Variant approaches to the Thoth: Angeles Arrien's book

Teheuti

Scion said:
someone has the responsibility of calling attention to the out-and-out problems when beginner's start looking to them.

Agreed, and I wish you would do so. I don't see you pointing out the specific material that creates the problem (other than her throwing out Crowley). Instead, you seem to only have issues with her.

That doesn't make her a bad person, it just makes The Tarot Handbook a bad book. . . . I did not say the book was worthless, but that I found it "virtually worthless"
Mostly, I've found your critiques to lack specific references to the material but, rather, to consist of name-calling based on your faulty personal knowledge of her lifestyle and background:

• "she is a moron"
• "typical 80s arrogance"
• "middle-class mass-market author with a middling education and some mushy new-age ideas from continuing ed classes" [she has a Ph.D. and teaches in at least three graduate schools]
• "her bourgeois caftans-and-coffee blather"
• "New Age sloppiness and inattention"
• "her wrongheaded piffle"
• "unwittingly belittling itself" (despite the "it" reference, this could only be referring to the author, as a text can't "belittle itself")
• "that bullshit is adamant and arrogant"
• "a foolish idiosyncratic meringue"

Such a critique on wikipedia would be thrown out in a minute. I object because what you have written is more of a rant then a helpful exposition. I don't see how it could help any of us make a rational decision.

just because I find her book silly and pointless doesn't mean I have any feelings about her
A balanced comparison of Angie's text on the cards compared with Crowley's, pinpointing errors that are detrimental to understanding the deck, would help anyone make their own decision and wouldn't make it seem like you were just thowing out angry pot-shots aimed to denigrate Angie personally.

Mary
 

Ligator

As I have said before...

Arrien has made some mistakes, yes. Arrien clearly states that she has disagreements with Crowley so she has reinterpreted some of the Thoth. She clearly states that.

You gave some examples of the "wrongs" of Arrien earlier: http://www.tarotforum.net/showthread.php?t=95427&page=4&pp=10

Well... You can't demand that Arrien should give EVERY connection and describe EVERY symbol of the card. That was clearly not that which Arrien aimed for with her book!? And... In the case of Scorpio you even demand that Arrien should do more than Crowley did. :eek:) Not even Crowley mentioned that the snake and the eagle are symbols of Scorpio...

/T
 

Aeon418

Ligator said:
Arrien has made some mistakes, yes. Arrien clearly states that she has disagreements with Crowley so she has reinterpreted some of the Thoth. She clearly states that.
Arrien's coffee table book is an attempt at making the Thoth Tarot "safe" and acceptable to the bourgeois middle class. Unfortunately one thing stood in Arrien's way. A thing that was so antithetical to middle class, New Age values, it simply had to go - Aleister Crowley. Along with Crowley went all his ideas.

But the loss of these ideas was met with a triumphant hooray! After all, those ideas were seriously difficult to understand. It required a lot of work, effort, and dedication to grasp the thread of Crowley's thought. But of course this sort of thing can't be tolerated in this "dumb down" New Age. It has a tendency of exciting the inferiority complex, and no one wants that to happen, least of all the middle classes.

Crowley's ideas are sometimes difficult, challenging, and quite often run counter to the consensus values of today. To engage with them is to have your preconceptions, view of life, and spirituality radically challenged at every point. Crowley does not allow you to sit inside your comfort zone. He rattles your cage until you step out of it and your preconceptions. He's a catalyst for personal growth shouting wake up!!!

Arrien, on the other hand, serves up a soothing, anaesthetic balm. Nothing is allowed to shock. Nothing is going to challenge or disturb. Everything is ok. Everyone can agree with every word, and wear a big happy smile on their face and feel warm and cosy inside. There's nothing in her book that is going to provoke thought and reflection because it all plugs in so well with main stream consensus reality values and the modern day consumer ethos. "Product" does not sell to a wide audience unless it is bland and inoffensive.
Go back to sleep........ shhhhhhh.....

But Arrien didn't stop there. Not only did she gleefully try to expunge Crowley from the Thoth, she also tried to re-write history by inferring that Harris was it's sole creator, and it would be better for everyone to look at the cards in that light. Unfortunately this brings with it a whole host of problems which Arrien either ignores or is unaware of. If Harris is credited as the sole creator of the Thoth, what criteria stand behind the composition of her works art? Did she merely place splodges of colour on canvas, without rhyme or reason, simply to create a pleasing aesthetic effect? After Arrien threw out Crowley she also threw out the intention behind the composition of Harris's artwork.

