Can one deck be better than another? (split from RWS to TdM thread)

Thread originally posted on the Aeclectic Tarot Forum on 09 Jan 2005, and now archived in the Forum Library.

Rusty Neon	09 Jan 2005
"Going from RWS to Marseilles decks" to my mind should not in any way be construed as going on to something better. Using the RWS and its scenic pips vs. using antique tarots (e.g., Marseilles and Soprafino decks) with their non-scenic pips are like consuming apples vs. consuming oranges, different expressions of fruit. An apple isn't better than an orange, nor vice versa. As mentioned in the "A Discussion about using RW meaning in a TdM throw" thread on the Let's Marseille subforum, it's ironic and interesting to note that there is more tradition to the use of cartomantic meanings for the pips than there is for the use of a number/suit or number/suit/non-scenic characteristics approach to the pips. The latter approach would appear to have into documented use only with Paul Marteau's book circa 1930s (and possibly Joseph Maxwell's book, late 1800s). Cartomatic approaches to pips go back further in time than the latter approach; anyone back further in time who would have used a tarot deck for divination would likely have used cartomancy meanings for the pips. http://www.tarotforum.net/showthread.php?t=34398 For the record, my approach to the TdM pips is number/suit, number/suit/non-scenic characterics, and number/non-scenic characteristics. However, I am of the view that such approach isn't necessarily "better", "more correct", etc. than an approach to the TdM pips using cartomancy meanings. There is nothing to support that there is some expressly-inserted esoteric meaning in non-scenic layouts of the pip cards of the various antique tarot decks; yet it's certainly interesting to use relatively-modern-day aproaches such as number/suit/non-scenic characteristics to derive meaning from those layouts. :)

Moongold	09 Jan 2005
Rusty Neon wrote: "Going from RWS to Marseilles decks" to my mind should not in any way be construed as going on to something better. Using the RWS and its scenic pips vs. using antique tarots (e.g., Marseilles and Soprafino decks) with their non-scenic pips are like consuming apples vs. consuming oranges, different expressions of fruit. An apple isn't better than an orange, nor vice versa. I agree with you, Rusty Neon. I have evolved to an interest in the Marseille. I could not have learned it as a new Tarot student. At this stage of my Tarot life Iam very interested in it however. I just bought the Fey deck on Fiday evening and am delighted with this. Also love the Ancient Egyptian and finding new levels of comfort and interest in the Universal Waite.

firemaiden	09 Jan 2005
Rusty Neon wrote: "Going from RWS to Marseilles decks" to my mind should not in any way be construed as going on to something better. Using the RWS and its scenic pips vs. using antique tarots (e.g., Marseilles and Soprafino decks) with their non-scenic pips are like consuming apples vs. consuming oranges, different expressions of fruit. An apple isn't better than an orange, nor vice versa. I do like oranges better than apples...for some things, and some do consider the Marseille to be "better" than other decks. The question is, better, how? in what way better? better for what? Differences in taste are sometimes an expression of differing criteria: For example: apples are better than oranges for pie.... oranges are better than apples for quenching thirst. Some claim that the Marseille is better at being a historical deck. I think this is irrefutable :D Some claim that the Marseille is better for developing one's intuition, because of the non-scenic pips. You'll have to try both approaches and see. Why is it that people don't go back once they switch? If it happens to me, I'll see if I can put it into words.

firemaiden	09 Jan 2005
Rusty Neon wrote: For the record, my approach to the TdM pips is number/suit, number/suit/non-scenic characterics, and number/non-scenic characteristics. However, I am of the view that such approach isn't necessarily "better", "more correct", etc. than an approach to the TdM pips using cartomancy meanings. There is nothing to support that there is some expressly-inserted esoteric meaning in non-scenic layouts of the pip cards of the various antique tarot decks; yet it's certainly interesting to use relatively-modern-day aproaches such as number/suit/non-scenic characteristics to derive meaning from those layouts. :) So far, I have indeed been finding this approach to be "better". (Better how, Firemaiden? Better according to what criteria?) (So glad you asked) It is better for me, because... because ... because... well, for starters, it is more fun! it allows for all kinds of x-rated interpretations of the swords cards -- just ask jmd: you can pull the three of swords and you don't have to tell your client: "you will suffer misery and gloom, heartbreak, abandonment and emotional torture" -- no! you can say "tomorrow there will be a penetration of the vecisa pisces by the sword" and wink smugly. ... if you read jmd's thread on the three of swords, you will understand. With the RWS, as soon as you turn over the three of swords with its triply penetrated heart and the rain, you know, if you don't talk about misery betrayal heartbeak and abandonment, you are holding something back, you are avoiding the issue, you are refusing to face the truth... and there is a nagging little voice that will plague you all day repeating that... Yes, the Marseille is definitely "better", if just for this one card alone, because it is more flexible, and more potentially positive. (But don't try to tear me away from my collection of relatively RWS-based decks with pretty pictures. I love the artwork, and I love reading from images, and they are much better for this, so there :D)

jumptothemoonyea	09 Jan 2005
firemaiden wrote: The question is, better, how? in what way better? better for what? I have just received my copy of 'Ancient Tarots of Marseille' and can try to answer this question. My favorite deck is Thoth, also sometimes I use RWS. What strikes me first in 'Ancient Tarots of Marseille' is complete absence of emotions attached to the cards. Almost complete. In accordance with the early middle age's rule restricting the emotional expressions in the painted art. For example please look at the 3 of swords in Thoth or RWS and in the 'Ancient Tarots of Marseille'. Deep black sorrow of 3s in Thoth and stubbed heart of RWS compared to pleasant, emotionless, light feeling of 3s from Marseille. Which is emotionally not different from 2,4,5 etcetera. Detached purity of this deck brings force the core of tarot without any emotional layers, which are subjective by the nature. (still like the thoth, though :))

firemaiden	09 Jan 2005
jumptothemoonyea wrote: I have just received my copy of 'Ancient Tarots of Marseille' and can try to answer this question. My favorite deck is Thoth, also sometimes I use RWS. What strikes me first in 'Ancient Tarots of Marseille' is complete absence of emotions attached to the cards. Almost complete. In accordance with the early middle age's rule restricting the emotional expressions in the painted art. For example please look at the 3 of swords in Thoth or RWS and in the 'Ancient Tarots of Marseille'. Deep black sorrow of 3s in Thoth and stubbed heart of RWS compared to pleasant, emotionless, light feeling of 3s from Marseille. Which is emotionally not different from 2,4,5 etcetera. Detached purity of this deck brings force the core of tarot without any emotional layers, which are subjective by the nature. (still like the thoth, though :)) ah, yes, jumtothemoonyea, how beautifully expressed. It is something I was trying to find the words for -- and you have put it so clearly.

Moongold	09 Jan 2005
I dunno whether III Swords is such a good example to illustrate that point, Firemaiden :). It depends on the context of the reading and how you deliver the message, The appearance of III Swords could be very witty and I've seen it as such. I must also say now that I do find it hard to take that red heart seriously. We have an organization here called Sacred Heart Mission. Their web site includes a pulsating red heart dripping elegant drops of blood. It's not meant to be funny but it is and it has completely tarnished the RWS III Swords for me now. :D I nearly always see melodrama in it. More to the point, the art of reading includes, often, the choice of deck and spread for the situation. I trust that I would be guided in this as well, and choose the right deck for the right job and that if the bleeding heart did come up I would know what to do with it.

Vincent	11 Jan 2005
firemaiden wrote: just ask jmd: you can pull the three of swords and you don't have to tell your client: "you will suffer misery and gloom, heartbreak, abandonment and emotional torture" -- no! you can say "tomorrow there will be a penetration of the vecisa pisces by the sword" and wink smugly. ... if you read jmd's thread on the three of swords, you will understand. You don't have to say either of those things. In fact, some Tarot afficionados will encourage you to make something up on the spot. Some might even encourage you to write a journal so that you can retroactively alter the meaning. Which accounts for such remarks as "Ive often seen the Three of Swords mean irritable bowel syndrome". firemaiden wrote: With the RWS, as soon as you turn over the three of swords with its triply penetrated heart and the rain, you know, if you don't talk about misery betrayal heartbeak and abandonment, you are holding something back, you are avoiding the issue, you are refusing to face the truth... and there is a nagging little voice that will plague you all day repeating that... If someone believed that the above were the only meaning (and lots of people do), then it would show they have a largely superficial understanding of what Waite is trying to convey. The design on Waite's Three of Swords is there to illustrate the divinatory meaning of the card. Waite describes them thus; The common divinatory meanings which will be given in the third part are largely arbitrary attributions, or the product of secondary and uninstructed intuition; or, at the very most, they belong to the subject on a lower plane, apart from the original intention. If a reader were to use only the divinatory meanings, which are apparently formed from a combination of Etteilla, Court de Gebelin and Papus, amongst others, then they are missing the point of the deck. In short, tying oneself to the divinatory meaning, rather than the symbolic meaning, of Waite's cards, is a reflection of how poorly one understands the deck, rather than a reflection of any perceived limitation of the RWS. Here we have a deck that was created with the express intention of conveying specific occult dogma. It is basically a pictorial representation of the Qabalistic Tree of Life, yet most 'students' cannot get past the LWB divinatory meanings. Meanings which the author himself describes as 'arbitrary'. firemaiden wrote: Yes, the Marseille is definitely "better", if just for this one card alone, because it is more flexible, and more potentially positive. It depends on what you mean by 'better'. It certainly isn't better for exploring the occult ideas that Waite wished to convey, is it? And that really is what the Waite deck is about, just as the Thoth is about exploring Crowley's ideas. And, if you wish to tell someones fortune by assigning arbitrary meanings, and/or projecting one's own fantasies onto cards, then how is any deck better than any other. Blank cards would suit that purpose equally well. What you have is a choice between a deck of cards created by a master occultist and symbologist, for the express purpose of expounding his particular ideas, and an earlier (a quality much beloved by those who believe that 'older is better') deck possibly created for some unknown occult purpose, but most likely created for playing a tarocchi-like game. It has become the fashion lately to attribute all sorts of meanings and systems to the Marseilles, (ironically a lot of these come from Waite himself), and presumably this is what you mean when you say it is "more flexible", but these seem to be the results of wishful thinking and retroactive attribution, rather than anything that was originally intrinsic to the deck. It is possible some evidence may turn up, but until then its 'flexibility' is as great as the imagination allows. So you have two different tools for two different jobs. How is one better than another? It's like asking if a hammer is better than a screwdriver... it depends on whether you have a nail. firemaiden wrote: (But don't try to tear me away from my collection of relatively RWS-based decks with pretty pictures. I love the artwork, and I love reading from images, and they are much better for this, so there :D) I like them too, they both have pros and cons, but obviously my deck is better than your deck. Vincent

