Variant approaches to the Thoth: Angeles Arrien's book

Ross G Caldwell

Scion and Aeon, could you quote Arrien's book to show what you mean? I don't have it, so the effect of your arguments just gives me a reaction of kneejerk agreement (having lived through and been educated in the intellectual climate of the 80s and early 90s, including being part of the burgeoning neo-pagan movement).

Although I am a one-time Crowley and Thothaholic, I also never minded if people saw what they wanted in the cards - but if someone decided to ignore or even repudiate Crowley's influence on the designs, they went down quite a bit in my personal esteem.

The only book I ever tried to read about Thoth besides Crowley was Gerd Ziegler's "Tarot, Mirror of the Soul" (IIRC). It was so lame compared to Crowley that it was positively unhelpful. I don't think I ever bought another secondary Thoth interpretation book. That, if you need to know, is how much of a purist I am. I can't imagine how it could be more difficult in the internet age to understand Crowley, since just about everything he talks about in the Book of Thoth is a mouse-click away, whereas in 1980, you had to chew the gristle day in and day out and make real effort to find the texts he mentions and puzzle out the Book itself.

"Luxury!" you say... well, those days are over, and people want it now and they want it easy. I don't even have DuQuette's book, although from what I understand it is a worthy introduction.

Anyway, I think I understand your points, and given the mentality of most "New Age" publications in the 1980s I implicitly agree with you, but I'd really like to see Arrien's own words, and if they damn her in the way you both say.

Ross
 

Lillie

Yeah, I'd like that too.
I want to see what she says without having to by the book.

And yes. same for me in the 80's.
BoT or sod off.

Though I expect I never gave it the same sort of study that Ross did!

In some ways it was more fun back then, hunting down a book, the anticipation, the sense of achievement when I found it, the feeling that there was all this stuff out there that you have to work to find.

Everything being just a another google click takes all that away.

It's sort of sad.
 

arcana17

Ross, this is what Angeles Arrien writes on page 13:
I read Crowley's book that went with this deck and decided that its esotericism in meaning hindered rather than enhanced the use of the visual portraitures that Lay Freida Harris had executed. I instantly felt that a humanistic and universal explanation of these symbols was needed so that the value of Tarot could be used in modern times as a reflective mirror of internal guidance which could be externally applied. In reading about Lady freida Harris, the illustrator of this deck, I was inspired to write this book to honor her execution of these universal symbols. The following quote about her perception of the Tarot's value particularly touched me:
"The Tarot could be described as God's picture book, or it could be likened to a ceslestial game of chess, the Trumps being the pieces to be moved according to the law of their own order over a checkered board of the four elements"

While I don't agree with some of what she writes in the book, it can still be something that can be useful, as it gives another layer to the meaning of the cards.

I just try to keep what makes sense to ME, and deepen my knowledge with the Book of Thoth (which does not always make sense to me).
 

Ross G Caldwell

Lillie said:
BoT or sod off.

LOL

In my neck-o'-the-woods it would have been "Book of Thoth or sawed-off".

In some ways it was more fun back then, hunting down a book, the anticipation, the sense of achievement when I found it, the feeling that there was all this stuff out there that you have to work to find.

Everything being just a another google click takes all that away.

It's sort of sad.

It sure does, for all the reasons you mentioned, and the fact that learning doesn't just mean "getting a fact", but digesting it and letting it find its place in your universe, a process that takes time and work.

The poverty of riches. When you have everything, nothing has any value.

Ross
 

Ross G Caldwell

arcana17 said:
Ross, this is what Angeles Arrien writes on page 13:
I read Crowley's book that went with this deck and decided that its esotericism in meaning hindered rather than enhanced the use of the visual portraitures that Lay Freida Harris had executed. I instantly felt that a humanistic and universal explanation of these symbols was needed so that the value of Tarot could be used in modern times as a reflective mirror of internal guidance which could be externally applied. In reading about Lady freida Harris, the illustrator of this deck, I was inspired to write this book to honor her execution of these universal symbols. The following quote about her perception of the Tarot's value particularly touched me:
"The Tarot could be described as God's picture book, or it could be likened to a ceslestial game of chess, the Trumps being the pieces to be moved according to the law of their own order over a checkered board of the four elements"

While I don't agree with some of what she writes in the book, it can still be something that can be useful, as it gives another layer to the meaning of the cards.