Why did Harris paint the Priestess with a bow in her lap? Why does the Emperor hold an orb and sceptre? Why are the dominant colours used in the Hierophant, red-orange, deep indigo, deep warm olive, and rich brown? Why was any of the symbolism used? The list of "whys" could go on and on. But according to Arrien there is no "why". The symbols and colours used are all arbitrary and placed there by pure chance. This is the only conclusion that can be reached after throwing out the directing force behind the symbolism. But to the rescue comes Angeles Arrien. She is going to tell us the meaning and intention behind Harris's "supposedly" arbitrary and clueless use of symbols. Instead of being a highly specific language of colour and symbol, it now becomes "cross-cultural" and has Arrien's intentions shoe-horned on to them.
Ligator said:
Well... You can't demand that Arrien should give EVERY connection and describe EVERY symbol of the card. That was clearly not that which Arrien aimed for with her book!?
It doesn't matter though, does it? The symbols on the cards are meaningless and arbitary shapes and colours, waiting for meaning and intention to placed upon them, or so Arrien claims. The artistic composition must therefore be a complete fluke. :laugh:
Ligator said:
And... In the case of Scorpio you even demand that Arrien should do more than Crowley did. :eek:) Not even Crowley mentioned that the snake and the eagle are symbols of Scorpio...
Erm......you did cliam to have read The Book of Thoth?
 

Teheuti

Aeon418 said:
The symbols on the cards are meaningless and arbitrary shapes and colours, waiting for meaning and intention to placed upon them, or so Arrien claims.
Since you say she said this, could you please show me where? I tried to find such a statement in her book and couldn't.

I'm middle class (am not sure about bourgeois) and sometimes "new agey." I don't understand the contempt for all things deemed "New Age" and I don't see it all as "dumbed down," and I don't think I'm stupid. I appreciate the challenge of Crowley's Tarot materials, though I feel no need to dedicate myself to an extensive study of all his works. I also found that quite a few things in Angie's book provoked thought and reflection in me. It also spurred a tremendous amount of creativity not only in me but in almost everyone who took that particular class with her. I've rarely seen a group of people react with so much concrete creative Tarot work and research.

I found it refreshing that Angie wrote a book that wasn't focused on what Crowley said. It allows for something different and, at times can be very mind-opening. When I went back to Crowley I was able to appreciate him at a much deeper level. For me, it was just what I needed to spur me to a deeper study of Crowley.

The extent to which Crowley's intentions for the deck are important is an interesting debate, but the fact is that it can't be legislated—human beings do what human beings do. "New Criticism" (which I was taught in college as an ideal) disavows the role of the author in creating a work. It is simply one way of approaching literature and art.

Scion and Aeon - What I hear is that reading Angie's work and thinking of others reading it is extremely painful to you. It must be terrible feeling that a favorite deck is not understood the way you'd like it to be understood. You seem very concerned that people are in danger of having something hurtful happen to them, the work, or to you. In your minds, what is the worst case scenario for what would result from people reading Angie's book?

Mary
 

ZenMusic

I've avoided stepping into this mess..but..
Scion said:
said "but my only interest is in the content of her book and the way that content does or does not help people studying the Thoth"

exactly; that is Scion's discussion.. and he is SO correct.. it is NOT a criticism of Arrien's personality, life, or soul, she could be the greatest person to walk the earth, but it's a terrible book..

A bad book, about nearly any other deck, wouldn't effect a response from me, but the Thoth is different ... and for me to take time to point out why .. is certainly unnecessary to anyone who really understands it.. Thoth is unique, I think the greatest achievement in all Tarot history..

It is so profound, build on such depth, including the Golden Dawn, Alchemy, Myth, etc. .. and consolates and then transcends the sources in the synergy.. this is such a enriching/evolving tool ... that to throw all that out, and start over with a new interpretation??? .. I don't mind..and with any other deck I wouldn't even make a comment.. but here we have newbie's asking for advice on books on Thoth... and others representing that it's a valuable book.. so we offer opinions that it's not..