tarobones	14 Jan 2005
I am new to these forums. I have loved and studied and grown with the Universal Waite deck colored by HansonRoberts. I find it to be much improved over the various other RWS decks. Anyway, I also have several Marseilles decks. These discussions of "my deck is better than your deck" reminds me of "my dad can beat up your dad" which was an endless game when I was a kid among the boys of the neighborhood. Ultimately, the discussions are meaningless. All Tarot is sacred, as far as I am concerned. And the diversity in the tarot community *should* create tolerance and mutual appreciation rather than all the picky wrangling. It's tedious. I too found the RWS 3 of Swords to be enormously graphic, gripping. I heard someone once say that the "airy swords" and the fleshy heart interpenetrated that way seem to speak of a deep integration of the personality. Intriguing. I love the endless variations of color, shape, movement, and high energy of the Marseilles pips. In many ways they remind me of Celtic knotwork.......intense spiritual energies, splashes of color. And the sacredness of number and correspondences to the Majors...........ah well.........I'm talking too much. I love BOTH RWS and Marseilles traditions. For me the only "better" is Tarot is BETTER than No-Tarot. So there. Peace and blessings to all. Michael

firemaiden	14 Jan 2005
Hi tarotbones, welcome to the forum. Yes, the "my deck is better than your deck" thingy was tongue and cheek... we were only playing. Actually, the whole point I was trying to make is that "better" is always about criteria. Better why? Better how? (see my earlier post)

Rusty Neon	15 Jan 2005
tarobones wrote: All Tarot is sacred, as far as I am concerned. And the diversity in the tarot community *should* create tolerance and mutual appreciation rather than all the picky wrangling. It's tedious. Well said, tarobones! We should focus on Unity in Diversity in tarot.

Diana	15 Jan 2005
Rusty Neon wrote: Well said, tarobones! We should focus on Unity in Diversity in tarot. Is that a Royal "we"? And if not, why SHOULD "we"? Personally, Diversity in Tarot is not particularly appealing to me. So why "should" I focus on it if it doesn't appeal to me? I know some people who never listen to anything but Classical music. Why should they not if that is what speaks to their soul? Should I drag them off to a Speed-Metal concert and hurt their poor ears in the name of "diversity" in music?

Fudugazi	15 Jan 2005
Diana wrote: Should I drag them off to a Speed-Metal concert and hurt their poor ears in the name of "diversity" in music? God forbid! (my poor ears) But I would say that the classical music lover, or the speed-metal lover (whatever that is) should respect - in words and deeds - the existence and the validity of each other's choice. No-one can make you like or use RWS - so be it. Some people will never want to use the Tarot de Marseille, so be it too. This thread is about those people who started in one tradition (RWS) and are curious to discover the other (without, necessarily, discarding the first). Given that I have myself engaged down that path of discovery (without the wish or the intention of confining myself to the Tarot de Marseille), I am interested in how other people do it. I am very attracted to the TdM- not least because I love history and the Middle Ages. I also am absolutely drawn to those symbols - so direct - on the cards. But I have felt the impact of symbol in other decks, and in the Mythic deck, I feel the impact of both symbol and myth. What I am finding, is that my study of Marseille (or rather the attention I pay to the cards in the tarot de Marseille) is helping me in my reading of other decks, which I didn't expect.

Anna	20 Jan 2005
Rusty Neon wrote: Using the RWS and its scenic pips vs. using antique tarots (e.g., Marseilles and Soprafino decks) with their non-scenic pips are like consuming apples vs. consuming oranges, different expressions of fruit. An apple isn't better than an orange, nor vice versa. I keep coming back to this point about oranges and apples, in mind there is a "yes, but" when I think about it. And today, on the bus journey home from work, I finnaly clicked why! Its because they are not both fruit!! Asking "which Tarot Tradition is better, Marseilles or RWS?" Is just like asking, "which kind of fruit is better, apples or apple pie?" The question can't be answered because it dosn't make sense. Apple pie is a delicious desert. Just because it contains apples, dosn't make it fruit. It began as fruit, but its not fruit anymore. In the process of baking, it became a desert. And to me its the same with Tarot. Modern decks, such as RWS, are based upon the Tarot. They contain Tarot certainly. But in the process of baking, other ingredients have been added and they have become something else. They aren't Tarot anymore. I would call them Oracles that have evolved from Tarot. But that doesn't make them less, or inferior. They just aren't Tarot. Before we can ask "can one Tarot deck be better than another?", I think we need to ask "what is a Tarot deck?"

firemaiden	20 Jan 2005
They are not both fruit? aha! then we get back the discussion of what are our criteria - we each may have a different definition of tarot based on our own criteria, and based on what we use it for. Again when we ask "which is "better" -- the word better has no meaning on its own - better for what? better how? -- criteria. Of course the TdM is "better" than some others at being a historical deck... because... it's a historical deck....

Moongold	20 Jan 2005
I wonder why the question is important? The answer is purely relative. There is no abstract answer. It always gets down to preference and preference only. Any person who thinks he has the best Tarot deck might for hmself but not necessarily for everyone else. :) Why do some of us like arguing so much? That is what is fun, I think.

spoonbender	20 Jan 2005
I loved your post, CharmingPixie :)!! Thank you! I also think the RWS is Tarot-based instead of Tarot: Waite decided to change the meaning, depiction and the sequence of the cards! In what way is that still Tarot :confused:??? We just end up with a totally distorted view. (I'm not saying decks building on the RWS don't have any value, BUT I see their value as an Oracle rather than a Tarot.) Just my opinion :). Spoon PS: Moongold, I don't know if your questions are allowed: we can't discuss the discussion, remember?

Moongold	20 Jan 2005
spoonbender wrote: PS: Moongold, I don't know if your questions are allowed: we can't discuss the discussion, remember? Oh well ....... What is the purpose of life? - It IS one of those discussions isn't it? I suppose I was just interested in the underlying basis of something which people hold such passionate views about. BUT - let's be serious then? Tarot is like a wonderful table of delicious food such as we see in the film Babette's Feast . Babette though that food was a way of bringing people together. Preparing food for others is such a spiritual thing - a gift. And sitting around the table, sharing food with others whilst discussing things we love is a fantastic experience. I can eat oranges and apples. I can sample the RWS and the Marseille. As fruits they don't necessarily go together in terms of taste so I might use them at different times but I can taste them at the table. I prefer oranges to apples but it's quite unpredictable. And someone who really knows a bit about apples can give me some hints about the best seasonal apples and things I can do with apples to make them more attractive. I am a librarian by training ( a long time ago), Another analogy is that of the library of Tarot. There is so much to choose from. There are contemporary novels and historical ones. I like both. So I love the discovery of my new Fey and my old Marseille. What I read depends on what I need and feel like at any particular time. And by the way....there are art books and mysteries ...... and the story goes on ............ :)

Fudugazi	20 Jan 2005
Moongold wrote: Oh well ....... What is the purpose of life? We have it on the authoriy than no less a personage than the late, august Mr Douglas Adams that the meaning of life was 42. Can anyone better that? Moongold wrote: Tarot is like a wonderful table of delicious food such as we see in the film Babette's Feast . Babette though that food was a way of bringing people together. Preparing food for others is such a spiritual thing - a gift. And sitting around the table, sharing food with others whilst discussing things we love is a fantastic experience. Beautiful image and idea, Moongold (and using one of my fave films, too). But the difference between a great meal and Tarot is obvious - our mouths are full, so we can't argue whether the turtle soup was superior to the ortolan breast, the wine is worth a King's ransom, and the pudding was better at Le Château-Bras. Moongold wrote: Another analogy is that of the library of Tarot. There is so much to choose from. There are contemporary novels and historical ones. I like both. So I love the discovery of my new Fey and my old Marseille. What I read depends on what I need and feel like at any particular time. And by the way....there are art books and mysteries ...... and the story goes on ............ :) Now you're talking. Some days I read Montaigne, some Keats, some Tabucchi and some Georgette Heyer :) Two nights ago I received the Jean Dodal. I am so in love, I can hardly speak of it. Then tonight Waking the Wild Spirit arrived. Not quite a Tarot, but so entrancing! It'll have to be a threesome, I fear.

Moongold	20 Jan 2005
Helvetica wrote: We have it on the authoriy than no less a personage than the late, august Mr Douglas Adams that the meaning of life was 42 . Can anyone better that? Hmmmm? 42 .... 4 + 2 = 6 Lovers That's pretty good! Hmmmm? 42 .... 4 - 2 = 2 High Priestess. Pretty good as well But does this make another argument? Sex vs. Celibacy ? Hmmmmm? Don't answer this because it is off topic and will with justification be deleted. It's just a morning whimsy.

