42-card Tarot Decks? Humm...

nisaba

Marina said:
I never minded major-only decks actually. But these 42-card decks really got me thinking... is the minor arcana so unimportant that is can be cut away like that? Then why bother learning it at all? How did it survive if it doesn't "add anything" numerologically (other esoteric schools out there that use tarot would have noticed that, wouldn't them?)?
I *like* the Minor Arcana.

But in my really early years, two things were going on: I was a bit afraid that 78 images with thousands of meanings each was a bit much for a non-genius like me to manage to get straight, and I might have heard or read (or assumed from the word "minor") that the Minor Arcana was somehow less important.

So I used a stripped-down majors-only RWS for a short period, quickly augmenting it with the courts and aces. I got better - I quickly realised how much richer the readings were with more cards.

Marina said:
So what if the sacred number of God is 42, tarot isn't a God-oriented oracle anyway. Wouldn't it be easier just to create another oracle, instead of dismembering the tarot?
Yup, but the fact remains that there are plenty of 22-card decks around, some of them excellent (such as the Blue Moon and the Lebanese). I think of these two in particular more as art-decks than as working decks, though - with 22 cards, they are just a bit thin on the ground for the complexity of people's lives. In the case of the Lebanese Tarot, too, I think it wasn't originally envisioned as a deck but as a set of Tarot-related full-sized artworks, and publication as a deck came later. As far as I can tell, the artist simply never had the time and/or inclination to do another 52 full-sized paintings - she may have had other artistic needs she wanted to pursue.

I like working with full decks. But I *have* worked with stripped-down decks, and I can't honestly say that I never will again, and I find a 42-card stripped-down deck works better than a 22-card stripped-down deck.