THIS is just as if , a great Saint were to write a book on Elliot's "The Waste Land" .. says all the previous research on the allusion, symbolism, quotes, structure (and the editing by Pound) are wrong, and this person's insight has revealed that the poem is actually a commentary on the life and works of Walt Disney...

then someone writes a criticism about that, warning students wishing to understand the poem more deeply, avoid the book..

if I wanted help working with the Thoth, Scion and Aeon would be the most valued input

.. i edited this down to about 1/4 th of what i wrote.. there's just no point more..
 

Scion

Teheuti said:
Scion and Aeon - What I hear is that reading Angie's work and thinking of others reading it is extremely painful to you. It must be terrible feeling that a favorite deck is not understood the way you'd like it to be understood. You seem very concerned that people are in danger of having something hurtful happen to them, the work, or to you. In your minds, what is the worst case scenario for what would result from people reading Angie's book?
You put your finger on it, Mary. I hadn't thought of it that way but it's a good characterization. Her book does make me mad, and for several specific reasons. I know that people have steering clear of this discussion because emotions are running high and no one wants to step on toes. Please know that I'm finding the discussion fascinating because it's forcing me to articulate something for myself. Always useful!

I hadn't responded to the above because it seemed you were taking personal offense, and I had no intention of upsetting you. The question you raise is an interesting one. Though you would have it otherwise, I couldn't care less about Angeles Arrien. Literally the only time I've spoken of her directly in the thousands of words posted on this topic is the use of the word "moron" for the purposes of a parallel structure in reponse to Ligator's post about Crowley being a "god." Rhetorical usage, but as you say, unfair and I apologize for that word. Still, 1 word out of 10,000 seems minor.

To be blunt, waggling Arrien's PhD doesn't impress me in the slightest; I know plenty of doctorate dingdongs who teach at much fancier schools with far greater acclaim. Her career in anthropology doesn't "cancel out" the mess in The Tarot Handbook. Frankly, if she'd published this book as part of her bid for tenure it would have been rightfully denied. No. Arrien's book is the problem, not just for itself but for an attitude which it espouses and encourages. I take enormous exception to promotion of a book so manifestly riddled with error and outright fakery. I cannot find a single redeeming thing about it not handled better and more clearly elsewhere. Other people can; I cannot. I don't care if she's nice. I don't care if she has a following. I don't care if she can walk on water. I DO care that her book on the Thoth continues to circulate misinformation and flat-out bullshit that unwitting newbies absorb and repeat ad nauseum. It's embarassing and frustrating for them and for people who know the source.

What kind of person teaches people falsehoods willfully? It's pathological. For a career educator, it's doubly so. If I had learned Swedish from a illiterate megalomaniacal con artist for 2 years and then went to Sweden I'd have TWICE as much work and zero benefit. I would very likely never learn Swedish because I would be even more convinced of my inability to learn it and deeply suspicious of anyone who suggested another attempt.

The worst case scenario, Mary, for people exposed to her book is that people's instinctive response to one of the great decks in history is mangled irreparably by the misguided blather of someone who proudly champions laziness and inattention and manifests it in spades. At best, they've learned how to think like Arrien by memorizing Arrien's uneducated, misguided, idiosyncratic, psychobabbled stream of consciousness. At worst, they will discover that they've absorbed a load of wank and have to scratch it all and start over from scratch, forever dogged by those initial impressions with which she infected them. Who would want to destroy and manipulate another person's experience of something as beautiful and complicated as the Thoth?

What I find initially irritating, what gradually gets me so enraged when I read her misnamed Tarot Handbook is the deliberate laziness and inattention. I don't care if some random Thoth user decides to approach the deck personally to faff their way through at leisure, and I'd wish them luck. It would be quite a slog to attempt to piece it all together from scratch, though possible I s'pose; it took Crowley a lifetime of monumental scholarship and magicakal practice to conceive the thing. But the minute an author puts her name on the cover of a book and suggests that she has something to say, wisdom to impart, a fresh perspective, and then goes on to admit explicitly that she has opted for laziness and inattention... My stomach knots. My gorge rises. I start to believe that she did all of it on purpose: made the mistakes, skipped research, fluffed up the scary bits, hit th epunters where they live. It seems like a deliberate con to take the poor suckers who are scared by the Thoth with fluffy pastel platitudes. After all, not only does she cop to skipping the research on the 2nd page of the intro, she is writing a Tarot book and the basis of any Tarot practice, no matter how loose or rigid: is paying attention.

