Meaning & Image

Rosanne said:

One of the images that does not seem to change much is the Hanged Man- it would be interesting to see how this could be built upon. Like as in the Strength card that has so many different forms, does the Hanged Man have the same variety? Can it be changed or challenged? If you could would it be accepted by the Tarotists?
~Rosanne

Click to expand...

You mean you aren't one ?

Some people who are into tarot will accept no variations of any kind from the tradition they support. That's life. Others are open to evolution in tarot - and Ric is among their number. I'm with Ric. I have had great success with decks from LS that have not followed the "traditional path" - especially some of the narrative ones - and I was one who wanted an evolved TdM...... I thought I might get banned over that one.... (I lost anyway....)

How can we not accept change ? The WORLD changes, for ****'s sake. We need new tarot for new times, IMHO.That is NOT to rubbish the old ones. We also learn from history, and historical decks are also very valuable, both for reading with and for study.

The crowned one said:

Meanings change with time, wars, and ideologies. Meanings change across cultures within the same era. There are so few cross cultural/time iconic images that we can count them easily.

I wonder how many people outside our circle and those of scholars who studies include these things know what pomegranate, corn, wheat, sickles, lily's red roses, dogs or water etc, traditionally represent or their meanings? Most of us here see these things as obvious. They are not.

Click to expand...

Yes indeed. But actually - an awful lot of us here do NOT have that instant knowledge you mention. And if using new imagery to signify the same things helps in absorbing it all - might that be good for a new age ? Someone VERY experienced here met her first IRL pomegranate recently. Many things traditional tarot takes for granted are unknown these days....

Well as for if the meaning proceeds the image or vice versa...for the deck creator I would imagine the meaning comes first. He/she must have an idea of the meaning he/she is trying to create before he creates the image, whetehr or not that is the meaning we choose to see in it.

For the reader, well that might be subjective. So much depends on how you read. For me it is simulataneous. The image is the meaning for me. Or another way of putting it is that the meaning is embedded inside the image. It's like saying of a human being which came into existence first the lungs of the individiual or the rest of the body. They came into existance at the exact same second, since one is contained within the other.

As for "we do not discover or learn the relationship between image and meaning: we *build* it." in the sense of learning to read the cards we "build/create" the relationship between the image and the meaning. Because that relationship may be different to different people. It is not something we discover like a major life truth. We all read in individual ways and the relationship between image and meaning can differ between readers.

In the case of individual readings, it is the reverse, again imo. The way I read anyway, the relationship between the image and meaning is different each time, in the sense that I don't see the same thigns in a card twice, different parts of the image call to me and stir my soul in different readings. SO I need to "rediscover/discover" which part of the image is revelent each time. It is not like I progressively build a relationship between the card image and its meaning over time. Each time it has a new meaning that needs to be rediscovered. Althogh in a sense that means that you are "creating" the meaning of the card anew each time.

Babs

If we all build our own meanings then a creator can also speak any language with what s/he puts in the image, yes ? If you see what I mean (in a rush; back later....)

No-one came back to me on this. I know it's been a while - but - what DOES come first ? For me it has to be meaning...

Hmmm, let's see if I make any sense.

I believe that, for the creator of an image, meaning has to come first. She has an idea, a desire to convey that idea's meaning to others. Therefore, she creates an image, and hopes that someone else coming upon it will understand.

A tarot card, in my opinion, is an image that attempts to convey meaning by portraying a scene in a specific way. Much as a photographer chooses their angles, shadows, and subjects to portray a specific meaning, the artisan sets the scene to evoke that meaning, ideally without any other words needing to be said.

For the person who comes upon an image, unawares, the meaning may not be readily apparent, at first. However, the observer begins to search for meaning, attempting to figure it out, to decode it. Therefore, it is assumed that a meaning does, in fact, exist within the image.

Basically, why would someone create an image, without some sort of meaning attached? It seems fruitless otherwise, IMO.

Throw the rotten tomatoes, but it sounds all too much like navel-gazing to me.

Or maybe it's just not that important to me--so much so that I couldn't find an erudite response to it in my depths. Or maybe I'm too shallow to know the difference or even understand the question(?)



Just sayin'...

WELL - when you decide to create a deck - there you are with (in effect) a blank card. Do you start to think about what (say) the fool means before you start to draw, or do you start to draw and see what the image brings up in terms of meanings. And would they be the same ones we all know just because you were doing a tarot card ?

And to take this further - what about a whole deck - do you have a concept for how it all hangs together and try and get that across in your drawing - or do you wait to see where the art takes you.

And that is just the simple side (so Ric assures me, when we get to Structure... !)

I'm not getting why there "has" to be an either or.

Like when you write a story, there's what is at the forefront of your mind and what you try and get across and then when you re-read it there's a whole bunch of stuff you didn't intend. It's there all the same. And then someone else arrives with all their Stuff and says "oh that's so clever the way you depicted x" and the thing is you didn't!!!

The creator, the reader, the image: they all interact with their personal histories and meaning making. For some reason Tarot seems to be especially flexible (when it is allowed to be).

Have you ever read Vanity Fair by Thackeray? It's a different book each time I read it, every ten years or so.

Aerin said:

I'm not getting why there "has" to be an either or.

Click to expand...

I do not think that there is, what we are seeing is different styles presented by the posters. There is likely "one way" per person and that will or will not change over time, but there is not just "one way".

For example:

I start with a visual idea, say for the eight of wands: Looking down onto a large schooner, a sailing ship on the cusp of a wave and the limit of its rigging and build , vibrant and riding the edge of control. Eight vertical spars with the sails in full, 8 sailors working in the rigging a over head view looking down, wind and sea movement and control... I like this image for the 8 of wands as it indicates many of the idea's visually that I put into the 8 of wands. Then I compare that mental picture to what I believe of the number 8: balance etc and see I still am on track. Hands on/ action works well with the sailors..still good for my eight...then I think: "but wands is fire" and in-spite of how great that image would be, with the element that out of wack I would reject it and move on. So my developmental style starts with a image in my minds eye and I use abductive reasoning and deriving from the basic visual/artisitic idea in my head. Others may work from a single idea and build it up. Both are as valid. Just different ways to reach the same end result: a finished tarot card. Variations are endless and as long as it leads to a finsihed card in the end you have "done it right" for you.