Fudugazi	20 Jan 2005
Moongold wrote: Hmmmm? 42 .... 4 + 2 = 6 Lovers That's pretty good! Hmmmm? 42 .... 4 - 2 = 2 High Priestess. Pretty good as well But does this make another argument? Sex vs. Celibacy ? Hmmmmm? Don't answer this because it is off topic and will with justification be deleted. It's just a morning whimsy. I'll keep going until they do. Evening fancy ;) I see no opposition. Rather, an integration! What happens when the High Priestess falls in love? You have the Higher Meaning of Life and Love. Ask Innana! (and her boyfriend)

Moongold	20 Jan 2005
Yes!!! What happens when the High Priestess becomes La Papesse? That would significantly change things and brings us back to topic :D One could imagine High Priestess with some sexuality but La Papesse with more mystical receptiveness. So the Marseilles is appropriate for people with Hermeticist inclinations and the RWS for people with Heretical inclinations? Would you pass me that bowl of oranges and apples, please? I feel like a pear.

Moongold	20 Jan 2005
Ps I claim diplomatic immunity. I like both decks but I might from time spend more time on on than the other.

Fudugazi	20 Jan 2005
Moongold wrote: One could imagine High Priestess with some sexuality but La Papesse with more mystical receptiveness. [...] Would you pass me that bowl of oranges and apples, please? I feel like a pear. Funny you should say that. I see the actual woman in La Papesse as far more sensual - earthy - and receptive sexually than the normal cool upper class High Priestess! The Papesse looks like she can pull up her sleeves and make bread, have a tumble in the sack, tame an unruly boy, sing in a heavenly choir and impart deep wisdom. All before tea. I became reconciled with that Arcanum when I saw the Papess. Here, dear, have a quince.

Moongold	20 Jan 2005
Hehehehe...... this is fun isn't it? You're talking to a once very devout Catholic here. I can't quite get the idea of nun away from La Papesse but I'm working on it. It's not so hard either because she does indeed look very earthy and non-idealised as some of the later versions seem to be. I am supposed to be working at the moment so had better refrain from forbidden fruit. I do think there is so much to be gained from exploration of both decks. For people like me, coming new to Tarot and from a place where the Marseille is not well known, the Rider Waite was the best initiation to Tarot. I would not have been interested in the Marseille and would have missed Tarot altogether, What a loss that would have been! Now I am a little further along the track and enjoying the exploration of the Marseille without loss of the other but with even more interest as a comparative thing. I think the study of the Marseille has improved my appreciation of Tarot generally. Maybe the increased interest in iconography, numerology and other compnents of Tarot would have happened anyway but you really are drawn to these in a special way with the Marseille. I didn't want to invest too much time in European history because I live closer to Asia and am interested in my own country's history as well as that of Islam, oddly enough. The connections of the Marseille with Islamic art which have been tentatively explored here hold much interest for me.. Must go now :)

Rosanne	20 Jan 2005
She says Toe mate o. He says ta mart o, Well I learned at the knee of RW with an old book thats pictures (in black and white) were of a Marseilles Deck. I became aware as the years went by that there were many forefathers in the family of Tarot. And my beloved ugly RW had many children all with a family likeness but with different personality. Those children had offspring that did'nt look like their cousins and they all have stories to tell me. I collect them all in my Tarot family gallery: Distant relatives,ancestral relatives, in-laws and all their little modern brats. Not one in the family could truely be said to be better than the others-just different.And I love them all!! They all teach me something. I want a coloured version of Marseilles to learn about that branch of the family as I have concentrated up to now on RW line.Marseilles line is strongly into Mathematics I am lead to believe and I am looking forward to that research and its rich rewards. I had a little quote yesterday that got removed, so I won't repeat, but I guess I think you all in this debate have merit in your views. I have enjoyed everyone thus far. Regards Rosanne ps I have this yearning to get to know Grandfather Thoth, but he scares me!!

Diana	21 Jan 2005
We're asking the question "Can one deck be better than another". We're not talking about Tarot here. Let's stay on topic for heaven's sake!!! All this talk about fruit is quite distracting and the Papesse is quite out of place here. I'm especially talking to Helvetica and Moongold who obviously do not know how to read thread titles. Open up a separate thread if you want to talk about her. We're talking about "decks". Well, I think it depends very much on the paper/cardboard and ink that have been used. Some decks for instance are very flimsy, and then others are too big to shuffle, and others use colours which don't hold up in the test of time. Oh indeed. Some decks are much better than others. There is not doubt about it. Of course, if one doesn't WANT to use a deck for shuffling, but for framing, then I suppose it doesn't matter that one can't shuffle it, for instance. But still, when tests are done on products, normally all the factors are taken into consideration and a final mark is given which takes into account all the factors.

Moongold	21 Jan 2005
Diana ~ The Fournier is a wonderful deck to hold and shuffle. The cards are just right for small hands. Some decks are much better than others for this but the Fournier is perfect.

Fulgour	21 Jan 2005
CharmingPixie wrote: Modern decks, such as RWS, are based upon the Tarot. They contain Tarot certainly. But in the process of baking, other ingredients have been added and they have become something else. They aren't Tarot anymore. I would call them Oracles that have evolved from Tarot. Shakespeare wrote his plays for the sole purpose of their being performed live upon the stage by his company of fellow actors. By some crazy miracle more than a few pirated scraps survived. Nowadays, a serious devotee of Shakespeare reads his works in their edited, emended, updated, and modern, published formats. The best editions are as near to the First Folio as possible, but, stylised stage productions, and popular films, are the usual fare. If we limit "Shakespeare" to only such as was originally intended, his work ceases to exist. William retired from the theatre in 1611.

Fudugazi	21 Jan 2005
Fulgour wrote: If we limit "Shakespeare" to only such as was originally intended, his work ceases to exist. William retired from the theatre in 1611. But an evening at the rebuilt Globe, standing in the pit or perched on the steep benches, to see The Merchant of Venice performed as near as can be imagined to 1611 is an experience to remember.

Fulgour	21 Jan 2005
Helvetica wrote: But an evening at the rebuilt Globe, standing in the pit or perched on the steep benches, to see The Merchant of Venice performed as near as can be imagined to 1611 is an experience to remember. Incomparably so, I imagine, but not available in a box of 78. Still, when I hold Le Tarot de Jean Dodal there are moments I'm transported back in time, much as with La Colman Smith.

firemaiden	21 Jan 2005
moderator note: (wielding big scary-looking pruning sheers) please heeeeeeeeeeeeeeelp me and my buddy Tom out everyone by finding, SOME clear way to relate your post to the topic at hand. please...please...please...

Fudugazi	21 Jan 2005
firemaiden wrote: moderator note: (wielding big scary-looking pruning sheers) please heeeeeeeeeeeeeeelp me and my buddy Tom out everyone by finding, SOME clear way to relate your post to the topic at hand. please...please...please... My tarot deck is better than his tarot deck. And my dad's a policeman (oops, that one is off -topic) This is not as interesting as Shakespeare's Globe and its relationship to Jean Dodal and Patricia Colman, in my view. Maybe we will always stray off topic because the topic itself is silly - there are no criteria to decide which is better. Better for what? for whom? Who decides? Some people say they can't read with pips that don't have human figures on them. Some people find the figures distracting and limiting. Some appreciate both, for different reasons. What's better for one is therefore clearly not better for the other and neither is best for the third category, who will choose one deck over another according to mood, circumstance, querent, etc. There are criteria of quality that might apply - force of symbol, artwork, evocative power, etc. but beyond that? A chacun son goût... (to each his own taste). So Shakespeare's Globe :)

Diana	21 Jan 2005
All decks are better. But some decks are more better than others. (No, I'm not cross-posting. I worded this differently than my post in the other thread somewhere else the other day. Both posts are better in fact, but one is more better than the other.)

Fudugazi	21 Jan 2005
Moongold, I can't decide if you've done a Colman Smith job on Shakespeare, a Housewives Tarot or a Tarot of the Gnomes. (My tarot is better than her tarot).

Clau	21 Jan 2005
So, Can one deck be better than another? No, nope, not. And my daddy is a black belt karate master :P Blessings, Clau

Diana	21 Jan 2005
Of course, the Dagobert Pumperdinkle Tarot Deck (unpublished - but well-known in most influential Tarot circles) is better than most. It's one of those modern decks, you know, where fantasy takes the upper-hand and reigns supreme. After all, as long as a deck has 78 cards, it can be called Tarot, right? We've often discussed this on Aeclectic and it seems to be the general consensus. 78 cards = Tarot Deck. And Dagobert Pumperdinkle was very careful to stick to this. (I'm busy designing a Tarot deck which only has colours. The Aces only have 1% of the deck in colour, the 2s have 2%, the 3s have 3% etc. It's a very esoteric and deep deck.... The 22 Majors have stark colours, but the others have different muted shades. It will require much meditation and intuition to understand, but it will be very profound and people should go wild about it once they have understood it, that is... - it will not be for those people who are completely unitiated - and will be popular for a few weeks or months anyway. But when that craze is over, I'm already planning for a deck based on Britney Spears which should also be very popular amongst the youngsters.) You can find a very brief history of the Dagobert Pumperdinkle Tarot Deck on the first page of this very very old thread: http://tarotforum.net/showthread.php?t=14067 And my Daddy was an electrical engineer.

