Freud, psychoanalysis, and tarot

[littleozzyman]

Hey folks,

I recently posted in the new member forums about my interests, and heard from quite a few people who wanted me to create a thread on this topic, so here goes.

I'm interested in, and am a student of, Freudian psychoanalysis. I've recently picked up the tarot, and frequently find myself wondering how certain themes , ideas and concepts relating to the tarot might resonate with Freudian ideas. For example, the super ego, the ego and the Id all seem to have corresponding cards, or at least cards that seem to emphasize one aspect or another of the un/conscious mind. The idea that we as humans are circumscribed to a certain range of experience, and that all experiences, no matter how "pathological", all have their basis in the normal set of human experiences, is also a concept that psychoanalysis shares with the tarot.

Those familiar with Freud would know that, as a fervent athiest and skeptic, he would scoff at the more mystical elements of the tarot. However, I think he certainly would have found them interesting as a template for thinking about consciousness and a tool for delving into our compex, contradictory and repressed unconscious thoughts/feelings. And, I imagine later psychoanalysts might be more amenable to the divinatory and mystical aspects of tarot reading (the Indian analyst Sudhir Kakar comes to mind -- he wrote an excellent book called "The analyst and the mystic".)

I would love to hear other people's thoughts on this topic. Have you explored the relevance of psychoanalysis to tarot reading? Any good texts that delve into this subject, or just thoughts of your own?

I know so much has been written about Jung's archetypes, the collective unconscious, and tarot. Though I find that interesting, and wouldn't want to censor that topic from this thread, I think there remains so much to be said about the non-Jungian analytic side to the tarot. The complicatons of transference/counter transference in tarot reading, how the Oedipus complex might be discerned through the cards, sublimation, etc etc...

Looking forward to your comments! And my apologies if I used too much technical vocabulary; I'm happy to clarify any of the jargon.

[The crowned one]

I think the Oedipus complex is very dated. I think Freud would completely disapprove of tarot, as he did of Jung's whole fascination with the occult. I am with Steven Pinker on the idea of the oedipus complex.

Freud opened many new doors and ideas, but those doors he originally opened not unlike Jung, or Descartes are very dated. We are past those original idea's as they were laid down. We built off of them.

I think he would have felt tarot dealt with the conscious over the unconscious. Like reading a label or pub sign. It did not bring out the hidden but spotlighted our needs and living dreams, what we want, not what we did not know we wanted.

[littleozzyman]

Originally Posted by The crowned one

I think the Oedipus complex is very dated. I think Freud would completely disapprove of tarot, as he did of Jung's whole fascination with the occult. I am with Steven Pinker on the idea of the oedipus complex.

Freud opened many new doors and ideas, but those doors he originally opened not unlike Jung, or Descartes are very dated. We are past those original idea's as they were laid down. We built off of them.

I think he would have felt tarot dealt with the conscious over the unconscious. Like reading a label or pub sign. It did not bring out the hidden but spotlighted our needs and living dreams, what we want, not what we did not know we wanted.

Hmmm... if you're interested in the tarot, which inherently requires a poetic and metaphorical way of looking at the world, I'm surprised to hear you take such a hard empiricist line on Freud. Yes, in some sense, the idea that every son wants to unconsciously kill his father and sleep with his mother is a bit dated, and simplistic. But the concepts of triangulation, of rivalry in our relationships with others, of our unconscious aggressive impulses towards those we love (all central components of the Oedipus complex) don't sound so "dated" to me.

You're right that Freud might have found tarot superficial. But any time I've received a good tarot reading, what I found valuable were not things the reader told me that I already knew, but the things lurking beneath my consciousness which, though previously unknown to me, felt very true.

[Eeviee]

Originally Posted by littleozzyman

Yes, in some sense, the idea that every son wants to unconsciously kill his father and sleep with his mother is a bit dated, and simplistic.

This reminds me of the Golden Dawn's Lord/Father, Queen/Mother, Prince/Son, Princess (Page)/Daughter labeling. In the book of Thoth he touches briefly upon how they have a cyclical relationship that can be translated into a world view: The Prince eventually becomes the Lord, seeking union with his Princess (she is "far removed" from the family due to her nature), who then becomes the Queen. They marry and create their own Son and Daughter (who keep the story/cycle going).

There is a Tarot deck out there that deals with Jung's views: The Jungian Tarot Deck
http://www.amazon.com/Jungian-Tarot-...logy+and+tarot

The creator (Robert Wang) also wrote several books about Jung & Tarot:
Tarot Psychology - http://www.amazon.com/Tarot-Psycholo...logy+and+tarot

The Jungian Tarot and It's Archetypal Imagery - http://www.amazon.com/Jungian-Tarot-...logy+and+tarot


Also, there are other titles I think you may be interested in:

Tarot and Individuation - http://www.amazon.com/Tarot-Individu...logy+and+tarot

Tarot as a Way of Life - http://www.amazon.com/Tarot-Way-Life...logy+and+tarot

Jung and Tarot - http://www.amazon.com/Jung-Tarot-Arc...=jungian+tarot

These are books I have on my wishlist and I find recommended or I just "run into" and have an interest in! I have a little background in psychology (studied it in college) and found these titles catch my eye.

