Elemental dignities

Thread originally posted on the Aeclectic Tarot Forum on 14 Apr 2004, and now archived in the Forum Library.

closrapexa	14 Apr 2004
What are they?

jema	14 Apr 2004
The short answer - a way to take into account what element the cards have and what elements are "friendly" or "unfriendly" and "passive" of "active" and how the cards with these different qualities relate to each other to change/reinforce the meanings in a spread. The good answer: Read this site:-) http://www.tarotmoon.com/articles/Elemental_Dignities/elemental_dignities.html

jmd	14 Apr 2004
I am surprised as to how 'catchy' the term has become... Basically, as mentioned by jema, elemental 'dignities' is looking at elemental attributions one may make to the cards, and seeing how they may relate to each other, is what is implied by those who prefer to use that technique. The problems associated with the method are varied. For one, there is an assumption as to which element is supposedly attributed to which suit - does Fire get attributed to Swords, as many prefer? or does Air, as many others also prefer? or does Water, as fewer seem to prefer, yet which also has an important following? or does Earth, again, a more minority view - but then, correctness is surely not to be judged simply by majority view!? Another aspect is that by using presumed elemental attributions, one may be lead away from more carefully looking into the card(s) at hand, and rather bring the associations assumed. As to the term 'dignity', it seems to have arisen from its rather more appropriate use in Astrology, in which certain planets (or their attributes) are described as 'dignified' (or otherwise) when in certain signs. In Tarot usage, it seems to have been introduced without, to my mind, paying due attention to the meaning of the term, but rather seems to have wafted in as a term well liked and, again to my eyes, misapplied. Another thread which also touched on the subject (and the subject of reversals), is Card reversals [...]. Our wonderfully differing views are what, in my opinion, makes Aeclectic the rich place it is :)

Macavity	14 Apr 2004
Can I recommend a google search on the phrase "elemental dignities"? I (now) find them (along with the broader concept of the related reading style) one of the most fascinating aspects of Tarot. As they say on the internet... YMMV ;) Macavity

Jenny-Li	23 Apr 2004
Quote: Originally posted by jmd The problems associated with the method are varied. For one, there is an assumption as to which element is supposedly attributed to which suit - does Fire get attributed to Swords, as many prefer? or does Air, as many others also prefer? or does Water, as fewer seem to prefer, yet which also has an important following? or does Earth, again, a more minority view - but then, correctness is surely not to be judged simply by majority view!? jmd - while I'm no experienced user or ED-reading style, it does appeal very much to me, to the small extent I've looked into it. I don't see the problem you describe - that will only be a problem if you necessarily look for "fixed", universal meanings. But if Swords are Fire to you, then you will read your dignities that way. I will read Wands as being Fire, since that is the way I'm comfortable with the elemental dignities. As often stated, not least on this forum, the magic isn't in the cards, or even in the pictures printed on them, but in our - the readers' - ability to make sense of, create meaning to the patterns the cards fall into when we lay them out. Thus - you and me both reading for the same querent with the same question, WILL have different answers. That doesn't have to mean either of us is wrong, just that we present different perspectives. (Or - do comparative readings with marseille-thoth-RWS based decks and you will get different readings too - even if you do them yourself!) Quote: Another aspect is that by using presumed elemental attributions, one may be lead away from more carefully looking into the card(s) at hand, and rather bring the associations assumed. That will always be the problem with unexperienced or unserious readers - it's hardly a problem with the reading method itself. If YOU don't dig out a standard meaning, then you don't - regardless of which method you use. That problem would rather relate back to how much time and effort the individual reader is prepared to put into his/her training to learn the tarot. My 2 cents in the matter... //Jenny :)

jmd	23 Apr 2004
There is no doubts at all that many find both elemental attributions and their respective affinities (or lack thereof) quite useful in providing a framework to assist in developing reading style(s) - and take the point both that this is useful, and that some already make elemental attributions. My 'concern' - for want of a better term - is twofold. On the one hand, it directs especially the beginner to make habitual and constant correlations between one suit and one element (whether it be Fire, Air, Water or Earth to any individual suit), rather than allowing for reflections on the suit independantly made of the four elements. On the other, it also makes suppositions about which elements are 'friendly' or in opposition to one another - and these are made, to my mind, again in rather fixed ways. It is as if what is encouraged is the fixity of both elemental attribution and presumed ways in which the elements relate to one another... Of course, and as I mentioned, many may find frameworks a support from which to more easily use the Tarot in various readings. And that I can see appeals to most of us...