I just try to keep what makes sense to ME, and deepen my knowledge with the Book of Thoth (which does not always make sense to me).

Thanks for the quote arcana17. The fact that she gives an explanation or apology for her method at all is good - although I imagine there would be many who wouldn't take time to reflect on what it means, in particular in relation to the intentions of the design.

I can find a lot of faults, both moral and intellectual, in this apology (I mean "apology" as a literary form - the defense of one's position, usually expressed in the Forward or Preface, or otherwise at the very beginning of a literary work (whole works can also be "Apologies")).

Nevertheless, if Arrien's work helped make the Thoth more popular - which IMO is a good thing - , I can only say "to each their own" (while muttering under my breath - "you'll come around one day") :)

Ross
 

Scion

I'll bite, Ross... I'm procrastinating on pages I have due tomorrow. I respect Mary's position, and understand where she's coming from, but I genuinely believe that the only reason this book still exists is because Duquette's didn't at the time. The Tarot Handbook is just old enough and so widely distributed that it happens to be sitting on shelves when people go to the mall looking for something on Tarot.

I'm going to just flip through randomly and give you an example from each page I hit. Crappy books are bad for all of us. As useless as Ziegler's book is, Arrien's is deliberately misleading and factually wrong more often than not.

So, on to some specifics:

The classic quote and the one which lets us know how wrongheaded the book is comes from Arrien's intro: (p. 13 Tarot Handbook, Arrien) : "I read Crowley's book that went with this deck and decided that its esotericism in meaning hindered rather than enhanced the use of the visual portraitures that Lady Frieda Harris had executed. I instantly felt that a humanistic and and universal explanation of these symbols was needed so that the value of Tarot could be used in modern times as a reflective mirror of internal guidance which could be externally applied.... I feel these visual symbols stand by themselves because of the artist's integrity and commitment to their being representative of something greater, "God's Picture Book". It is Crowley's interpretation of these symbols, regardless of his reputation, with which I have issue; and it was this issue which led me to interpret these symbols from a cross-cultural and universal view, honoring their visual execution." I'm not going to get into the choice she's made for heerself, but the fact is that Harris painted (brilliantly!) as she was instructed; if there is confusion it is Harris' because even SHE admitted over and over that she was only executing Crowley's work. The thing is that Harris was INITIATED by Crowley and spent most of their correspondence begging him to correct her mistakes. But if Arrien admitted that she couldn't tell us how she FEELS about the pretty pictures. Mystical tradition as scenic postcard. It's like saying you go to church regularly because cathedrals and their stained glass scenes speak to you personally and spiritually... but you don't agree with anything that Yeshua guy said and you don't like all that icky crucifixion and rebirth business. :confused:

Sorry, I got annoyed and disgusted again. :mad: Deep breath. I'm just gonna flip through for some examples.

On Arrien's discussion of the Death trump, because she hasn't done her homework, she doesn't know that the Eagle, Snake, and Scorpion are actually three different ways of magically depicting Scorpio... and flails around with the generic symbolism that you'd find in a continuing ed poetry course carefully keeping everythign upbeat and friendly. From p. 72 Tarot Handbook, Arrien: "the scorpion represents that part of ourselves willing to protect or defend ourselves," "snake sheds its skin", "the phoenix, or eagle reflects the overall vision and perspective that is needed to become even more of what we are." Uhhh, right. Not only can't she identify the actual symbol, she's just slopping the candy coat wherever her logic doesn't follow. She's got enough sense to identify the double crown as Egyptian, but again ties it into her feeble phoenix rebirth business.