Clau	21 Jan 2005
What? Dagobert Pumperdinkle Tarot Deck???? Where can I get it? How much is it? It sure will look good along with mi kazillion other decks! :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P I'm sure your daddy is smart, but mine hits harder! LOL Blessings and a wave to beautiful old Switzerland, Clau

Moongold	21 Jan 2005
Under all comedy there is a fundamental question, and the underlying, unstated theme of this thread does seem to hark back to the old question of the nature of Tarot itself and which version is better. I think the question is unanswerable objectively. It is a matter of preference and, to get back to Charming Pixie's post, also a matter of love. How possible is it to change a person's "truth" and how impossible is it to talk a person out of a love affair? I need and like different versions of Tarot. That's because of who I am and my cultural background, I suspect. It's not a matter of "better" (which always leads to "bitter") but a matter of choice and diversity and we are so damn lucky to have so many choices! My Dad was an English teacher and a bit of a poet :). He was also a philosopher and if we were having this discussion at our dinner table he would be challenging me to get to the reality. Is there such a thing as better considering the undoubtful nature of reality for each of us? I can hear him now.

Anna	21 Jan 2005
If one deck can't be better than another, and all a deck requires to meet the criteria of being Tarot is 78 cards.... I could get 78 bits of paper, ask my 4 year old nephew to scribble on them, publish them and sell them, and they would be of the same value and worth as the any other deck?????

Moongold	21 Jan 2005
CharmingPixie wrote: If one deck can't be better than another, and all a deck requires to meet the criteria of being Tarot is 78 cards.... I could get 78 bits of paper, ask my 4 year old nephew to scribble on them, publish them and sell them, and they would be of the same value and worth as the any other deck????? "Better" is relative, individual. The Marseille is obviously the "best" for you. There is no absolute, universal "better" in this human reality. I can't see that you would seriously think that for everyone. Some time ago you said how important it was for you personally to have choices; for you personally not to feel that others were telling you how you should act or what you should do (Giving Feeback thread). You would say that about Tarot too, I imagine. To be consistent you would say that everyone has the right to choose what is "best" for herself. You would probably be objecting if someone told you that you had to use the Marseille or the RWS because "they" thought it was best. To be consistent with your own position, it is matter of individual preference and choice. :)

Nina*	21 Jan 2005
Moongold wrote: There is no absolute, universal "better" in this human reality I believe you're absolutely right! It's no different from taste in clothes, music, art, flowers, men or women etc.... The only thing that matters is how it FEELS for you; deep inside!

Rosanne	21 Jan 2005
Hey folks, what is the criteria for judging 'Better'. Is it the card stock, the size, the Art work,the antiquity,the most bought,the most used etc etc.... or is it that unjudgeable essence 'What works best for me as a Tarot deck?' I can sew, my friend can Knit, I win sewing hands down, she wins knitting.. they are both crafts. Regards Rosanne

firemaiden	21 Jan 2005
Rosanne wrote: Hey folks, what is the criteria for judging 'Better'. Is it the card stock, the size, the Art work,the antiquity,the most bought,the most used etc etc.... or is it that unjudgeable essence 'What works best for me as a Tarot deck?' I can sew, my friend can Knit, I win sewing hands down, she wins knitting.. they are both crafts. Regards Rosanne Yay!! Exactly, its about criteria. If my criteria for a superior deck is (sometimes) that it have mermaids on it, then my new Mermaids deck is beyond question the best deck. :D Here is a little story (it is related, trust me): Once upon a time there was an article in the Italian newspaper (I was living in Trieste for a few weeks) that presented a poll to determine "who made better lovers, Italian or French men?" Now, since it was an Italian newspaper, who do you think won the contest? Duhh... but the question for me, became, okay, so, by which criteria did the Italians find themselves to be better lovers than the famous Frenchmen?? Well, it found simply, with the French mostly they just talk (!!). (to which the francophile responds: precisely why I like them ...) For champions of the Marseille, by which criteria are we finding it "better?". I am thinking right off that bat - -- that having a virtually unchanged pattern for centuries, and and being reproduced in very nearly the same format by many different card-companies spread about France and elsewhere in Europe, after a certain period of evolution -- gives it a claim to legitimacy that is hard to compete with. So if we mean "better" meaning having historical legitimacy - the Marseille is it. But this is not so interesting. What IS interesting to me, is that some who have tried both feel the Marseille is better for divination. Aha! but why?? Does historical legitimacy beget more accurate divination? (Obviously not for everyone, or we wouldn't be having this discussion.) or.. is it something else?? Is it the pips? We have seen, that the un-scenic pips allow for greater freedom of imagination for some, and for some - freedom for the imagination is a criteria of "better". Perhaps it is a combination of the historical legitimacy and the greater freedom? Or... is it something else deeper, more mysterious?

tmgrl2	21 Jan 2005
Different doesn't have to necessarily include a discussion of comparison.."better" implies "worse." Ok..my story...(I liked yours, firemaiden!) The story about the funeral, where the minister/priest says to the seated people, as they are asking for people to come up and say a few words about the deceased.... "Certainly, someone can come up here and find some words to say about ....." No one got up. "There must be one among you who can step up here and say something about....." Finally, a little man gets up from the back row, walks slowly toward the podium, stands up straight when he gets there and says: "I knew his brother. He was worse." So...my point is ....why compare? Use what works. Study and learn the tradition or traditions that speak to you. Again, I use both RWS clones and Tarot de Marseille and don't intend to compare. I don't need to do that in order to use them both and love them both.

Nina*	21 Jan 2005
firemaiden wrote: What IS interesting to me, is that some who have tried both feel the Marseille is better for divination. What's interesting to me is that some who have tried both doesn't feel like this!!! tmgrl2 wrote: So...my point is ....why compare? Use what works. Study and learn the tradition or traditions that speak to you. Exactly!

Fudugazi	21 Jan 2005
Tarot decks, like literature, do have criteria of quality - I've named a few in my post above (e.g. force and depth of symbol, quality of the art, versatility - can you use it to meditate, read and study?). Do these criteria make the decks better? According to these criteria, yes, just as James Joyce is better than your average airport novel. There will always be some element of elitism, I believe, in Tarot and in literature - but probably less in Tarot, even very great tarot decks, because images - symbols - speak directly to the unconscious and do not necessarily require a strong intellect or a wide education to be understood and appreciated; nor does Tarot exclude intellect and education. Some systems and decks stretch the intellect more than others - that's one possible criterion to judge quality, but not crucial for everyone. Some of the great readers in history have been uneducated gipsies. In fact one could argue that the stronger one's intellect the more difficult it is to access one's psychic qualities - intellect just gets in the way and wants to explain away everything. Just as theatre or film requires supsension of disbelief, so does Tarot. Beyond that - like with art - it's love what does it. Funny though, there seems to be a limited number of decks, and always the same, that people do fall and stay in love with. Some decks deepen as you get to know them - they don't reveal all at once. Some are great passions from they start. Some appear deep but are revealed as hollow. And some are just a bit of brawn or fluff, one-night stands, enjoyable enough but in the morning you have nothing to say to each other.

Nina*	21 Jan 2005
Helvetica wrote: Tarot decks, like literature, do have criteria of quality - I've named a few in my post above (e.g. force and depth of symbol, quality of the art, versatility - can you use it to meditate, read and study?). Do these criteria make the decks better? According to these criteria, yes, just as James Joyce is better than your average airport novel. There will always be some element of elitism, I believe, in Tarot and in literature - but probably less in Tarot, even very great tarot decks, because images - symbols - speak directly to the unconscious and do not necessarily require a strong intellect or a wide education to be understood and appreciated; nor does Tarot exclude intellect and education. Some systems and decks stretch the intellect more than others - that's one possible criterion to judge quality, but not crucial for everyone. Some of the great readers in history have been uneducated gipsies. In fact one could argue that the stronger one's intellect the more difficult it is to access one's psychic qualities - intellect just gets in the way and wants to explain away everything. Just as theatre or film requires supsension of disbelief, so does Tarot. Beyond that - like with art - it's love what does it. Funny though, there seems to be a limited number of decks, and always the same, that people do fall and stay in love with. Some decks deepen as you get to know them - they don't reveal all at once. Some are great passions from they start. Some appear deep but are revealed as hollow. And some are just a bit of brawn or fluff, one-night stands, enjoyable enough but in the morning you have nothing to say to each other. Simply beautiful :) Because I DO believe this is about both the RWS and the Marseilles (and of course others that I do not know enough about to mention here).

tmgrl2	21 Jan 2005
Helvetica wrote: just as James Joyce is better than your average airport novel. Hmmmm....better for whom and under what conditions? As a former English teacher, I wouldn't touch someone's taste in reading....I might discuss the writing, the quality of the writing, the style, ... but if someone finds great enjoyment in reading... whatever... Who am I to judge what floats their boats? Quote: There will always be some element of elitism, I believe, in Tarot and in literature - but probably less in Tarot, even very great tarot decks, because images - symbols - speak directly to the unconscious and do not necessarily require a strong intellect or a wide education to be understood and appreciated; nor does Tarot exclude intellect and education. Some systems and decks stretch the intellect more than others - that's one possible criterion to judge quality, but not crucial for everyone. ouch! Quote: Some of the great readers in history have been uneducated gipsies. In fact one could argue that the stronger one's intellect the more difficult it is to access one's psychic qualities - intellect just gets in the way and wants to explain away everything. double ouch... Quote: Beyond that - like with art - it's love what does it. Aahhh.....relief at last..... Quote: Funny though, there seems to be a limited number of decks, and always the same, that people do fall and stay in love with. Some decks deepen as you get to know them - I would think this possible of anything...the possibility of "depth" emerging with experience. Quote: they don't reveal all at once. Some are great passions from they start. Some appear deep but are revealed as hollow. Ouch again.... Quote: And some are just a bit of brawn or fluff, one-night stands, enjoyable enough but in the morning you have nothing to say to each other. Tell this to the artist...I would be careful, though, that they are not live people and members of AT. I still say...No one deck or tradition is "better" than another if we are having an objective discussion about this. Subjectively, what one prefers to use and or/study... That's not up for judgment or comparison...just respect of another's choice. terri

tmgrl2	21 Jan 2005
Forgive me, Helvetica, if you weren't comparing James Joyce to the Tarot de Marseille and an airport novel to the RWS tradition decks... I wasn't sure that you doing this...but it seemed as though that might be the intent..as though the Tarot de Marseille would be the tradition for a "person of intellect." If I am wrong in reading this into your post, I am sorry, but that was how it hit me at first. terri

