Have you seen this ROOTS OF ASIA artist/creator interview?? Kind of shocking.

Dee Ell

I just came across this interview with the artist/creator of the Roots of Asia deck. It's a deck I've become fascinated with recently, but can't find a reasonably priced copy to buy so don't own it myself and therefore have no personal experience with it nor the book.

Personally, I don't like telling other people what they should/shouldn't do or believe, and so I was a little taken aback by the apparent condescension of the artist! Perhaps it's just a cultural or language issue, but I'd be curious to know what others (whether you own the deck or not) think of the interview.

http://www.rama9art.org/amnart/special.html

***And if you do own the deck, do you have anything to add to what he's saying, having worked with the deck yourself?
 

karen0205

I didn't find his statements to be condescending. I think he's just making a statement
about what his experience with tarot has been. His experience might only be that they
provide yes or no answers to questions. I think his view of having people to be open to
the fact that their behavior has a direct result on the outcome of a situation is enlightened.
His opinion that people are more prone to think it was some mystic force is pretty accurate.
People don't want to be responsible for their own actions. It sounded to me like he was
approaching tarot as a way to grow as a person and not a deck with 'yes or no' answers.
I wasn't offended at all, I wish more people thought that of tarot. At least they would stop
calling us devil worshipers. I didn't feel he was telling anyone what they should
believe. I didn't study the interview but my general take on it is he's trying to open tarot
up as a way for self-evaluation and improvement.

Which part did you find condescending?
 

Dee Ell

I agree with everything you're saying about behavior, etc and one of the reasons I'm interested in it is to grow personally - not to have/make predictions.

But it sounds like he's trying to simply teach people about dhamma with no real respect for tarot -- "Whether or not predictions for the future come true, Amnart said he believed that words of wisdom alone would make consultations worthwhile. They were more 'real and practical' and would help us to better our lives, he said. ...To give them dhamma lessons with regards to their problems, however, would not be palatable to most people. But if we blend the words of dhamma with something they do believe in, like tarot readings, they will be more willing to follow the path of dhamma."

Maybe I'm reading his "more 'real and practical'" statement wrong, but it sounds like he's saying his spiritual practice is more real and practical (and better) than tarot or other superstitious nonsense. (At least that's how that statement came across). And that he had no real interest in tarot but simply found a (admittedly elegant) way to shoehorn his message about dhamma into a system that would disperse itself to many non-believers (of dhamma).

Also: "When one goes for a tarot reading, he said, the predicted future will either be true_or not. Which was rather useless. 'What's the use of one knowing about the future without knowing how to walk through the present to a good future? Conventional tarot readings lack perspective, insight and practical guidelines that would lead us to a more fulfilled life.'" Which underlines the fact that he doesn't understand the various aspects of tarot and, unless I am again reading this incorrectly, he is actually saying tarot readings are useless (but his deck makes them useful due to their dhamma lessons).

Now this is all coming from me: someone who has no experience with reading tarot (but a great interest in it), and given my natural leanings am greatly attracted to this deck. So I'm not a diehard defender of tarot. I'm more of an intensely interested bystander who happened to notice what I considered to be some low blows.
 

karen0205

I guess you would have to know what his personal experience with tarot has been.
It appears to be that tarot that he has seen is a 'yes or no' answer kind of thing,
I think he just hasn't been exposed to a more involved tarot reading. Being Buddhist,
maybe he hasn't seen many readings and is basing his opinion on a few limited
times. He does want to expand tarot to play a role in self improvement so I think
that's good. You might just be reading more into his comments because of your
own experiences. Without talking to him, you have know way of knowing what
exactly he meant. Don't forget about the language barrier too. Sometimes things
don't translate the way they intend.
 

Dee Ell

Don't forget about the language barrier too. Sometimes things
don't translate the way they intend.

I understand - that's why I said in my original post "Perhaps it's just a cultural or language issue..."

And I also understand if his experience with tarot is very limited, but his statements came across as so definitive. Maybe because I grew up in a very strict religious (non-buddhist) background and saw the condescending way people talked to other "non-believers" (even if things were said in a loving way, I know what went on behind the scenes and the condescending attitudes people had (even if they were ignorant of their own condescension)).

So it just makes me bristle, like it's proselytizing.
 

caridwen

It has made me very interested in the deck. He researched Tarot for 4 years, went on a year long meditation retreat and then painted the cards. That's quite a lot of time and energy and inner wisdom in a deck. He wants to spread the word of a certain type of Indian Buddhism (Dhama). He certainly has an agenda and I don't agree that Buddhism and fortune telling are incompatible when we consider the Yi Jing and Yarrow. However, most Tarot decks have an agenda.

Now if someone put that much effort into a Tarot of Tao then I would snap it up:D
 

ravynangel

deleted :)
 

ravynangel

It has made me very interested in the deck. He researched Tarot for 4 years, went on a year long meditation retreat and then painted the cards. That's quite a lot of time and energy and inner wisdom in a deck. He wants to spread the word of a certain type of Indian Buddhism (Dhama). He certainly has an agenda and I don't agree that Buddhism and fortune telling are incompatible when we consider the Yi Jing and Yarrow. However, most Tarot decks have an agenda.

Now if someone put that much effort into a Tarot of Tao then I would snap it up:D

deleted :)
 

Dee Ell

It doesn't make me any less interested in the deck itself (if you've seen my previous crazy post on the fact that I've looked at every single deck on the giant A-Z list on this site then you'd know this came out as my favorite from all these decks I've only seen online)

And obviously he put a lot of thought and effort into the deck, which is why I said it is an elegant communication of his agenda.

I was just really curious for anyone who actually has the deck what they think of it in light of this interview...
 

Zephyros

I don't see condescension there, in fact I hold very much the same views. I do feel that many readers tend to deify their decks and accept whatever they "say" divorced of perspective, self-reliance and responsibility. Besides, he doesn't have to open every statement with a caveat that it is his opinion. We can, and should, automatically assume that. Here on Aeclectic it is the custom to do that, but it can be tedious at times, and I often don't do that.

Of course, if someone researched Tarot for four years, and then came to the conclusion that Tarot reading is 5000 thousand years old and comes from ancient Egypt, that in itself casts grave doubts on how good his research actually is. This deck doesn't interest me, personally, but then, it wouldn't.