Apparently the Eye on The Tower is (from p. 82 Tarot Handbook, Arrien) "The Eye of Horus, the opened and radiant eye at the top of the card, is an Egyptian symbol for the God of Perception." Now for one thing, can you point me to anyone who calls Horus a God of Perception? I'd love to know where in Egypt they had a God of Perception, but I'm going to write that off as typical 80s mush in which New Age authors believe that ancient people worshipped archetypal abstractions in a kind of institutionalized therapy. :bugeyed: Horus' eye was blinded during the battle with his Uncle Seth, and then restored. THAT is what Crowley is getting at. (Crowley BoT "To obtain perfection, all existing things must be annihilated") In fact Crowley states flat out that the Eye is the eye of Horus AND the Eye of Shiva the destroyer ... only Arrien doesn't like scary words like Destroyer or Blinded or Annihilated, so she's decided it's a big eye of self-help insight.

Then there are just the stupid things: the idiotic phallic stretch on The Knight of Swords: "In Oriental terms, the dagger would be a metaphor for yin (feminine) energy and the sword would be a symbol for yang (masculine) energy," ([WHAT?!] p.107), The Queen of Disks "sitting on a huge pineapple" :)bugeyed: p.139), Five of Wands "The state in alchemy which was known as leaded consciousness" (p.180, I'd love to see the word consciousness used in the 17th cent), the fact that Arrien only recognizes the 3 obvious Mercury signs on the 10 of Disks but can't identify the others (p.197). That isn't interpretation... that is ignorance. Why would I want to pay money to someone writing a "beginner's guide" who couldn't even get their facts right? THAT is the worst of publishing, but it was especially prevalent in 80s New Age massmarket nonfic: people who equated memoir with research, and people who equated typing with writing.

And Arrien's snapshot meaning guide to the deck? Suffice it to say that the skew in her interpretations is towards the self-congratulatory and the facile. The Lord of Pleasure means "Emotional pleasure" and the Lord of Wealth means "Wealth" without edit... but the Lord of Ruin means "Fear of Ruin" and the Lord of Defeat is "Fear of Defeat, Memory of defeat." For Arrien, nothing negative exists in the present tense, only gentle soothing pablum. I realize that the case can be made for this as a kind of elevated philosophical position, but isn't ANYTHING ever wrong in the world? I would argue Arrien should leave poor Crowley and Harris alone and create her own feel-good Tarot of Mystical Opportunism.

I want to be clear: I take Mary's point. I respect her patience with Arrien. I know that Arrien is a much loved teacher and I assume she can read the Thoth, but this book is a train wreck. People do have to find ways to connect to symbols personally and subjectively. BUT... derivative, self-involved books like The Tarot Handbook are worse than useless. Why would I want to read a catalog of someone else's errors rather than just making mistakes on my own? At least if it's my mistake I am more invested in finding the answers rather than taking it as writ. If all we can expect from a book is someone hugging us sporadically to say that whatever we think is great and we're special and unique (just like everybody else apparently:confused:) then why is the book longer than a greeting card? and there's the answer: Arrien wrote a 320 page beautifully printed, sporadically articulate greeting card thanking Harris and giving Crowley the fluffy New-Age finger.

The thing is, symbols are supposed to be interpreted, people SHOULD be able to find their own meanings, but it doesn't happen in a vacuum. Think about the way we learn to read books: we have ideas, then learn the squiggles are letters, then the letters make words, words make sentences, the we use sentences to attempt to communicate the ideas between two separate consciousnesses. As I said once somewhere else here on the board, every artistic choice is an act of "insistence": "see it this way," "consider this myth," "explore these symbols." To use a deck based on unfamiliar tradition and then make up personal meanings without considering the source seems... strange to say the least; like walking into a library and thinking you were looking at shelves of toilet paper because you'd never seen a book. And that isn't a judgement. It's not wrong to take something at face value and reinvent it. You can use those pages to wipe, but it wasn't what was intended.