Nina*	21 Jan 2005
tmgrl2 wrote: I wasn't sure that you weren't doing this...but it seemed as though that might be the intent..as though the Tarot de Marseille would be the tradition for a "person of intellect." I hope not.... because then I completely misunderstood :confused:

Fudugazi	21 Jan 2005
tmgrl2 wrote: Forgive me, Helvetica, if you weren't comparing James Joyce to the Tarot de Marseille and an airport novel to the RWS tradition decks... No, I wasn't. I was thinking more along the lines of Hello Kitty and the Tarot of the Gnomes as airport tarot ;) I would compare Le Tarot de Marseille with Shakespeare, Thoth with James Joyce, and Colman-Smith with Thomas Hardy :). Sorry if I made it look otherwise. As for Marseille being the tradition for the person of intellect...what of all those gipsies? It's a tradition for all. Like Shakespeare is theatre for all.

tmgrl2	21 Jan 2005
Ninamagic wrote: I hope not.... because then I completely misunderstood :confused: Me, too, Nina. terri

Nina*	21 Jan 2005
Helvetica wrote: As for Marseille being the tradition for the person of intellect...what of all those gipsies? It's a tradition for all. Like Shakespeare is theatre for all. I guess I DID misunderstand...

Fudugazi	21 Jan 2005
Ninamagic wrote: I guess I DID misunderstand... ? what are you talking about?

tmgrl2	21 Jan 2005
Helvetica wrote: . As for Marseille being the tradition for the person of intellect...what of all those gipsies? .....gypsies of intellect or ALL gypsies? Again, forgive me. Did you mean to say here that gypsies (we spell it differently, LOL, because of our language backgrounds...and so, too, I am having trouble being sure what you are saying...) Anyhow, did you mean to say that gipsies/gypsies DO use the TdM and are or are not people of intellect...or that gipsies/gypsies do NOT use the Tarot de Marseille.... but that that doesn't mean they don't read well with whatever they use and that they can ALSO be people of intellect? I think I know what you are trying to say, Helvetica...but what I am trying to say is again the same, why place any deck in direct comparison, e.g., with a particular author? It could prove offensive if someone, let's say... loves the Tarot de Marseille... but finds Shakespeare a bit baudy ? I say again, let's not compare. Let's simply let each gorgeous tradition be beloved of anyone, any time, any place.... As Umbrae has said...maybe we could do as well with toothpicks, once we hone that intuitive thing. terri

Fudugazi	21 Jan 2005
tmgrl2 wrote: Who am I to judge what floats their boats? True, no-one can argue with taste. But you'll not convince me that James Joyce and an airport novel are equal in richness of language and invention, modulation of voice, strength of imagery and about a hundred other criteria, including humour. They just ain't! ;) Some things in life aren't fair, and talent is one of them. But there are great decks - judging by criteria of quality - in all traditions of Tarot, and outside the traditions too. That was my point, terri.

Nina*	21 Jan 2005
Helvetica wrote: what are you talking about? I thought you were comparing the RWS and the Marseilles and found them being 'equal' (intellectually), but I guess you didn't.

Fudugazi	21 Jan 2005
Gypsies (I learnt English as my first language - but it's 3 am here) - read with the TdM from about the 17th century. Most were illiterate and considered uneducated, though not necessarily lacking in wit, tradition and intuitive gifts. So the TdM was beloved by many different people - as it still is nowadays - from all educational backgrounds. Just like Shakespeare filled his Globe with people from all conditions. That's what I meant. Time for bed- I think and type fast, but I guess I took some short cuts.

Fudugazi	21 Jan 2005
Ninamagic wrote: I thought you were comparing the RWS and the Marseilles and found them being 'equal' (intellectually), but I guess you didn't. Of course I was. You got it right the first time. Equal but different. And not only intellectually, as I don't think intellect is the only (or even the most important) criterion for judging tarot. I wrote that the first time too, I think. I think Thomas Hardy was as good as Shakespeare. Different, that's all.

Nina*	21 Jan 2005
Helvetica wrote: Of course I was. You got it right the first time. Ok... I'm glad :)

firemaiden	21 Jan 2005
LOL, terri, you sound like a mother who is worried one of her children is going to get less love than another. No no, we must love them all equally. Of course every creature is equal in the eyes of God, and to mom... However, with things, if we avoid comparisons, we run the risk of giving nothing greater value than anything else, and then the world will be flat. "It's all good" is the slang of today (said sleepily). yeah, man... its all good... and its all blah? No its not all good. Some things are phenomenal, some things are great! and others are not. Why? Comparisons are very interesting and useful. We compare and judge and take stock every second. If we had to take everything on its own merits, without the use of analogies and comparisons of all kinds to do the short-hand, our brains would have to be the size of k-mart. (and then how would we get born?) How does Balzac compare to Zola? Both wished to transcribe reality as such- yet the surreal creeps into both! in different ways. How? Why? How does realism compare to surrealism? that is the question? How can we even understand what the strengths of one are without comparison to another? In music history classes, they teach the greats-- Beethoven, Mozart, Schubert, etc,. We do not study the manifold contempories of these guys whose stuff didn't make the cut. This is interesting! But why didn't they make it to the next century? How do I know how great Mozart is, until I understand what his contemporaries lacked? My observation is, the guys whose stuff fell into oblivion usually lacked some kind of spark, they were content to let forumula drive their content, instead of their imagination. Some wrote a couple chords, and let scribes fill in the rest, they had to churn it out as soon as they could. Of course music churned out as like a plate of pancakes cannot have the same value as something written with blood sweat and tears, with one's whole heart and soul poured into it, as if from beyond the grave -- like the Mozart Requiem! Will the gummi bear tarot be here tomorrow? (personally, I hope not). Will the Thoth (I am quite sure it will!)

Fudugazi	21 Jan 2005
Ninamagic :D I don't know about you, but for me, the BEST thing NOW is my BED! Good night, sweet tarot (of any and all traditions) (I'll probably be visited by those pesky Gnomes in my dreams now) Helvetica

Nina*	21 Jan 2005
Helvetica :) Sleep well... I'll find mine too! (bed! hopefully no gnomes :D)

tmgrl2	21 Jan 2005
firemaiden wrote: LOL, terri, you sound like a mother who is worried one of her children is going to get less love than another. No no, we must love them all equally. :) Thank you, firemaiden. I take this as a compliment. Night all...sleep well. I will. terri

Moongold	22 Jan 2005
Please delete :)

Fulgour	22 Jan 2005
CharmingPixie wrote: If one deck can't be better than another, and all a deck requires to meet the criteria of being Tarot is 78 cards.... I could get 78 bits of paper, ask my 4 year old nephew to scribble on them, publish them and sell them, and they would be of the same value and worth as the any other deck????? This is one of the strangest arguments, and yet I hear it so often about the Tarot: Anything Goes vs Dogmaticism. What is it that prompts people to propose scraps of paper, void of any rhyme or reason, as the reductio ad absurdum argument for/against either a) conformity, or b) diversity? The creators of Le Tarot de Marseille would be horrified by any such narrowness of vision and interpretive intolerance. Pamela Colman Smith would be the last person to say that her inspired creation was in any way meant to be superior. These gifts we freely enjoy are an inheritance to celebrate.

Kissa	22 Jan 2005
firemaiden wrote: Will the gummi bear tarot be here tomorrow? (personally, I hope not). Will the Thoth (I am quite sure it will!) it raises another question in my mind... are popular tarot decks the best ones? if you look at the Aeclectic 10 best tarot decks from the last years, are you sure they are the best ones? what about the super favourite of one year that disappear totally, nobody ever talk about them here? kissa

Umbrae	22 Jan 2005
Excuse me, but I’d like to interrupt this thread. Best? Better? Can one deck be better? Define ‘Better’ cuz otherwise you’re talkin’ bout nothin’... What is better? Do you mean that it ‘reads’ better than others? Or that it looks better than others? What style of reading and does that matter? It’s a trick question. Pirsig wrote two books on Quality. What is it? Define it? It’s a trick question, used from a Rhetoric Class. Properly asked may be…WHY are some decks more brutally honest than others? This then implies a usage of and for the deck, and not simply an open ended quality question. Because there is a reason why some decks are more brutally honest than others – and art has nothing to do with it. Index cards can be brutally honest…honest…as can Sweet N’ Low…

Moongold	22 Jan 2005
I think we made that point too Umbrae at the beginning and in the midddle of the thread. There is a probllem witht he question. It was put after another thread was spilt into three.

firemaiden	22 Jan 2005
(Serious) Suggestions for new title to this thread will be gratefully received.

Moonbow*	22 Jan 2005
How about Umbrae's: WHY are some decks more brutally honest than others?

firemaiden	22 Jan 2005
I love that! (but maybe that should be a new thread?)