Now, I understand the argument for a user-friendly intro. I understand that some people are scared of all the symbolism and ideas and iconoclasm in the Thoth. But the idea of ANYONE recommending a book that is deliberately, adamantly, incessantly wrong is... bizarre and cruel, to say the least. In my world it borders on criminal because it promotes the publication of shoddy books and it misleads the uninformed. Quite frankly, there are stacks of other books that do the job better and with fewer mistakes. So (it seems to me) the only reason to recommend the book is if you personally like her. Which is your business. Ironically I have read a few other Arrien books. I have an interest in the Muses, so that one made its way into my hands, etc. (Equally facile, sloppy, and poorly written, not researched BTW.) My trouble with her writing is that it is bad and empty. That's okay: lots of authors can't write; they just fill a niche or make people feel soothed. Again, only my opinion. Totally subjective. Anyone who thinks she's witty and articulate should continue to do so. But surely, no one is going to argue that the woman did her homework: she tells us she didn't. You admit she didn't. And before anyone suggests I'm being vague or not providing evidence, a few pages back on request I flipped through The Tarot Handbook at random and gave page numbers of some of the Arrien-embarassments in a 4000 word post. Go look. Several people have also cited howlers. Interestingly, I have as yet not seen ONE person quote something true or useful in support of the book. Though I suppose she does identify shapes and colors accurately.

And for the record, yes: Crowley made mistakes. I'm not sure why this is news to anyone who can read. He also created the deck in question. Anytime Arrien wants to actually create something that outlives her, I'm ready to defend her right to incorporate her own mistakes into an actual creation rather than an interpretation of someone else's work. The thing is, "New Criticism" has been pretty much discarded as a self-involved exercise in academic masturbation along with a lot of other postmodern exegesis. Laziness. Inattention. The exceptions tend to be those critics who are such gifted intellectuals that their ramblings qualify as a sort of independent creative philosophizing. People don't actually learn much trying to interpret Euripides using a Girl Scout handbook, so that line of inquiry has been dying an ugly death. As I've said repeatedly, Arrien is so manifestly a product of a moment in academia that I feel embarassed for her. If this book were just forgotten or superceded it wouldn't be an issue. But it hasn't been and isn't.

I think it's great if people want to believe that there is a quick-fix for discovery and development. I wish such a thing existed: we'd live in a very different world. I imagine there are lots of people who open Arrien's book and breathe a sigh of relief: no magick here! Crowley wiped clear! Nothing scary or complex or paradoxical... But this reminds me of all those infomercials advertising weight loss equipment on late night TV. They sell because they look like they'll work in a flash with no effort. And America stays fat because they don't. Laziness. Inattention. Do people really believe that the secrets of the universe come in a can like E-Z cheese? This is another fundamental thing I find insulting, misleading, and cruel in the book. That quick fix is a LIE. I'm not saying that everything needs to be byzantine torture and that every person who picks up the Thoth wants Knowledge and Conversation of their Guardian Angel, but shouldn't they have the option? Any kind of exercise involves effort just beyond our comfort zone, and then time to recuperate. Arrien's book LIVES in the comfort zone.

It's not that I believe there's one right way to learn, I don't! Rather I do believe that there is a WRONG way to learn. And Arrien's book is fundamentally wrong. Anything that suggests that laziness and inattention is a desirable state in the process of study is lying. I do think that working with the Thoth (or any solid deck) privately and individually can be wildly illuminating and transformative.I can also see that nervous types might appreciate the handholding Arrien offers. You could counter that her willingness to just bluff her way through and just GO for it provides a kind of empty infectious enthusiasm. May be. You could say that her repeated New Age cliches and platitudes make the book accessible to a wider audience. You could say she's so darned gifted she's plugged directly into the pleroma. You could make the case that she's paying attention to her own ideas and that's somehow more pure. I have no problem with that, except for one thing: she's using someone else's deck, and kicks off with idea that the creators ideas are an impediment AFTER admits she couldn't make it through his book 'cause it's just too hard. Laziness. Inattention. But that's not the end of it. She then proceeds through the deck blithely sticking her foot in it on every page, not bothering to check facts or to research anything. Laziness. Inattention.

Infuriating. Maddening. Like fingernails on a blackboard. Endless fingernails on a blackboard that other people will repeat out of ignorance as long as Arrien's pastel doorstop is in print.

