Around the Tarot in 78 Days

MandMaud

They help to really widen the meanings of the court cards. This, however doesn't make them any ” easier” it just further shows how complex they are, just as Joan Bunning had observed. In my opinion, they helped prove JB correct: a court card is difficult becausE it can represent so many things.
I didn't mean easier as such, but something that is clear to one person can be muddy to another, each mind has its own way of grasping concepts. This has really helped me even just from the overview of the ideas that the introduction gives.

Maybe it's about learning styles or something else, but each mental 'digestive system' needs the input prepared differently, and this way of looking at it just clicks for me.

But then, I found with maths at school that the bits everyone found impossible I found obvious, and the bits everyone found easy I was totally baffled by. (So i sat through lots of explanations I didn't need and was desperate for more help than the course offered.) My intellect just comes at subjects from the opposite end to everyone else methinx!

mm
 

MandMaud

... shows how complex they are, just as Joan Bunning had observed. In my opinion, they helped prove JB correct: ...
Do I read this right, has Joan Bunning posted in this thread? Who is her, I can't work it out?
 

Skydancer

I have begun a new thread under 78 Days class discussion.

:)
 

gregory

Do I read this right, has Joan Bunning posted in this thread? Who is her, I can't work it out?

I think someone just meant that in her course she SAYS this ?
 

Tiddles

I think someone just meant that in her course she SAYS this ?

Yes, and they make reference to her saying it and how the CC's are NOT difficult, etc...but in my opinion they end up only proving her to be correct. I thought they mentioned it in the book, but maybe it was only in the class, the first one.
 

MandMaud

I think someone just meant that in her course she SAYS this ?
Ah... my goof then. :D

And sorry, for some reason I've only just seen your response!
 

Lee

Hi Tali, I'm interested in the Kindle edition. The Kindle page is here but it says "Not currently available." Do you have any info on when it might become available? Thanks!
To answer my own question, the Kindle version is now available (at least in the US).
 

Fonda

Is 78 Days worth it?

I just bought this book a few days ago since it has been on my radar for some time now and although I am only about a week into the lessons I have to say I am a bit disappointed. To be clear, I'm not disappointed in most of the ideas, that is, the meat of the book, but the editing is poor and shoddy to the point that it begins to interfere with the meaning and with my trust of the author's ideas.

For example, Page 16 in the Lets Get Started section he recaps, "...the major cards are the nouns, the minor cards are the verbs, and the court cards are the adjectives. We can add a word ourselves to describe how we interpret the sentence which becomes the adverb..." [emphasis in original]
Then on the same page in the first example he has of this method he reads The Tower (major) The Three of Cups (Minor) and the King of Pentacles as, "The friendly group (3C) broke up (tower) steadily (K Pents). " The only problem is that he used the minor card as a noun, the major as a verb, and the court card as an adverb, bypassing the use of an adjective completely.
So I am left with either using this method in the professed way or in the way it has actually been shown, in the example, to be used. So which way is right? This leads to reader (me) confusion and makes this method less useful to me as he has presented it.

I could perhaps forgive this lack of grammatical understanding, and I did, except that it seems like the rest of the book is plagued with some of the same types of errors that could have been fixed had they employed a decent copy-editor before publication. For one example, in the Page of Cups lesson under the Travel and Lifestyle section the authors inexplicably reference the Page of Wands. Is this a true reference or an editing mistake? My belief is the latter.

Perhaps some people here will call me nit-picky or claim that it is not important because the meat of the book is still valid, and while I can agree with this assessment to a point, I find myself questioning the validity of the ideas contained within a poorly-written and poorly edited piece, especially when some (if not all) of the ideas are materially affected by the editing. (Like my first example.)

Has anyone else noticed these problems and/or been affected by them at all? Is it still worth me reading the rest of this book?
 

Yineth

Hey Fonda,

I'm glad I'm not the only one who noticed the page 16 confusion.
I'm taking the book in really small bits and pieces for now, but already I do feel a little overwhelmed and confused by some of the details.

I don't want to say I hate the book, because I haven't watched the online courses yet. So maybe some things will make better sense with the videos?
 

MountainGirl

Has anyone else noticed these problems and/or been affected by them at all? Is it still worth me reading the rest of this book?

Yes, there are a few typos in the book. However, I find that usually they are quite obvious and very rarely confuse the meaning. The book is still worth reading and I find the exercise quite helpful and enjoyable. There is actually a thread in the class forum to collect all the typos that the participants notice for fixing in a later edition.