Rusty Neon	22 Jan 2005
Moonbow* wrote: How about Umbrae's: WHY are some decks more brutally honest than others? Strangely enough, I had started a thread a while back with an almost identical title, and was just searching for it now and I can't find it. It must have been lost during the hacker attack incident.

Moongold	22 Jan 2005
firemaiden wrote: (Serious) Suggestions for new title to this thread will be gratefully received. It's hard to conceptualize a meaningful change half way through. It would be good to ask people if they were to judge the BEST deck of the year, how would they do it? I'd like to keep it broad because all would use criteria but some might come up with more process oriented ways of judging. Or a variation of this: How would people assess the best deck of all time?

Rusty Neon	22 Jan 2005
Moongold wrote: Or a variation of this: How would people assess the best deck of all time? In my view, there isn't such a thing as "the best" tarot deck of all time. There have been many good (and also quite a few bad) tarot decks during the times when tarot decks have existed; and there has been a wide variety in styles and iconography among such decks.

Moongold	22 Jan 2005
Rusty Neon wrote: In my view, there isn't such a thing as "the best" tarot deck of all time. There have been many good (and also quite a few bad) tarot decks during the times when tarot decks have existed; and there has been a wide variety in styles and iconography among such decks. If people were going to do this of course it would be on an individual basis and the exercise would make people think about how they make judgments. Sort of like if you were going to be alone on a desert island for three months which Tarot deck would you take? Perhaps this is indeed a reframe of my question. I agree with you. I would be hard pressed to want to define and choose *Best*. I'd be interested to see how other people do it though because some do.

jumptothemoonyea	22 Jan 2005
firemaiden wrote: (Serious) Suggestions for new title to this thread will be gratefully received. 1. Much Ado about Nothing? (FM, just kidding, trying to be serious) 2. AT Crusade No. ? 3. Apples or Oranges or TdM or RWS or gummi bear tarot? 4. Brutally Honest decks vs. Softly Gentle? 5. Why 'better'? List your reasons why your deck (or your dad) is better. 6. What's compared? Archetypes or their 'blueprints'? 7. Can one archetype have different blueprints? (are apples and oranges of tarot grew from the same archetype or different ones?) :)

Rosanne	22 Jan 2005
How about the "Goldilocks and the Porridge Question"? You know ..too hot..too cold.. and just right! and her criteria of being hungry.

Diana	22 Jan 2005
Whatever the title, I think a link to the Top Ten Tarot Decks that people voted for should be given. Because there's already an indication there that some decks are considered better than others.

Nina*	22 Jan 2005
I believe that the top 10 is about your favorite deck at this time... not if you think it's better than any other deck!

Diana	23 Jan 2005
Ninamagic wrote: I believe that the top 10 is about your favorite deck at this time... not if you think it's better than any other deck! Interesting. I wonder if a new thread should be made called "What motivated your Top 10 Vote?". Personally, I was voting for what I thought is the Best Deck, which also happens to be my Favourite (although I suppose that goes without saying. I think the two go hand in hand.) (Am looking forward to the day when a Marseilles deck arrives in the Top Ten.) (Of course, if I can vote for a Best Deck, then I obviously think some decks are Better than others. It is so obvious to me that some decks are Better that I find the question rather redundant. Does anyone remember the Poor Man's Tarot that was sold on E-Bay?)

Moongold	23 Jan 2005
One day, Diana, you will quite possibly see the Tarot de Marseille in the top 10 here. Certainly many more people are using it here and the Marseille sub forum is great. The more members see readings, the more demystified the Marseille becomes for people not familiar with it. Some of us will become multi-lingual in Tarot. That is wonderful, and I hope it gives you some satisfaction. The Marseilles has moved from historical and philosphical discussion threads to practical everyday reading. That is a huge shift and you and various others are in a large part responsible for that. I hope some of you come back and participate in readings again. I miss reading your readings. The discussions around *best* I don't find productive. To me, the Marseille is a discovery now of delight but the whole area of Tarot has become quite enriched for me. I am also discovering new things in my RWS, and the fabulously bittersweet Fey. A few weeks ago I was thinkiing of giving it all away for a while but have been driven to keep on, although my study has changed. I can see how both traditions enrich and complement the other. Certainly I would not have stayed with Tarot if the Marseille had been the only thing on offer because it was really like a foreign language. So RWS and others taught me to see and speak. They gave me confidence. I find the Marseille exquisite but the RWS gives me balance and more depth each day. I am becoming multi-lingual - Yea :) :) :).

Fulgour	23 Jan 2005
Moongold wrote: I can see how both traditions enrich and complement the other. Certainly I would not have stayed with Tarot if the Marseille had been the only thing on offer because it was really like a foreign language. So RWS and others taught me to see and speak. They gave me confidence. I find the Marseille exquisite but the RWS gives me balance and more depth each day. This brings to mind how important our work is, the efforts we make, with learning even the basics of Tarot language and meanings, just to be able to gain confidence, be able to trust and believe in our abilities. When I do the work required of me, my efforts make the deck better, whether learning to speak Le Marseille, or understand Colman Smith.

Rosanne	23 Jan 2005
OK you have just said in plain english what I wanted to hear on this thread.Fulgour said " when I do the work it makes the deck better" What I want to know is- What is the difference in the work you did to speak Marseille compared with learning to understand Coleman Smith.? Is there a whole different approach for each tradition? I want to learn the Marseille way, but I don't know if I will be able to swim in another current and get to where I am at with Coleman Smith. Does that make sense?

Moongold	23 Jan 2005
Rosanne wrote: OK you have just said in plain english what I wanted to hear on this thread.Fulgour said " when I do the work it makes the deck better" What I want to know is- What is the difference in the work you did to speak Marseille compared with learning to understand Coleman Smith.? Is there a whole different approach for each tradition? I want to learn the Marseille way, but I don't know if I will be able to swim in another current and get to where I am at with Coleman Smith. Does that make sense? Fulgour will speak for himself :). I can tell you what I did. The RWS was my introduction. It gave a me the means to understand the universe in a different way through archetypal imagery. It gave voice and authenticity to intuition and sensitivity. I had to learn the structure of the Tarot, the meaning of the elements and the iconography and everything that you already know aboutthe RWS. In the Marseille - there are a completely new set of images. There are, of course, similarities but the Marseille dates back to the 18th Century. The majors do speak to one differently, but they are like distant relatives. You get to know them quickly! They are like old photographs. The more you look at them the more you see the family resemblance whilst knowing that they come from a different culture and country The minors are very different with symbols of the elements and plants and flowers. When you get to used to these they don't seem strange and abstract anymore. You still learn the elements and a little about alchemy and the Marseille iconography. You learn a different kind of numerology, perhaps a more rigorous one. and you learn that in one little card lies much more meaning than you ever imagined. This is just a beginning. Why not put your toe in the water? The Marseille will enrich your understanding of the RWS; And you will fly with the Marseille because you honed your tarot skills on the RWS. Different measures for everyone. :)

Rosanne	23 Jan 2005
Aha, Thank you for that Moongold. That was very clear. I have got somewhat confused with the statements about which one is better. So I kept blathering on about criteria and that really was'nt what I wanted to know. Yes I will take the plunge as I have had this great drawing closer feeling to what it is that I wanted and I could'nt get to the point somehow. As an aside to this it is a nearly full moon over my land tonight and it is really golden. I call that a sign. Regards Rosanne

Diana	23 Jan 2005
Rosanne wrote: OK you have just said in plain english what I wanted to hear on this thread.Fulgour said " when I do the work it makes the deck better" What I want to know is- What is the difference in the work you did to speak Marseille compared with learning to understand Coleman Smith.? Is there a whole different approach for each tradition? I want to learn the Marseille way, but I don't know if I will be able to swim in another current and get to where I am at with Coleman Smith. Does that make sense? Rosanne: I went from a Marseilles, then when I joined Aecelctic I studied the RWCS and its numerous clones, but abandoned them in order to get back to the Marseilles as it was the only one that really made sense to me. I glanced at the Thoth as well but for various reasons it didn't hold my interest. (I'm not particularly interested in Golden Dawn stuff - RWCS/Thoth. For me the Golden Dawn people were a very curious bunch of harmless nutcases and their decks reflected their philosophy obviously.) If you however want to learn about the Tarot of Marseilles only, there is no point in studying the RWCS and the Marseilles together as a single study, and trying to put the two together. This will just confuse the hell out of you, starting already with the first Arcanum, right up to the 78th. (The first Arcanum in the Marseilles is not a Magician and most definitely not a Fool either, the 2nd is not a High Priestess, the 5th is not a Hierophant, the 8th is not Strength, etc. etc. etc.) If you study them at the same time, then make sure you realise you are studying two separate things. Like if you're studying German, you're not going to take out your French books, and if you're studying Botany, you're not going to take out your History books. Separate the two traditions for they are very different indeed.

Fulgour	23 Jan 2005
Rosanne wrote: What is the difference in the work you did to speak Marseille compared with learning to understand Coleman Smith.? The first big difference is the Court Cards. Never mind the pips to begin with, anyone who has struggled to come to terms with these 16 very troublesome cards in the Colman Smith will find the Marseille Courts awkward and difficult. They're so odd, but in almost no time at all, like Moongold said, they get like family. Then you'll notice that it's the Majors that speak clearly now and it's the pips that jump out, cards 2 thru 10 become so mysterious. But once again, because these pips now take so much attention, the next thing you know they soon get to be the most fun to see. It starts out like reading the cook book, and ends up being a cake.