Macavity	24 Apr 2004
Although I understand much of the criticism (often!) leveled against Elemental Dignities, I feel an important factor to consider is the overall context in which they are used. I don't really know whether the method itself pre-dates (especially) the Golden Dawn's "Opening of the Key" spread, but certainly in the latter context, Elemental Dignities form an integral part of a greater and indeed rather coherent whole. :) Implied problems with fixed elemental association, a diversion from studying the cards, are perhaps fair comment. But I suggest this is associated with use of dignities in small "spreads" with conventional reading techniques. (Aside: Even then I cannot really see dignities as any MORE limiting than e.g. fixed spread meaning or use of reversals? It might even be claimed that dignities push the reader more towards a holistic approach to the interaction between cards, more than either?) Dignities are often depicted as an alternative (inimicable?!?) towards reversals, but can naturally be used in parallel with any other method, simply to add further degrees of freedom to the reading. I feel the essence of Tarot concerns card selection to allow the "seeing of wood for the trees"? An (obvious!) way to select "relevant" cards is by dealing a subset of them into a spread. But another way is to leave ALL the cards potentially available (e.g. in the OOTK method) and allow the cards to self-select by the methods of "counting" and "pairing". There are thus many alternative "futures". Some might even suggest a more accurate reflection of life? Further and indeed complex associations can then be built up between cards by weighting them according to elemental assignments, and/or against some elemental background, as positionallly derived or implied by the subject matter of the question. I see fixed elemental assignments, not as evidence of inflexibility, but as merely the adoption of convention - Clearly something with inherent flexibility? That said, I do concede a degree of consistency might be desirable for the individual reader! But convention (whatever it's merit) does seem to be particularly important to the GD style of reading and is intimately bound up with the THOTH tarot itself. Indeed, if guidance is needed in these matters, one need hardly look further than the exhaustive "Liber 777" by Mr. Crowley himself! But then I do believe authenticity in reading style is important too - I have great faith e.g. in the designer(s) intentions in this respect... ;) A point not often emphasised is the modularity of these methods. The card elements and positions form an intrinsic "story" but additional meaning (derived from the images and... indeed convention?) is then added as a discrete process. This can be to ANY degree of complexity and perhaps (primarily) down to reader's abilities? But again, nothing need ever be lost! Rather than being unsuitable for beginners, the method is often cited as being particularly useful and especially encouraging. At a most basic level, a meaningful start might even be made with (shock horror!) a U.S. Games Little White Book meaning? But seriously, with a little journalling, any reading might be revisited at later dates and... improved. This might actually be more difficult with a conventional reading approach? Finally, a layered methodology also confers a degree of "deck independency" to the reading - One could (virtually) superimpose a completely different deck (with alternate meaning set) and see what happens... :D I think part of the cross to be born by elemental dignities, as with much of this, is that they are seen as "scientific" (a risky word here!) or indeed as vaguely... modern? }) Macavity P.S. In the last (sic) century (20th!) there was a U.K. TV series which followed the gently whimsical conversations between a group of Anglican clerics - Typically over a glass or TWO of Sherry? Perhaps somewhat reminiscant of Tarot... :P DEAN: "We must always strive to bring the Church into the 19th century!" CURATE: "Uhm, Don't you mean the 20th century, Dean?" BISHOP: "One century at a time, young man, One century at a time..."

The Elemental dignities thread was originally posted on 14 Apr 2004 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.