The worst tarot books you have come across

Simone

Maybe the destruction of the cards was suggested in the context of some magical ritual? I have not read the book, so I can't really talk, but this is the idea that has been swimming through my head each time I saw your comments... That's maybe why it is suggested to use copies in the ritual.

:D just my two cents...
 

GoldenWolf

Morrison Book

I bought the Morrison book about a week ago and put it aside as I am working through Robert Wang's book on qabalah. Now I am going to go home and check it out to see what, if any, reasoning she gives for destroying a deck! And after you have spent several more dollars copying it at Kinko's no less. I'm not even going to comment on the copyright issue. At least I got my copy in the Clearence section for a buck or two so I'm not out much.
 

sunflowr

After looking into this a bit more... In defense of the author, I do think she (according to what I read on Amazon) cautions that there will be this kind of action and to maybe consider making copies of cards that are used, and then use the COPIES. Also, one doesnt neccesarily have to use a place like Kinkos. Maybe you can find a scan of a card online (or scan your own) and print it out and that will work the same.
 

DeLani

I haven't actually read the Dorothy Morrison book, but I don't think it's such a horrible thing to make copies of cards, then use those cards in such a way that they end up "defaced" or whatever. I do it all the time - make a copy of a card and then glue it to a jar candle for visualization, or else write an affirmation on the bottom border and tape it to my mirror, etc. It's just using the image in sympathetic magic. So I could see if you were banishing something, using the card image as a symbol of it, and burning it or flushing it.
Anyway, back to the topic, I have finally found what is the worst book ever. "Tarot Revelations" by Joseph Campbell and somebody else. I am a huge fan of Campbell, so I was so excited to find this (in my mom's bookshelf, no less), but it is utter garbage. The writing was awful, and I couldn't understand a thing they were trying to say. And I'm pretty knowledgeable about Campbell's works! It was a great idea, poorly executed.
 

Babylon_Jasmine

Auroramyst said:
I'm sure some will disagree, but for me, Tarot Made Easy, by Nancy Garen, just didn't work. It's one of those books that made me think, "OMG, I'll NEVER learn this in a zillion years!"

If you're looking for something specific ("How does this card pertain to my job search?"), then it can certainly be helpful, but it is NOT a book to make learning the tarot "easy," as its name implies. It's more a book for those who DON'T want to learn the tarot but still want to be able to do readings for themselves.

I've read, on another forum, that there are mistakes in the astrological connections in this book, too. I haven't confirmed that myself.
Click to expand...


I don't know if this is the easy tarot book that I looked at, but I read one with a title like that Tarot made easy, or simple or something similar, and after that decided to advise anyone considerign getting into the tarot to run away from any books with the word easy or simple in the title. Only exception would be Tarot for Dummies, which I haven't read, but every for dummies book I have read has been accurate and concise.
 

Babylon_Jasmine

WooMonkey said:
I have to agree with Auroramyst and Yaboot's comments about Garen's Tarot Made Easy. I felt the same way about her Tarot According to You book.
They just didn't work at all for me. Perhaps partially because I am not a Swords-Fire/Wands-Air person.
Click to expand...


I finally figured out where that came from. Because I was sure from a young age that swords were fire and wands air but every tarot book I read disagreed. In the Celtic tradition swords represent fire and wands (or shillelagh's or staves usually, a bit heftier than a hermetic wand) represent air. I read wands as fire and swords as air because i use Hermetic decks but I know if I designed my own deck I would use the Celtic attributions.
 

Babylon_Jasmine

rexenne2003 said:
Thankfully it was a used book from half.com. It was Tarot Spells by Janina Renee. AWEFULL!
Two paragraphs on spell ethics (it's a bit more complicated than that and should be more fully talked about IMHO). Not only did that paturb me, but there is a rigid spell 'pattern' that she instructs you to go by. Candles in the corners book between them laid open to the spell, cards laid EXACTLY as she has them in the book...come on...spell casting is not that rigid and varies from person to person, depending on style and ethics. Yuck. She has a newer verison of the older one that I have, but I cannot get myself to purchase it. It's just the same old thing with a makeover and a spiffy new design on the cover.
Click to expand...

I'd say spell ethics are pretty simple and could easily fit into two paragraphs. And if you need a book to tell you how to cast spells that is going to give you specifics on each spell it is probably good for the book to be as specific as possible. Personally I use a very freeform approach to spells and am usually more interested in books on Magickal Theory than "cookbooks" but I think it is a virtue in a cookbook to be as precise as possible. Witches who feel confident in their theoretical knowledge can tinker with it just as someone who knows how to cook will tinker with recipies in a literal cookbook.
 

Babylon_Jasmine

hdarpini said:
I should have taken the advice of the original post I was responding to and canceled my order. This book is a mishmash of information that is only negligibly useful. Some of the information I would even categorize as whacked-out.

Llewellyn puts out some great books (e.g., "The Complete Book of Tarot Reversals") so I guess they're entitled to a clunker once in a while. Who knows, maybe some people do find this book useful. As for me, I'll be selling this baby on eBay, along with my other least-favorite book, "Tarot Card Combinations" by Dorothy Kelly.

The latter book does contain some useful ancillary information, but the bulk of the book, which deals with card combinations themselves, was disappointing. I was expecting the author to provide an approach and methodology to interpreting combinations, much like Mary Greer does in her book on reversals, rather than just an endless procession of of combinations and their supposed meanings (in keyworks no less, a method I find useless). I imagine that reading card combinations is much like reading individual cards: the meaning you give them is more a blend of others' interpretations and your own intuition rather than a rigid set of keywords to learn by rote. In terms of this perception of card combinations, this book fails.

If you'd like to make up your own mind about these books, check out my posting on eBay in a few days. :)

Hal
Click to expand...


Llewellyn puts out more books than any other esoteric publisher, maybe more than the rest put together, and as far as i have seen they put out a higher percentage of fluffy poorly written books than most. That doesn't mean they don't also have some excellent books, but I usually avoid anything with a moon on the spine unless I know it is good.
 

Babylon_Jasmine

mike gorth said:
THE PICTORIAL KEY TO THE TAROT was a terrible book to get. How disappointing. What ever you do, don't get it!!!!!!!!!!!
Click to expand...


I would say you should get it, but not even try to understand it until you have read a few dozen other books. I think Waite wrote to be difficult to understand on purpose.
 

Psychebleu

Pollack

darwinia said:
I know this crops up in the best books category usually, but I would put Rachel Pollack's "Forest of Souls" in this category.

I liked what she had to say about time in the very early part of the book but little else. It surprised me since I like her two books on the Haindl tarot so well.

I doubt if I'll ever read another of her books. Perhaps my tastes have just changed.
Click to expand...

You're right not to bother - I have 78 Degrees, which I bought in a local metaphysical bookstore when she made an appearance - gave a talk, signed some books. Not impressed with the book (as a tool for learning to read tarot, anyway) or her. Sorry, but she just strikes me as a trained reader, in the sense that some differentiate between a 'tarot reader' and an 'intuitive/empath/psychic' - she knows the cards, but I don't see her as a developed intuitive.
 
tarot companion The ultimate software