Diana	23 Jan 2005
Fulgour wrote: The first big difference is the Court Cards. Never mind the pips to begin with, anyone who has struggled to come to terms with these 16 very troublesome cards in the Colman Smith will find the Marseille Courts awkward and difficult. They're so odd , but in almost no time at all, like Moongold said, they get like family. Oh Fulgour! I didn't know that people found these cards difficult. I find the Marseilles court cards so easy to understand. Because they are real people, like the kind I meet every day. They seem so familiar to me! When I say familiar, I don't mean that I brush shoulders with nobility every day - god forbid!! :eek: :eek: (what a dreadful thought.) What I mean is that they are just human beings and I'm familiar with human beings, having lived with them for the last 45 years. (I don't like the English term "court cards", I prefer the French term "les honneurs", i.e. The Honours.)

Moongold	23 Jan 2005
Rosanne wrote: Aha, Thank you for that Moongold. That was very clear. I have got somewhat confused with the statements about which one is better. So I kept blathering on about criteria and that really was'nt what I wanted to know. Yes I will take the plunge as I have had this great drawing closer feeling to what it is that I wanted and I could'nt get to the point somehow. As an aside to this it is a nearly full moon over my land tonight and it is really golden. I call that a sign. Regards Rosanne Rosanne ~ I have just come back from a walk and I too saw the golden moon. The sky here is very clear tonight. I wonder whether we were looking at the moon at the same time? There is a wonderful thread in the Forum some where Called "La Lune - how may we read this card?" started by JMD. Have a look at the Marseille La Lune and read that thread. That will be a timely beginning. Blessings :)

Fulgour	23 Jan 2005
It's the coldest night here so far all winter, and we've got a foot of frozen snow. The Moon is over to the West now, as it's just before dawn. Saturn is brightly beside her and Castor and Pollux clearly mark the constellation Gemini. If this were a reading from Le Tarot de Marseille it would be like personally sitting here with Miss Pamela Colman Smith.

Fulgour	23 Jan 2005
Diana wrote: I find the Marseilles court cards so easy to understand. Because they are real people, like the kind I meet every day. They seem so familiar to me! This truly helps me to understand so much more about you. Here in Illinois we don't have Mr. & Mrs. Marseille next door.

Moongold	23 Jan 2005
Good, better, best: is that the question: Whether ‘tis nobler for Tarot to be French or English? Both have suffered The slings and arrows of our raging Forum. Shall we link arms in this sea of trouble And sing Marseilles at the coming of the Dawn - Ending our quarrels thus? To rant to rave, No more; and by this peace to say we end The heart ache and the thousand florid words That temper reading; ‘tis a gentle flowering Devoutly to be wish’d :)

Fudugazi	23 Jan 2005
Rusty Neon wrote: In my view, there isn't such a thing as "the best" tarot deck of all time. There have been many good (and also quite a few bad) tarot decks during the times when tarot decks have existed; and there has been a wide variety in styles and iconography among such decks. That's the most succinct way of putting it - exactly what I think too. However, we are still left with the question: better for what? Perhaps we could say that the bad decks are never better for anything?

Fudugazi	23 Jan 2005
Moongold wrote: I am becoming multi-lingual - Yea :) :) :). This reminds me of the thread in the Deck section where we are speaking of learning to read Italian so we can read the commentary books on the Dante and the T Liber. Which reminds me - do you speak the language of the Thoth? When I did, a few years ago, I became rather good at it - but I've not practised in years. Maybe I'll take it up again at some point - but I'll have to trim those wretched keywords, which certainly don't make the deck better. When I was stuying it, I was reminded how completely different from the RWS I had started with it was. Very much a different language, and for a passionate while, better. Just as, for the moment in my mind, the Marseille is better than either Thoth or RWS traditions. I attribute that to falling in love.

Fudugazi	23 Jan 2005
Moongold wrote: the Marseille dates back to the 18th Century Sorry, I couldn't let that one pass. The earliest Marseille known are in the early 16th century, though many suspect - with some reason - that it is older. The oldest preserved decks are from the 17th century.

tmgrl2	23 Jan 2005
Diana wrote: Whatever the title, I think a link to the Top Ten Tarot Decks that people voted for should be given. Because there's already an indication there that some decks are considered better than others. Dear Diana...not necessarily "better." See what I mean about that word?? The list is the Top Ten Decks that are "most popular." We have already had a discussion about what that means... terri

Kissa	23 Jan 2005
Fulgour wrote: The first big difference is the Court Cards. Never mind the pips to begin with, anyone who has struggled to come to terms with these 16 very troublesome cards in the Colman Smith will find the Marseille Courts awkward and difficult. They're so odd , but in almost no time at all, like Moongold said, they get like family. hummm... believe it or not, i find Marseilles court cards much easier to understand than RWS court cards... actually, i bought the book "understanding the tarot court" last spring when i was into the RWS folklore (sorry, couldn't resist, in french they say : "to hold someone the stick that they will beat you with" ("tendre le bâton pour se faire battre")...). it made some sense, i had beach parties with Mr King of Pentacles (funny lad as he is), flirted heavily with Mr King of Rods (quite Clooney-ish don't you think?), lightly with the King of Cups (Jude Law...), hated a few Queens, felt much sympathy and love for the Pages (who are much more quiet and well behaved than my own kids) and the Knights remained just as mysterious as they were before... then i switched to TdM and until your post, dear Fulgour, i never asked myself whether i understand the court cards or not... because i think i do now. i cannot explain why but ... for example : when you look at the Reyne de Deniers, isn't it all obvious? where in any other deck does the Queen look so intensively/passionnately at her Denier, making clear it's her whole world? Forget about the little rabbit, the garden and the rest (re: RWS), check her stare in a TdM deck: isn't that impressive??? I have met ppl like her but i have never met any person like the (RWS) Queen of Pentacles. there is a truth, a simplicity, a humanity in les honneurs that is cruelly lacking in any RWS deck. IMO. IMO. IMO. you have problems with your court cards? free your mind and switch to the TdM! :) btw the order of the court cards in TdM is not the same as the RWS order (doesn't TdM order come from the playing cards?). the knight/chevalier is placed after the king or more exactly, it goes like this: Valet, Reyne, Roy and Chevalier. kissa the one who doesn't know how to write capitals.. :P

Fudugazi	23 Jan 2005
I'm puzzled, Terri. You know the difference between better and best - is it that you don't accept than any deck, whatsoever, can ever be better than another? All are in force of symbolism, in "giving the honest answer"? Or is it that you don't accept an overarching hierarchy, which says that there is a best, a second best, a third best, etc.? If the second, I am with you; but as for the first, I really think some decks are better than others, according to objective criteria.

Fulgour	23 Jan 2005
Kissa wrote: then i switched to TdM and until your post, dear Fulgour, i never asked myself whether i understand the court cards or not... because i think i do now. One of the joys of switching to the Marseille is that, (unlike the pronouncements of the Oracle) you can take all of your Colman Smith experience with you. So, if you have made friends with the Court Cards, it is quite refreshing to greet them in the old guises. And thank you too Dear Kissa for making it so clear!

Fudugazi	23 Jan 2005
Kissa wrote: you have problems with your court cards? free your mind and switch to the TdM! :) I have to agree with Kissa. I find the Marseille courts unambiguous (or deliberately ambiguous, like the Chevalier de Coupe), much easier to interpret and see in life. I had knocked my head against walls for years with the idealised courts in the RWS and the Thoth (what is a Princess???! in my life I mean. And that RWS Queen of Cups - beautiful, but so remote). No longer. And that is the case with a lot of Marseille cards I think - the direct symbolism allied with the mystery and enchantment of the pips makes for a very dynamic reading experience. Kissa, I like your comparison between the RWS courts and movie stars - removed from us, glamorous, attractive, fascinating even - contrasted with the women and fellows we see about us in the Marseille. You don't need a "How to read court cards" book with the Tarot de Marseille. I also like the courts in some other decks: the Tarot of Prague, a love affair for me, has some gorgeous court cards borrowed from drawings and statues of famous men and women of Prague, therefore really real people. I find them much easier to read than the Colman Smith courts, and I enjoy finding out who these people are (Wallenstein, Elisabeth of Bohemia, etc), which illuminates my understanding of the card and tells me where Karen and Alex were coming from when they created any given court card. Anyone who is not touched to the bone by the delicate Queen of Swords, with her sad, brave and honest expression, taken from an early medieval illumination of St Catherine of Alexandria in a manuscript in the Strahov Library, must have a heart of stone. In the Mythic Tarot, the courts are men and women from myth, so if you know the myth, the court card is not difficult, and particularly for someone like me who responds better to stories than to key words and set meanings (as well as the image itself, that's also what floats my boat in the Prague, btw). This discussion probably belongs to a different thread (which court cards are better?) but I think it illustrates the "better" quality of some decks over others, when it comes to one aspect of Tarot.

