RWS suits tell a story in sequence?

Abrac

If you buy a book from a bookstore, you can preview it before buying. Amazon offers previews for a lot of its books. I think people expect some kind of preview so they can decide if it's something they want to pursue further. Mary, I can completely understand your not wanting to give away your work, but couldn't you at least offer a couple of teasers? Are there some already out there I'm unaware of?

In the advertisement you linked to above, it says:

"In these two master-classes, Mary examines the evidence which shows there may have been a specific purpose behind the illustrations to the Minor cards."

I'm a little confused. Is there evidence there may have been a specific purpose, or is there supportive evidence that proves the theory? Without some kind kind of preview that demonstrates you're actually on to something I wouldn't be interesting in purchasing the material and I'm not sure if any serious tarot student would.
 

Teheuti

Is there evidence there may have been a specific purpose, or is there supportive evidence that proves the theory?
There is nothing that proves my theories, absolutely. It's all circumstantial - but it's very specific also.

I've talked about my theories of the suits here quite a bit over the years. I gave some of the reasons I have for my information above, and I've given other details in the past as I uncovered them. I've given my primary sources - for anyone to examine for themselves.

The Hiram Abif story and a couple of the illustrations are found in Duncan's Rituals of Freemasonry (as I've mentioned when we've discussed this topic in the past). I gave the source of the Cups story in this thread, and the source of the Pentacles theme. The suit of Wands is not as specific as the others, partly because I believe it relates to the much longer Perceval story (referenced throughout Waite's _Hidden Church of the Holy Grail_ - published the same year as the deck), which also is the book where Waite talks most about the Tarot Minor Arcana (other than PKT). I've pointed out the significant passages in other threads in this section.

If the quality of my other publications and materials in this section and the Tarot History section are not good enough for you to consider the insights I've gained in my 46 years of studying, teaching and writing about Tarot and my having read and studied most of Waite's books, then no matter what I say, it won't be good enough.
 

Abrac

To be quite honest I've never read any of your other publications so I have nothing with which to compare. I've read a lot of your past posts on this subject and haven't really heard a clear explanation of any of your arguments. You reference Masonic lore and obscure works by Waite, which explain where your theories come from but not one example I can remember that illustrates how you've reached your conclusions, or demonstrates this 'circumstantial' evidence you're talking about. The only conclusion I can come to is you yourself aren't that convinced. Usually when people have a strong argument for something important they can't wait to get the word out.
 

rwcarter

Moderator Note

Mary has every right to charge for the information she has gathered or to give it away for free. That choice is hers and no one else's. Those who are interested enough in what she has to say for a fee will pay that fee. Those who aren't interested enough won't pay that fee and will get exactly what they pay for.

If Mary chooses to give a teaser/preview of the info, again that choice is hers.

Let's get back to the discussion of the Minor Arcana suits telling a story in sequence, shall we?
 

ravenest

That's why I mentioned Masons who are Tarot readers.

I completely understand someone not wanting to buy my work, but I shouldn't be made to feel that I am obligated to present my published work here for free and that there is something wrong if I don't.

As long as you understand how little available money I have and that it is nothing personal.

I dont think you are obligated to anything Teheuti, nor that you have done anything wrong ... although its hard to examine anything fully here without the facts :(

... and that disappointed smilie isnt emotional blackmail either :laugh:

PS ... the Arnie clip was a joke ... I am not going to send him after you ;)
 

ravenest

The Hiram Abif story and a couple of the illustrations are found in Duncan's Rituals of Freemasonry (as I've mentioned when we've discussed this topic in the past).

Thanks. That was one of the confusing points I tried to clarify (I must have missed the past posts). Now I know what the reference is.

I gave the source of the Cups story in this thread, and the source of the Pentacles theme. The suit of Wands is not as specific as the others, partly because I believe it relates to the much longer Perceval story (referenced throughout Waite's _Hidden Church of the Holy Grail_ - published the same year as the deck), which also is the book where Waite talks most about the Tarot Minor Arcana (other than PKT). I've pointed out the significant passages in other threads in this section.

Yep, thanks for that.
If the quality of my other publications and materials in this section and the Tarot History section are not good enough for you to consider the insights I've gained in my 46 years of studying, teaching and writing about Tarot and my having read and studied most of Waite's books, then no matter what I say, it won't be good enough.

Its good enough for me - I DO value you and appreciate your input. People should not expect you to re write your books here as posts.

Regarding Masons and Tarot ... its rare, but when you find them, its extra interesting (IMO) ... not to forget where 'it' came from

http://www.amazon.com/The-Magical-Mason-Forgotten-Physician/dp/0850303737
 

Zephyros

I can only say that I have read Mary's posts and explanations, but I have not made it a point to study the source material, which she does reference. As far as that goes, I see great worth in the points she makes, and I believe her. I think the problem is that a forum may not be the proper, well, forum, in which to make a definitive case for anything, due to the format and relative shortness of explanations. Academic studies are long, involved and can't be summarized into forum-post bullet points, so that just goes back to the idea that if anyone has doubts, they can do the work of verification themselves. Still, she has discussed these topics at length over the years, here and elsewhere, and has still managed to give good, clear, in-depth explanations.

I can't tell you why I "believe" in evolution or climate change, not being a scientist who actually studied those things myself, except for the fact that enough knowledgeable authorities have explained these subjects over the years in terms I can understand, and that the points put forth by them make sense.

Now, to get back on topic,

Teheuti said:
Waite himself made clear on two occasions that he "spoon-fed" PCS with only some of the Major Arcana. The Court Cards generally follow the Golden Dawn ones found among Westcott's papers (possibly drawn by Moina Mathers). Obviously, he gave Pixie direction on all the Majors. I feel he left much of the specific imagery in the Minors up to Pixie, with some exceptions.

How would you say this explains the images themselves? If they are allusions to a greater work, would PCS know enough to do them? I'm sorry for sounding argumentative, but it seems there is a contradiction, that there is on one hand evidence for what the images are, but also that Waite left the Minors to her. But she couldn't have stuffed all those things in there, could she? I guess I still don't understand Waite's lack of involvement in the Minors, when they themselves evince his involvement.
 

Teheuti

How would you say this explains the images themselves? If they are allusions to a greater work, would PCS know enough to do them? I'm sorry for sounding argumentative, but it seems there is a contradiction, that there is on one hand evidence for what the images are, but also that Waite left the Minors to her. But she couldn't have stuffed all those things in there, could she? I guess I still don't understand Waite's lack of involvement in the Minors, when they themselves evince his involvement.
PCS was trained by some of the top illustrators of the time to illustrate stories - to turn text into images. We have other examples of her doing just that. She also was known for being able psychically (or via synesthesia) to do drawings of music that the composers said was what they saw when they composed the music (how did she do that?). In PKT Waite notes that at times what she drew was not exactly the sense of the card meanings, and a few times he mentions pictorial elements that aren't there. This is not surprising in a job done very quickly and for very little cash. What's amazing is how well it was done.
 

Zephyros

It really is amazing. I've mainly studied the images in relation to the GD Kabbalistic formula and in most cases they fit extremely well, whatever other influences they have. So well, in fact, that I had always assumed a Crowley-Harris type of relationship, despite the lack of surviving correspondence between them.

It would be good if something like an order form existed, in which Waite explained what he wanted. Then the leap between his intentions and her result could be definitively bridged.
 

Teheuti

Marcus and Tali's new book will demonstrate that Pixie was not near Waite during most of the short period in which she would have been doing the drawings. Some time was obviously spent together when doing the Majors but probably not while finishing the Minors.