Mastery is earned. There is nothing easy about becoming good at anything. The "New Agey" quality to which people refer, that you don't see, may be Arrien's soundbite psychology and the implied suggestion throughout that the easy way to connect to something is to just make it up as you go. That is not study. That is laziness and inattention. If people want to do that, mazel tov. But why publish a book saying that books are worthless?! The Tarot Handbook is an oxymoron. It does in fact (your protestations notwithstanding) "belittle itself" on every page; in fact it ERASES itself: a book about the worthlessness of books. I could offer a class on Swedish and just make all of it up. It might be, as you put it, "mind opening" for me as a creative linguistic exercise to invent a grammar and a vocabulary. But what the hell would my students have learned in a year? Wouldn't it make me a liar? How would they fare in Sweden? What benefit would there be other than to my wallet? Languages must be learned. By the same token, Crowley DESIGNED his deck to affect the intuitive functions. I think that someone could actually study the Thoth on its own and still get enormous benefit from personal direct work without cracking Crowley. It would just take longer. I could build a particle accelerator out of paper clips but I might need a few millenia to figure out the math. Why not just learn, properly? Laziness. Inattention.

This is where this book and all books of its ilk seem like slow, sweet poison to me stacked in pastel rows at strip malls everywhere. They are caustic and insidious, devouring everything inexorably like the "little foxes" in the Psalms. Of course they do! People LIKE being lazy and disconnected. They WANT to be told they're perfect and loveable and skilled as they are without lifting a finger. It's a seductive and lucrative position to take. I have no idea of Arrien knows how crappy and useless her book seems to many-many-many-many people; I imagine she must have a sense. People do generally. But it sells. And that's the bottom line. The world is full of passive, credulous consumers that want an easy out and will accept and enshrine anything between covers as gospel. It may be that she unwittingly embraced the sullen, bourgeois complacency at the core of me-generation pop psychology and it just leaked out into her book. Frankly, it doesn't concern me. Her outdatedness doesn't concern me. She doesn't concern me. It might be that I would love her on sight and embrace her as a sister. But her book would still be empty and facile.

There is something at work in the world, something loose that thrives in apathy... a kind of beige, mushy permission to sit slack-jawed in sweatpants and gum frozen McFood while staring at the television. Do people really, truly, deeply believe that they will access some kind of Gnosis by sitting on their asses? Or is it just that opportunists are willing to sell that idea for $19.95 by the bushel to anyone gullible enough? It's not that I think everyone should still be wearing suits and dresses. It's not that I think people all have to speak in complete sentences and use more than 400 words with regularity. It's not that I believe in hard choices and good books and rewards that are earned and being proud of yourself because you've actually accomplished something. (Well, actually I do) But I think work matters and discipline is worthwhile and knowledge is the hardest won, most precious thing on the earth. ANYONE who states in print, even passively, that people needn't bother, that they can just muddle through, that everything will be easy and they can just keep their asses in the Barca lounger in front of the TV and know the mind of G-D... seems like the closest thing to pure Evil I can imagine.

If anyone is still reading I have an anecdote that might clarify... About 10 years back, psychologists did research on math skills in children living in low-income housing projects. It was theorized, and later "proved," that children who were only comfortable and familiar with present tense never developed certain brain functions. By not using past tense, or future, (and certainly not subjunctive) these children grew up with cognitive deficiencies that impaired math, spatial logic, and verbal abstraction. The things ncessary to strategize, calculate, visualize, or problem solve. The same study showed that low-income parents spend 16 hours a week watching TV, and less than 1 talking to their children in the present tense. Young brains that didn't use those non-present tenses literally atrophied in spatial and quantitative areas. The use of limited and improper verb tense is common in most low income households and it changes who they are and what they can do forever. Whole populations of children are growing up NEVER remembering the past or planning for the future or dreaming or solving problems because they are primarily spoken to (and speak) in the (...like, ya know...) present tense exclusively: "Get me my bag," "I want to eat," "Get in here." The present tense is easier and it gets the job done, right? Compare/Contrast middle and high income families who talk more, read more, verbalize more in MANY tenses. Parents who interact actively and imaginatively with their children are literally building them into stronger skillful adults. Insidious and cruel, no? The study made many people very mad, because it means there are kids trapped by laziness and inattention and it has LITERALLY crippled their minds... and the minds of their children... and their children... A cancer of language that is devouring us and our civilization's capacity to evolve.

