do with reading. I don't even consider myself a reader of tarot. I am however, by training, a student of symbols, this is what brings me to the tarot in the first place. Who was it, Antonin Artaud? that said, in theater " tout signifie" -- everything signifies. That statement reflects the perspective that in Art, the artist is the Creator, a.k.a God, of his creation, so that everything he puts in his creation is some kind of choice, whether conscious, or unconscious. ( Alternatively, one might say it is simply a perspective which justifies the critics job. .:D :D Hey, its a hard job, but somebody's gotta do it.) Again, I think of the act of digging for gold, i.e. of delving into the possible symbolic meanings, as a creative act. In our dream interpretion threads, the famous "sometimes a cigar is just a cigar" is sometimes quoted, as a way of saying, perhaps, this dream doesn't mean anything at all. That would be too bad, because looking for connections between images and ideas is such wonderful fun. I think if we pursue this debate out as far as it would like to go, we will arrive at questions of the possiblity of Meaning with a capital 'M'. We might go from " tout signifie" to " rien ne signifie" - nothing means anything, there is no meaning, etc, which is where my university got to about the time I decided to call it quits -- the death of meaning. (a.k.a. the death of graduate students). For the purpose of reading the cards, I can see how one would need to take all of this with a large crystal of kosher sea salt. On the other hand, who knows, one day I might pull this card, see Waite's magical W signature, and think " Aha! Wotan! it means I am going to be cast as Brunhilde in Die Walküre!"

Macavity	29 Jul 2003
I think it's just interesting to explore the possibilities? I also suspect it's a useful exercise in a style of thinking, somewhat alien to some of us? I was (am?) one of those who DID think, when confronted with a pregnant empress: This signifies lack of... "family planning" - And NO more! :laugh: Doubtless it might be important in REALITY to know where to stop making ever more tenuous links and associations, but in the interim, enjoy? But I think the learning of historical(?) convention for symbolism is also quite fascinating, aside from any literal meaning. To bring a little constraint to some of the wilder ideas }) I did offer the following (shameless plug!): http://www.tarotforum.net/showthread.php?s=&threadid=16241 - My link to things Heraldic. I think (particularly) PCS uses quite a lot of those devices (sic) in her artwork but, one senses, as interpretations rather than in any literal correctness. As you were, chaps, Macavity P.S. There's that BIG ol' Waite on the (side of the) grail in the Ace of cups, which might have some Meaning? Aside: ISTR this was being discussed on another list, but can't remember the conclusions on that one... :D

divinerguy	29 Jul 2003
Quote: Originally posted by firemaiden So, DG, if I understand you, you question the legitimacy (or necessity) of exploring the symbolism on the cards, especially with regards to reading tarot, is that right? Nope - that's not it. Not at all. I do not question the legitimacy of symbolic analysis. I do it all the time. I agree with your statement that sometimes a cigar is just a cigar, and that searching for symbolic meaning is fun. However, a symbol need not always play a major role in a reading. If, as a reader, you choose to read differently, you can. There is no law or rule that says an element in a card MUST mean something. By automatically assuming that every symbol on every card in every draw -- must have significance in a reading, we are making assumptions based upon someone else's conclusions. Readers need to think for themselves. In your reading, Firemaiden, every element might very well mean something. But if it does mean something, it should be based upon your own decision that it means something, not based upon someone else's assumption that it does. Bottom line - Tarot readers need to decide for themselves what things mean, or what they don't mean.

firemaiden	30 Jul 2003
DG, did you perhaps miss this part of my previous post? Quote: So be it, understood. Let me be the first to say that none of this need implicate your, or anyone's way of reading. I must confess, my interest in disecting these cards has nothing to do with reading. I don't even consider myself a reader of tarot. I am however, by training, a student of symbols, this is what brings me to the tarot in the first place.

divinerguy	30 Jul 2003
I did not miss it.

Thirteen	30 Jul 2003
I think Firemaiden pretty well spoke for me, so now I'll speak for her. Quote: Originally posted by divinerguy Bottom line - Tarot readers need to decide for themselves what things mean, or what they don't mean. But I think they DO decide for themselves EVEN if they open a dictionary of symbolism and learn everything a Snake, for example, has historically symbolized in a dozen different cultures round the world--or, for that matter, what Waite or Crowley says it symbolizes in magic and the tarot. There will always be readers slavish to the books and written interpetations. But I think the best readers really do decide--and sometimes that decision is not undermined but assisted by this wider knowledge of symbolism. That said, I also agree that too much raw info can backfire and bog a reader down or make them uncertain. But sometimes you have to go through that stage as well on your way to mastering a thing. A stage where you know too much and have to learn how to discern, pare-down, choose and trust yourself. Most artists start out that way--musicians, painters, writers. They learn from others, copy those masters they most admire, accumulate info and incorporate it--then start discarding or re-interpeting until, somewhere in all this, they find their own voice and talent, their own way of interpeting (as Martin Luther, for example, re-interpeted the Bible after years of intense and minute study of it) and become, themselves, masters to be admired, learned from, and immulated. Quote: Originally posted by carrie I have always thought the man was peaceful, wealthy, and kind... do you think some of my readings were wrong, or off the mark?? Hm. Why would you think your readings wrong or off the mark? As I pointed out to DG, none of this discussion should lead you to doubt what you feel, only to see other ways of expressing it. The card doesn't, after all, have to have only one positive message. For example, now that I've been told about this Wotan idea, it occurs to me that this card could signal a very positive retirement. The old man who's wandered his whole life creating an empire can take a rest at a beautiful home with a beautiful family. A nice message for some hard-working businessman who's spent his life flying from place to place. He can rest and enjoy the fruits of his labor as well as the good he's done his family. And he will enjoy them, says this card. I wholly agree that 10/Pents is a pretty positive card.

The Ten of Pentacles: the old man's cloak! thread was originally posted on 12 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.