I get very worked up about this (obviously) because I think people should support good books and diligent authors. Books like Arrien's should be left in the rubbish heap of Tarot history. I'm not saying you couldn't get use out of it. My family always says that there is no one so stupid in the world that you can't learn from them. Readers have one power and that is attention; Arrien's book on the Thoth is beneath attention. You'd get more value out of reading a book of Egyptian mythology or walking through a piece of great sacred architecture or even just learning basic geometry than reading this self-involved twaddle. By spending your bookbuying dollars and bookreading time on this kind of oatmeal you aren't supporting the material that deserves to stay in print.

Respectfully,

Scion
 

Ross G Caldwell

Great post Scion, I'm just reading it now. Please don't change anything yet.

Ross
 

Scion

LOL I'm an inveterate editor... curse of my profession. :D
 

Teheuti

Aeon418 said:
I'm somewhat confused by what you've just said there, Teheuti. The logical conclusion drawn from it is that someone moving on from Arrien's book to Crowley's will realise that The Tarot Handbook itself is one big misconception.
I meant that Angie's misconceptions will become apparent—not that the whole book is one big misconception. There is a difference.

Angie says some stuff that is nonsense or factually wrong. She also has some wonderful ways of looking at the cards from a personal growth and cross-cultural perspective.

For instance, you can see the Queen of Swords, in a reading for yourself, as a Salome or as a Judith figure, holding the head of Holofernes, or you can see her as Angie suggests—as "the mask-cutter" cutting through deception to get to the truth. Angie gives you other options.

I think it's disturbing and dishonest that someone can blithely divorce a creator from their creation and not even acknowledge the primacy their ideas.
People do it all the time, in all fields; get used to it. Once an artist (in the broadest sense) has created something and put it out into the world the artist no longer "owns" how it works on people—it just does. For instance, an observer might see the foreshadowing of WWII in a painting where the artist claims this was not his or her intention.

The primacy belongs with the person having a direct primal experience with a work of art or literature. Angie can help one realize that possibility with the Thoth deck. It doesn't make her ideas better or worst, except as they stand the test of time and usefulness.

If historical primacy of ideas was the be-all-end-all of things then we'd only use Tarot for playing card games. Crowley would never have created his Tarot deck—for wouldn't that be disturbing to the original design? Nor would he have used it for divination, nor added the astrological references, nor switched the Emperor and Star!

It's no secret that the political climate of the late 80's and into the 90's was one of intense hatred against Crowley and his views on Tarot. There was a concerted effort to erase Crowley's contribution to the Thoth Tarot and replace it with something else, anything else, as long as it wasn't Crowley.
I never noticed that! Sure, there will always be people who don't like Crowley. This was so at the turn of the century, in the 1940s and when I first got into Tarot in the late 60s.

Angie's book, BTW, was written around 1976-78. I read some of the first draft while it was in process and attended classes where she taught the material. She fell in love with the cards, but had an aversion to Crowley (yes, it's true). The cards spoke to and through her in a way that made a lot of sense to others, including me—despite the fact that she ignored far too many of the truly profound things Crowley had to say.

For me, returning to Crowley's book for the third time—which I did after taking Angie's classes—was far more enlightening then it had ever been before. I had learned to appreciate Crowley, and the depth of his knowledge, even more than I had before. But, I also got some wonderful insights from Angie's material.

Mary
 

Teheuti

I can understand completely why many people don't like Arrien's book. I don't recommend it for everyone, and I'd never ever suggest it replace Crowley's book.

Still, I recognize that Arrien's book plus the deck fulfill a need in some people. Those who are satisfied with just these don't want to know anything else about tarot or have a real understanding of the deck. In my opinion, they're really missing out. But, so what?

Arrien's book can be a way to access a deck that, at first, may be impenetrable. It can also be an inspiration to personal growth work and creativity.

Mary