Are all decks created equal?

Thread originally posted on the Aeclectic Tarot Forum on 22 Sep 2004, and now archived in the Forum Library.

blackroseivy	22 Sep 2004
I find there are some similarities from deck to deck, but the differences seem to out-weigh these. Wondering how others see these differences, how they influence how one reads from deck to deck, etc. (Just now mentally comparing the Visconti-Sforza with, say, the fairy-sized Tarot Nova, both of which I own - that sorta thing!)

Mesara	22 Sep 2004
I think the differences between tarot decks is astounding, even when the pictures/symbolism are similar. For instance, I can only use my Russian tarot of St. Petersburg for intense, precise readings. It so far is the only deck that I trust to use for really inportant readings like yearly forcasts, destiny spreads, and pressing quesitons. The Thoth deck I use only for my own personal use; I don't do readings for anyone but myself with those cards. And I don't read them the same way as I do my others- The thoth for me is more like a dreamscape- meditations, thoughts, feelings, nothing precise or predictable. (hard to explain). My medieval scapini is different also. Again, its like im tapping into another plane of existence that is hard to put into words. Im not too experienced with this deck yet-ive only had it for a short while, but I can already sense a different vibe to it. I think each deck posesses a certain embodiment of something..( again-hard to put into words). I believe that different decks have different ways of "reaching out" to people. Some touch the intuitive parts of people, some try to reach us through the parts of our minds that appreciate logic and facts. While other decks lure us through their aesthetic qualities and speak more to us visually, others tap into the dark recesses of our minds and stimulate the "darker" parts of ourselves that give a more somber note to our readings.

jmd	23 Sep 2004
Mesara has already touched on ways in which not all decks are created 'equal'. There are other ways in which they are not equal. Some decks reflect tradition more so than others, some decks have brilliant artistic beauty, some decks incorporate the specific viewpoints of the various particular views of the creators, and some decks seek to fill a perceived market niche. Each each of these instances, they are not each equal. Then, and perhaps for myself, most importantly, is whether a deck reflects the essence or 'being' of Tarot - and in that, for me (of course) most decks using the title 'tarot' just fall short.

Le_Corsair	23 Sep 2004
But were they all endowed by their Creators with certain Inalienable rights? :D Bob :THERM

closrapexa	23 Sep 2004
It isn't a pleasant thing to say, but decks are different also if you compre the time taken to make each deck. Not to disparage modern deck creators, there are some fabulous decks out there; But you can see a difference between a deck like the Thoth, that was created in five years, and others that were created in a shorter amount of time. But on the opther hand, that doesn't make a deck easier to read with. The deck I read with the most is my Morgan-Greer, and I reserve my Thoth for readings for myself or meditation. So what it really boils down to is personal preference, I suppose.

blackroseivy	23 Sep 2004
Yeah... I was just wondering what the differences would be from say, the Stick Figure to the Ananda to the Visconti to the Giger... & so on & so forth, as far as how one reads them. I have my "toy" Tarot (the Tarot Nova micromini), which I use for myself & approach *very* differently than, say, the Visconti. If you were to take these two decks & read them for the same situation, I wonder how would they be similar & how would they differ? Just for an example.

Diana	23 Sep 2004
All decks are created equal. But some are more equal than others. And this is not a smart-ass answer, even if it LOOKS like one.

Thindelock	23 Sep 2004
Just one man's insight here: it seems to me that each deck has a different "feel," yes. But it also seems that whether or not that affects a given reading depends on the individual reader. I, for one, let the style of the deck influence the way I percieve each read. For example, I've asked the same question of RW, Stick Figure, and Vertigo. Compared to the answer that the RW gave me, the Stick Figure deck gave a slightly more upbeat reading that seemed stripped of ambiguity and frills... much like the cards themselves... but gave a similar answer overall. This makes perfect sense given the nature of the cards. The Vertigo deck, on the other hand, was more brutally honest, exposing more of my personal bias in the situation which I had originally not wanted to admit to myself (or anyone else). The Vertigo deck is beautifully done, but the artwork has a darker feel (without bordering into the truly dark like the Giger deck). The cards seem to want to pull you into awareness of the shadowy aspects of your question/situation/self, even if it means dragging you kicking and screaming. I know, however, that Umbrae on these boards would have a different opinion (not to speak for him, just to recount what I've observed). He has said before that he can get a brighter, lighter, happier reading out of a nominally dark deck (his example was Giger). So I suppose that whether or not a deck's style should influence your readings is a question of your personal style and outlook as a reader. Some prefer a bit more objectivity, some let the theme of the deck carry as much meaning as an individual card... it's all up to you. As for me, I let each deck fill a niche based on style. The bias-filters I'm putting up ("Vertigo is darker and therefore the reading will be darker/more austere") may block some interpretations of the readings, but it adds a depth that I find lacking otherwise. I go to each deck with different expectations based on my initial experiences with each. May not be the best way, but it's my way :)

blackroseivy	23 Sep 2004
...Yep, this sounds a *lot* like how *I* approach *my* decks. In my thread on the Giger, there was a lot of talk about "fluffy bunny", etc. Well, IMHO, if you go into using, just say, the Giger with that attitude, you may be missing something the cards have to tell you. I'm not saying that this attitude is *wrong* for those for whom it works; just that it (the deck) has its merits on its own with the attitudes & insights that the artist brought to the imagery. In other words, my approach is to more or less "channel" Giger while reading; how did *he* see the cards? & then bring my own views into it. I *couldn't* view that deck in a "fluffy bunny" manner; therefore, the readings are going to reflect however I *do* see them. There is another deck I see with a lot of intense gravity, & that's the Visconti deck. Its sheer antiquity makes me take it that much more seriously than, say, once again, my "toy deck". But that's not to sell the "toy deck" & the like short: they have a particular, down-to-earth yet "fairy" quality that always helps me to lighten up when I need it. My own insights, here... :D

The Are all decks created equal? thread was originally posted on 22 Sep 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.