Kissa	23 Jan 2005
Ninamagic wrote: I believe that the top 10 is about your favorite deck at this time... not if you think it's better than any other deck! i tend to use my favourite deck because i think it is the best for me and better than any other in my collection. kissa

Nina*	23 Jan 2005
Kissa wrote: i tend to use my favourite deck because i think it is the best for me and better than any other in my collection. I guess we all do (use the one we feel is better for ourselves).... well, I do! But voting for your favorite deck is NOT the same as saying 'my deck is BETTER than yours' it's just saying that 'this one is MY favorite'!

contradiction	23 Jan 2005
i do not like asparagus, my family does, therefore when i cook i make asparagus for them. i even took the time to learn a few "tricks" to make it taste better for them. but, i will never eat it. i happen to like to drive a particular brand of car. there are other brands which are older, does that mean that my car is not a car, because it is not an old brand? i think not. what if i were to tell you that your car is not worth driving because it is not a certain brand, that would be stupid of me, would it not? it is the same with decks, there are some i like and some i do not like, but it is not up to me to tell someone else they can not like or dislike certain decks. and personally i do not feel anyone else has a right to tell me what i can or can not like. so why argue about which is better? at one point in this thread, it was mentioned that the tdm is better, because it forces you to use your intuition more. the 3 of swords was used as an example. i happen to use the rws, not because i think it is better i just happen to like it more. i have looked at the tdm, and i do like the illustrations, but it is not something i would want to read with, but that does not give me the right to belittle you or your choice to use it. but, back to my point of intuition, i read by intuition, i do not necissarily use the meaning the deck creator used, nor do i go by symbolism. as a matter of fact i have never studied or understood the symbolism. i have read with playing cards just as easy as i did the tarot. i have no idea what playing card relates to what tarot card, i look at the card, and listen to what it is saying to me, and have done some very accurate readings for people i do not know. when i go to buy a deck i will pick up every deck in the store, no matter what style it is. tdm, rws, hello kitty or whatever, i do not care. when i pick up a deck, and i can feel the energy of the deck i know i have found the one to buy. if it is one i have never used before, i will then become familiar with it. if someone wants to have an intelligent adult discussion, on the difference of the different decks, i will be glad to participate, however other than to voice my opinion on how silly and childish arguments about "better" can be, count me out. anyone who wishes feel free to pm me and i will be glad to discuss my opinion with you. i know i have offended some people, that was not my intent, however if you are offended, then maybe you need to rethink your attitude about other peoples choices. your taste in things is no better than any one else's, it is just different.

Diana	23 Jan 2005
contradiction wrote: i know i have offended some people, that was not my intent, however if you are offended, then maybe you need to rethink your attitude about other peoples choices. your taste in things is no better than any one else's, it is just different. I am so sorry to hear you have offended some people, contradiction. I have never read anything in your posts that could be deemed offensive. Please note that some people on AT (as on ALL internet forums) are over-sensitive and take offense at even inoffensive remarks. It happens frequently. Just ignore it and get on with your posting and let them deal with their own feelings. (To me, it is so obvious that some decks are better than others that I am finding it puzzling that such a question even needs to be answered.)

Fudugazi	23 Jan 2005
contradiction wrote: i know i have offended some people, that was not my intent, however if you are offended, then maybe you need to rethink your attitude about other peoples choices. your taste in things is no better than any one else's, it is just different. contradiction, you have not offended me (I can't speak for anyone else), but I am going to contradict you on one point - and agree with you on others :). Asparagus are a natural product, not man-made. Cars and tarot cards are man-made. Some are better made than others. Some cars don't start, never leave the garage, don't hold to the road, break down easily and fold in a crash. Some tarot decks are made like bad cars, except you're unlikely to die with them. There are objective criteria. Having said that, if some people prefer a tin-pot of a car over a solid well-built long lasting one (a good car from a variety of brands, not just one), then so be it - as you say, we can't argue with taste, which is subjective. As for TdM and intuition - I believe the word was imagination, rather than intuition. As you also say, intuition is not linked ot any one thing, it is innate to the person deploying it. But I believe intuition builds on knowledge, and vice-versa; and on trust. You appear to trust your intuition very much, so it works for you. Personally Marseille is enhancing my intuition, but I can perfectly accept that people not using Marseille have oodles of intuition which they have built over the years using all sorts of teachers. So have I had many teachers! Imagination in tarot is a different thing - objectively given the fact the pips don't have scenes on them, you have to deploy a lot of imagination to read them! I also read with playing cards by the way. I find reading the Marseille pips pretty similar, only more enjoyable because I prefer the design.

Moongold	23 Jan 2005
Helvetica wrote: This reminds me of the thread in the Deck section where we are speaking of learning to read Italian so we can read the commentary books on the Dante and the T Liber. Which reminds me - do you speak the language of the Thoth? When I did, a few years ago, I became rather good at it - but I've not practised in years. Maybe I'll take it up again at some point - but I'll have to trim those wretched keywords, which certainly don't make the deck better . When I was stuying it, I was reminded how completely different from the RWS I had started with it was. Very much a different language, and for a passionate while, better. Just as, for the moment in my mind, the Marseille is better than either Thoth or RWS traditions. I attribute that to falling in love. Yes - I have read with Thoth but not particularly brilliantly. I used it more for personal work. At first I actually thought the deck was too *dark* but then felt more at ease with it as time went by. I rarely use it now. But I hope you can see my point. I think people can become well versed in more than school of Tarot. So you have fallen in love with the Marseille and you think it is the best? Nobody will take that away from you. If you want to walk around with a badge saying *The Marseille is best* I won't stop you. But if you spend hours trying to persuade everyone else that it is the best some people will listen, some will be rude to you, some will be defensive and some will stop listening :) Some will engage in the argument for a while and others will get on with whatever they need to get on with. I would say to you at some stage. *Yes, Sophie - I like the Marseille too. I love it in fact! And I could sit down for hours and discuss aspects of the Marseille as I could aspects of the RWS but I don't feel I need to convince everyone else that one or other is the best.* And if someone kept on trying to persuade me - and I am not saying that you are - eventually I would turn off my ears or go and sit somewhere else. Just a thought. I live in a comparatively new culture - quite multicultural - I see such value in the diversity. It s the same with the Tarot. By the way... I know Tarot goes back further than 17th century. It's just that my Conver Marseille. one of the earliest versions currently available in print was designed some time in the 1760's I think. I was simply making the point of history with Rosanne - but yeah..... should have been more careful.

Moongold	23 Jan 2005
One other thing is pertinent. If the deck is so good - and it IS beautiful - then it will attract its own following. That is the best way. :)

Major Tom	23 Jan 2005
The question really boils down to: What is Tarot? I can't remember who said it on the thread - perhaps they'll come forward, but it was an answer. Tarot is not a deck of cards. :joke: There is an underlying impulse. ;) For me, and perhaps I'm alone here, there is a deck of cards that most closely resembles that which is not a deck of cards. That I'm creating that deck shouldn't come as a suprise. :laugh: There is a concept known as 'consensus reality'. The secret of life is shown in Tarot. Don't you reconise yourself? Which deck speaks to your life? Gosh! :eek: Let's put this in perspecitive. This isn't about divination and the foretelling of your future. This is about how you create your own reality. We all live in our own heads. The secret to life is what you want. ;) Answer me this: Would you rather be right or would you rather be happy? :laugh:

Fudugazi	23 Jan 2005
Hi Moongold, I will never seek to persuade people one tradition is better than another, only individual decks within a given tradition, on objective criteria. As I already said, I think the whole question - is Marseille better than RWS (or vice-versa) completely silly. (Besides, "persuade" is a big word - I only say what I think, if people are persuaded by my stunning eloquence then so much the better!!). When I say - "I am in love with the Marseille so for the moment it is better", I am making an emotional choice, not one based on objective criteria - and I recognise it :)

Moongold	23 Jan 2005
You are quite right - and I confused the issues. My apologies. I just demonstrated how easily folk can misunderstand one another. I am so weary of this discussion and now quietly leave the thread! Does it not seem odd that many of us felt the question was silly but have none the less spent four pages discussing it? :) Waving her wattle scented scarf, Moongold scrambles back to the Haiku thread........

firemaiden	23 Jan 2005
Diana wrote: (To me, it is so obvious that some decks are better than others that I am finding it puzzling that such a question even needs to be answered.) The title question of the thread was hastily chosen in making the split. For a better definition of the subject, please read the first post on the thread. (And then suggest a better title.)

Diana	23 Jan 2005
firemaiden: I don't mind your title. Threads anyway frequently tend to take their own directions regardless of their title. Threads are very pesky. But of course, if one reads the first post, then a title would have to be in the line of "Is going from a RWS to a Marseilles a step upwards or not?" Or something like that. But that's not going to please a number of people on these boards. May rub their fur the wrong way. I suppose in the long run, it all comes down to "What is Tarot?" I know that one person's Tarot is another person's Oracle. And one person's fruit is another person's vegetable (like tomatos, I suppose).

Rosanne	24 Jan 2005
I had to go by byes about post 90. I had lots to think about today as a result of this thread. Heres a little story. Four tarot readers left this mortal coil and arrived at the great Mill in the sky. The Miller welcomed them with "I have seen you have lived passionate, commited and fruitful lives; you all have shared your knowledge with others, so unpack those knapsacks on your wands, and show me what you have brought." "Hey Miller, we had remarkable journeys, don't you want to know how we got here; we each came by different roads and we want to share that with you?" "No I' ve heard it all before- Marseilles Street, Rider Waite Drive,Thoth Avenue and Aeclectic Parade. Just show me the wheat. I am known to have the BEST flour, and I use only the BEST Wheat for that, I don't care how you got here" So many thanks to all whom help me improve my wheat, with passion and commitment. Regards Rosanne

Nina*	24 Jan 2005
Rosanne wrote: "Hey Miller, we had remarkable journeys, don't you want to know how we got here; we each came by different roads and we want to share that with you?" "No I' ve heard it all before- Marseilles Street, Rider Waite Drive,Thoth Avenue and Aeclectic Parade. Just show me the wheat. I am known to have the BEST flour, and I use only the BEST Wheat for that, I don't care how you got here" Oh Rosanne, this is beautiful and made me laugh :) It really says it all, doesn't it!?! The deck we use doesn't matter. Only what we use it for does...

The   Can one deck be better than another? (split from RWS to TdM thread) thread was originally posted on 09 Jan 2005 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.