"Memorization is a technique that has fallen out of favor"--Le Fanu

Mary everything you just talked about is memory based.

Memory is a active recall of a personal past experience. What you are suggesting to me, if I understand you is the recall of multiple memories comparing and choosing the best one using inductive rather then deductive reasoning more often then not to draw a conclusion."well-developed pattern-recognition, and conceptual and associative abilities" are well developed memories.

I wonder if your ability to store works just fine but your ability to recall brings it out in sections: you build the shapes and tecture, colours etc in your mind rather then your brain? Most people repeat rather then recall to try and put things into memory, a tough way of doing it. I am guessing your episodic memory works just fine but your semantic memories are harder to recall. In other words you need to relate personal experiences to have good recall, emotion is a good one to tie into for better recall of any type of memory..

Anything we do consciously involves a memory or creates a memory.

I should add "verbatim" does take luck of the genetic draw to have that sort of short term to long term movement within our brains. For me it is WORK.

The crowned one said:

Memory is a active recall of a personal past experience.

Click to expand...

If that is the definition we are using of "memorizing card meanings" then I don't get what the discussion is about.

I thought we were talking about memorizing meanings for cards, as in Chana's original statement that started this discussion: "I feel that something I have learned by rote is truly mine."

You are right - I don't recall numbers or word-for-word texts (numbers are the hardest for me). I do remember many experiences from my past, but not well, and I've never had much recall of names or faces (which is getting worse).

you need to relate personal experiences to have good recall, emotion is a good one to tie into for better recall of any type of memory.

Click to expand...

Definitely. I remember the sense of stories having to do with the cards, but only rarely do I remember details. I've learned keywords primarily because of layers of associations and very frequent repetition.

Of course, this is all memory - but not memorization by rote.

Chana Siegel said:

I like using a combnation of association, memorization and (when it comes) intuition. But memorization can be a good thing; I feel that something I have learned by rote is truly mine, and therefore I have an easier time playing with it.

Click to expand...

Teheuti said:

If that is the definition we are using of "memorizing card meanings" then I don't get what the discussion is about.

I thought we were talking about memorizing meanings for cards, as in Chana's original statement that started this discussion: "I feel that something I have learned by rote is truly mine."

Of course, this is all memory - but not memorization by rote.

Click to expand...

I feel it still is. One may not have understanding, but one uses all the same processes of memory. She can recall it, it is hers. It is a past experience, if she had not experienced it she would not know it. Knowledge in the absence of experience is, to me, very unlikely.. as far as how useful it is is up for debate to me.

But this could get circular and I get the point you are making.

I see this as voluntary access to information rather then environment induced.

But memorization can be a good thing; I feel that something I have learned by rote is truly mine, and therefore I have an easier time playing with it.

Click to expand...

I am not sure I understand. The learning by rote must be for a purpose and the result is truly yours then -for example the times tables. They are just equations until you use them.
So was Chana saying the rote work involved makes them valid or the ability to remember them or draw them down to their application?
I find it very hard to distinguish at this end of my Tarot practice to decide what is learning by rote and what is instant recognition.
I did not have the lists of meanings at the beginning.
Would I suggest that a beginner have Tarot for Dummieswith it's set ideas on cards
or 21 Ways to Read a Tarot Card? Maybe I would suggest neither but a deck of cards and a journal. Is memorization out of favour? I do not think so- but there is this swing to reading in a different way with no format or learned base rote for Tarot. Inside of me there is this quiet voice that tells me that is a cop-out for Tarot but not toothpicks.
~Rosanne

Do my books advocate "making up meanings" as the only way to go? I don't think so. I study tarot deeply and several of the 21 "ways" are about integrating material that must be learned, including how to integrate book meanings. I really don't get this either/or attitude that says if a person teaches x, y and z then they are only advocating x and must, by definition, be anti- y and z. I really don't get this reductionism.

Personally, I think memorization of meanings is very helpful as one of many ways to learn tarot. But, if it means you are an absolute failure if you can't or don't do it, then, it becomes ridiculous. It is not the same as memorizing times-tables (which took me years of hard work to do and which I still have to review if I'm going to use it).

Teheuti said:

Do my books advocate "making up meanings" as the only way to go? I don't think so.

Click to expand...

Oh you have taken me wrongly Mary. I suggested those books as opposed in method.
I have a pile of 21 Ways that I give to new people who are interested in Tarot.
I am most likely one of your best advocates for that book.
When starting out, memorization is most likely the first tool even if it is only to get the order in your head.

~Rosanne

Rosanne said:

I have a pile of 21 Ways that I give to new people who are interested in Tarot.
I am most likely one of your best advocates for that book.

Click to expand...

Yes, yes, yes! I love hearing that. Thank you for clarifying in such a nice way.

I'm just sensitive because it seems that many take me as the primary advocate for the "make up anything that you like" style of reading. It's a misapprehension in that I advocate contrasting and comparing "made up" ideas with traditional tarot and symbol systems (unless the situation dictates otherwise). Also, there are lots of different ways to "make things up." A problem, as I see it, is to get so stuck in one way of seeing that you are not present in the moment to what is actually happening.

Mary, it's your books that finally opened up the tarot experience for me and made it FUN and powerful. Before your books I was trying to grasp the concepts by rote memorization and I simply don't have the brain for that. So, to those naysayers ... to heck with them!

caridwen said:

You are going to struggle however when the cards do not comply with the keywords as will happen. But as long as I ain't paying you for a reading, I don't care

Click to expand...

Are you saying that someone who practices memorization as part of their studies is not a good reader? I personally take offense to that.

Manda said:

Of course pictures have something to do with the reading. And the word "reading" is integral. If memorizing meanings was all it took, I would have been done with studying tarot in a day. It's not 78 keywords, but how those cards relate to each other in the spread, the question, the querant, and a whole host of other factors. I think that is where the magic comes in, but magic is dependent upon ritual and ritual is the act of doing the same thing over and over, within a structure.

"Meanings" are only a start to a tarot reading, but what a good start! I never squash intuition in favor of what I intellectually know a card means, but having that structure makes my deck respond to me in such a way that intuition and knowledge blend seamlessly and that is thrilling, beautiful, and immensely satisfying!

Click to expand...

Completely agreed!