Now, what does that have to do with the Crowley-Harris Thoth or Angeles Arrien's book? Those kids grow up functionally impaired because their associational cortexes aren't developing the neural paths they could. And they will raise their children the same way. That makes me MAD, not at them, heaven knows, but at the great televised tit that has numbed this country into a state of complacent idiocy where we're at war with everyone and can barely get off the couch. Laziness. Inattention. The idea that anyone would willingly champion a book that seeks to stripmine the discipline and richness out of a deck seems wicked, in the original sense. I'm appalled by the suggestion that if everyone can feel self-congratulatory relief for a while, once they realize they've been had they'll just wise up and get over it. Vile. It makes me feel like I've thrown up in my mouth and swallowed it at the funeral for our culture.

I think discipline is beautiful. Literally beautiful. Like the curve of a throat. I love seeing it. It pierces me to some secret core. Same thing with study. The raw pleasure I get from the flash of a new synapse is something I hold close in the dark moments. A spark of the divine fire. I believe the Thoth is one of the great esoteric creations of all time. Literally. It is a masterpiece, in the same way that Bovary is a masterpiece or Guernica. Reading a book that is so cavalier, so sloppy, so rude, so passive, so emphatically, insistently incorrect about it out of laziness and inattention seems like an insult on the order of smearing a handful of shit on a Degas. I can understand why someone might hate Degas, but the idea of taking the time to go, and carefully execute something so mind-bogglingly negative and silly seems literally pathetic... as in evocative of pathos. It makes me acutely aware of my own mortality and of the smallness of human beings. Arrien will never in her life create anything that will be remembered that way, and the best she could come up with was to mutilate the primal experience of the deck for thousands and thousands of unwitting readers. Why? Laziness. Inattention.

And that is why I get so mad.

Scion
 

Aeon418

Teheuti said:
Since you say she said this, could you please show me where? I tried to find such a statement in her book and couldn't.
I was being sarcastic. ;) But sarcasm or no, the point still stands because it is the overall theme of Arrien's book.

1) Arrien believes that Crowley's esotericism is a hindrance rather than a help. Did no one ever tell her that the Thoth was intended to be a pictorial representation of Crowley's esoteric doctrines? She claims to have read The Book of Thoth. So how she can have failed to grasp this fundamental point beggars belief, unless it is a deliberate ploy on her part. It is the most esoteric deck out there, and probably the most esoterically loaded deck ever created. (Liber T fans are probably writing me hate mail as I speak. :laugh:)

If you remove Crowley's esotericism from the Thoth what are you left with? 78 pretty pictures that were "seemingly" assembled at random, without any conscious thought behind them. The reasoning behind the careful placement of each and every piece of symbolism has instantly vanished. The trouble is that each card is trying to convey a set of ideas using the language of symbolism. If you throw that language out how do you know what it being said. Certainly much can be gleaned via intuition. But you have to be mindful that any impressions you receive may be coloured by existing preconceptions. This is why it is important to learn the language of symbolism. Intuition is not an infallible guide. It is often biased and skewed by pre-existing thought patterns. Can you imagine the kind of negative reaction a fundamentalist Christian would have to many of the cards in the deck?

The multitude of symbols used in the Thoth is an encoded and highly concentrated language of symbol and colour. It is a gate way that allows the intuition to speak using a clearly defined language that links together human consciousness and the universe. Arrien decided to scrap all that. After all it's bloody hard work to understand it. Anything worth while usually is though. In it's place Arrien has substituted the language of middle class, New Age fluff. In the place of the mysteries of the universe we now have the tedium of suburbia. The former language forces you to step outside yourself, to see a bigger picture. The latter leaves you right where you are and encourages you to stay there. "I'm ok, your ok, we're all ok. And if there is a problem it's always someone else." :rolleyes:

2)Arrien's insistence that Harris be acknowledge as the sole creator of the Thoth literally reeks of agenda. Aleister Crowley was outrageous, controversial, sexually liberal, out spoken, and a rebel. Essentially he is anathema to middle class values. To make the Thoth acceptable to the beige masses you have to get rid of Crowley. There is no way around that. His ideas are unacceptable to the self contained, cosy little world of the middle classes. They are liable to rock the boat, to upset the status quo. If you remove Crowley the Thoth Tarot can be safely "assimilated" into the collective. There won't be any ripples in the water and no one will be forced to question their normative values. How wonderful.