[Lotus Padma]

The Symbolon deck is not a tarot, so I guess this is a bit off topic - but it uses Jung's philosophy to explain our archetypal selves and motivations. (insofar as I currently understand it.) It is considered a kind of oracle deck, even though it isn't one...it appears to still be in print in the UK, as far as I know. That is where I got my deck from.

The Tarot and Freud? I can't really see the link, myself...the images of tarot came far before Freud, and its modern application is now far beyond Freud. Although some ideas he generated may be contemporary enough to survive - beyond Eviee's very good explanation via Thoth...I can't see him as being any kind of deep or permanent aspect of the deck...though it is certainly an interesting theory!

[The crowned one]

Originally Posted by littleozzyman

Hmmm... if you're interested in the tarot, which inherently requires a poetic and metaphorical way of looking at the world, I'm surprised to hear you take such a hard empiricist line on Freud .

A opinion or a fact are you stating with such authority?

I do not make a correlation between Freud and tarot so I can see each in my own way as separate unrelated entities. For me there is no causality, but I respect your opinion.

Originally Posted by littleozzyman

our unconscious aggressive impulses towards those we love

A therory based on his love for his young mother and dislike/ mixed feelings of his older dad, who was at the time of his birth already a grandfather. He made a template system based on his own emotional disorder. Perhaps I can not relate because I was raised by my Dad, but I found the whole Oedipus complex very distasteful at its core. Where he took it to is interesting, but what he based it on...well. I am certain I have no unconscious aggression towards my kids or lover, nor my kids towards me. Of course the whole Oedipus complex is something he felt happened between 3 and 5 years of age.... my recall of that time is in the form of short clips or stills in my mind, all but a few pleasant. If the complex existed it seems I have resolved it through my life experiences.

I like Freud, brilliancy on many levels.

[trzes]

Originally Posted by The crowned one

He made a template system based on his own emotional disorder.

That's a good point. IMO it is the strongest argument against many specific things Freud said. Nowadays we often have better explanations for all sorts of behaviour Freud wanted to explain, like children's aggression or fury against their parents that mostly is forgotten as fast as it arouse.

On the other hand I think that today Freud's general influence and his contribution to our common knowledge about psychology and the human mind tends to be underestimated. IMO the most important things (specially for tarot) are that our brain works associatively and not structured, and that only a small part of what's going on in our heads is conscious. This explains a lot about the power of symbols and about how tarot works in an intuitive way.

And although Jung seems to be more adequate to think about when it comes to specific symbols/archetypes I think the typical Freudian mindset is worth considering too in some cases. When Waite made the RWS tarot for example, Freud's theories were a pretty new and modern thing, "en vogue" so to speak. I don't remember where I read about the Golden Dawn, but it was something like that they had a strong focus on sexuality. And it is often said that Waite gave extra superficial descriptions of the cards in order to hide some deeper levels of meaning. Putting all this together it seems quite plausible to me that some of the RWS images used to have a Freudian subtext. My personal guess is that the 3rd set of seven major acrana (15 to 21) in particular have such a subtext. While the devil is obvious anyway, tower=phallus is pretty straight forward in a Freudian mindset too. The star with the naked woman spilling water into more water can be seen as a symbol for female sexuality as opposed to the male sexuality of the tower. Even the collar around the naked woman in the world can be seen as a vagina. And besides, all figures “post temperance” are naked in the RWS.

I see Lotus Padama's point that the tarot symbols are much older than Freud. But both Freud and Jung only discovered or described things, they didn't invent them. (I am not speaking about the Oedipus complex here ) And I admit that the Freudian subtext looks a bit far fetched from today's point of view, which is rather different to that from a century (or longer) ago. It is hard to suppress sexual thoughts in today's over-sexualized environment for example, and it would be a bit pointless as well. All I came up with might be more something of historical interest then.

I wonder nonetheless if anybody else has written about such a subtext. I couldn’t find anything so far.

[prudence]

Originally Posted by The crowned one

A therory based on his love for his young mother and dislike/ mixed feelings of his older dad, who was at the time of his birth already a grandfather. He made a template system based on his own emotional disorder. Perhaps I can not relate because I was raised by my Dad, but I found the whole Oedipus complex very distasteful at its core. Where he took it to is interesting, but what he based it on...well. I am certain I have no unconscious aggression towards my kids or lover, nor my kids towards me. Of course the whole Oedipus complex is something he felt happened between 3 and 5 years of age.... my recall of that time is in the form of short clips or stills in my mind, all but a few pleasant. If the complex existed it seems I have resolved it through my life experiences.

I have read that Freud had a wet nurse, which in itself could explain why he'd have a relationship with his mother that was detached enough to have developed (immature) sexual feelings for her. Suckling a woman who is not one's own mother could lead to all sorts of unusual thoughts/fantasies, as well as his Oedipus complex theory. Generally speaking, we do not have wet nurses in this day and age, so as far as theories go this one is fairly dated and I would argue is (was) really only relevant to a certain class of society.