The great tragedy is that the vibrant message of self liberation and self discovery encoded into the cards is lost in the sticky mush of collectivist bourgeois morality and main stream values. Anything that is allowed to become mainstream is essentially dead. The only way to kill the Thoth is to remove Crowley. (see point 1 for the consequences)

I guess I have to ask why did Arrien chose the Thoth? She could have picked any number of decks, callously scrapped the intention behind the symbolism, and projected her own world view on to it. In fact she could have done much the same job with a pack of Pokemon cards, with equally dire results. So why practice this particular form of vampirism on the Thoth?
Could it be a fervent desire to see the Thoth tamed and be made to lay down in green pastures after it has been pumped full of New Age bilge water and effluvium? The Rider-Waite deck is a classic example. It's now so safe that it can even be used on the most sensitive skin. :laugh:

As long as Crowley is associated with the Thoth it will never be part of the zombie mainstream. Maybe Crowley was a lot smarter than some people think in his cultivation of a bogus evil persona. Somedays I thank God that Aleister Crowley still is The Wickedest Man in the World. })
 

gregory

I am no expert.

BUT where I take exception to Arrien is that the Book of Thoth is quite specific and thorough in its descriptions and symbolism. If I take out my Thoth from cold and read with it without having read anything about it - fine; my results may or may not match what Crowley intended. But that is just me, my brain and the deck.

But to write a whole book almost deliberately ignoring what he went to a great deal of trouble to include is - as Scion says - lazy, whatever her qualifications and experience. It doesn't matter what her motives were - balm for the masses, promoting acceptability - whatever. It is just plain wrong. I doubt if my writing up what I KNOW are the meanings of some deck or other would be welcomed by an artist who had put their whole life into their own deck. (Indeed, I have been blasted by an artist on another forum for seeing something in a deck which was not intended..... and I have been startled by a similar response to a card of my own.) We should afford Crowley/Harris the same respect.

Given that the Book of Thoth exists, it is plain rude to disregard all that is in it. If you don't understand it - fine. If the fact that the Thoth is a complex deck makes it hard to understand - tough. Esotericism is the whole POINT of it. If you can't cope with it, don't try till you can. It is NOT OK for someone who claims to be an expert to dumb it down to make it "OK". There ARE good books about it that can help.

I'm sorry - but this is one area of Tarot that I am actually working on understanding with the help of people who ARE helpful with the real McCoy - like Duquette - and - yes - Scion - and I know what hard work it is. But it would be totally wasteful to just leave all that and say hey, PRETTY DECK ! even if it does make great desktop wallpaper :| !
 

Aeon418

I agree with you, gregory. It's a sad reflection on our times that real works of genius and individuality can be butchered with little regard for the immense effort that went into their creation. Two hugely talented and creative people don't collaborate on a Tarot deck for 5 years just for nothing. Surely in a modern world full of soulless, mass produced rubbish we should be celebrating works of creative genius, not burying them. It's a virtual slap in the faces of the artists involved that their hard work and effort can be so casually and disrespectfully tossed aside as if it were just another piece of useless trash.

This modern sickness has spread it's roots widely. These days if something is not easily digestible at the first attempt it is branded "not user friendly". Everything has to be dumbed down and served up in small portions as if we were all children. That way no one feels left out and more "product" can be sold to a wider audience. But at what cost to depth, meaning, and originality? :(

People complain that the Thoth is difficult to understand and they are put off by it's esoteric complexity. My answer to that is that these people aren't really interested in the Thoth. If they really were interested they would be willing to invest the time and effort needed to get to grips with it. Unfortunately this is rarely the case, and the most vocal complainers are the ones who wish to sit back and wait for the world to land in their lap. With this in mind is it any wonder that people who are passionate and invested in the Thoth get irked when books are written that champion the dumb down mentality and the "you can have it all for no effort" ethos? :rolleyes:
 

Teheuti

Scion said:
What kind of person teaches people falsehoods willfully? It's pathological.
William Westcott, MacGregor Mathers, Aleister Crowley.

The whole founding of the Golden Dawn was based on a lie. Florence Farr and quit when she found out. I met several people when I lived in London in 1971-72 who had known Crowley. They enjoyed regaling me with stories of how he laughed at gullible people who believed his fakery (turning water into wine at gatherings and tales of certain feats he'd accomplished).

I'll get back to the rest later, but let's face it— the whole occult tarot tradition is built on a mix of outright falsehoods and faulty suppositions.

Mary