Thoth companion book?

Rusty Neon

While I like Crowley's Book of Thoth for connecting with Crowley's intentions behind the deck and explanations of symbolism, I also like Ziegler's book Mirror of the Soul for its treatment of the minor arcana cards.

While Ziegler's approach obviously strays from Crowley, I personally don't find it fulfilling nor within my general tarot interests to make a deep, painstaking study of Crowley's intentions.

Accordingly, I find Ziegler's book to be useful as it nonetheless allows me to connect with the GD/RWS card meanings for the minor arcana and with the pre Golden Dawn, pre-Crowley divinatory meanings that strongly influenced the GD / Crowley card meanings for the numbered minor arcana. Ziegler's book is relaxing and soothing bedside reading. That said, I also consult Crowley's book when so moved to.
 

rachelcat

The First Book for Thoth

I heartily recommend the new Understanding Aleister Crowley's Thoth Tarot by Lon Milo DuQuette. He is a Crowley/Thelema expert and therefore does the work of figuring out Uncle Al's intentions so we don't have to! Part 1 is entitled "Little Bits of Things You Know Before Beginning to Study Aleister Crowley's Thoth Tarot," but it's a lot more than just little bits! As someone in another review mentioned, the explanation of the card backs alone is worth the price of the book! I would say this is the book to give you a great background to start your study. It does have card-by-card descriptions, but they are not as in-depth as Banzhaf, so Banzhaf should be your second book. Or, with the good foundation from DuQuette, you can dive right into the Book of Thoth! Happy reading!
 

Vincent

rachelcat said:
I heartily recommend the new Understanding Aleister Crowley's Thoth Tarot by Lon Milo DuQuette. He is a Crowley/Thelema expert and therefore does the work of figuring out Uncle Al's intentions so we don't have to!
He is also a member of the O.T.O. and as such, shouldn't we be wary that he is trying to push his organisation's view of Crowley and Crowley's intentions, rather than giving us an objective view?

How exactly can sipping from this (possibly tainted) tributary be better than drinking from the source?
rachelcat said:
Part 1 is entitled "Little Bits of Things You Know Before Beginning to Study Aleister Crowley's Thoth Tarot," but it's a lot more than just little bits! As someone in another review mentioned, the explanation of the card backs alone is worth the price of the book!
If you are talking of the Rose-Cross Lamen, then explanations of that symbolism are plentiful online... and they are free, so if someone is planning to buy the book simply for an explanation of the card-backs, they might like to save their money.
rachelcat said:
I
I would say this is the book to give you a great background to start your study. It does have card-by-card descriptions, but they are not as in-depth as Banzhaf, so Banzhaf should be your second book. Or, with the good foundation from DuQuette, you can dive right into the Book of Thoth! Happy reading!
Banzhaf is full of misinformation. Let's examine one of the most egregious pieces of misinformation in the book;

"The contention propounded by Soror I.W.E. in the introductory text of
Crowley's "Book of Thoth," that Crowley examined her [Frieda Harris] work very critically and had her paint some cards up to eight times, is not
confirmed there. It appears much more that he gave her an "inventory
list" with the symbols and the motifs of each card, but to a great
extent let her have a free range in their design. With the exclusion of
the three Magi, there are no other multiple representations of the cards
known."[i/]

This is simply not true. And there is ample proof that this is not true. And it is not an isolated instance of their false claims.

So... why would a book filled with such mistakes, (misinformation at best, deliberate lies at worst), be better than a book, written by the creator of the deck, dealing specifically with that deck?

If Crowley's Book of Thoth is good enough for Banzhaf to use as a primary source in writing a book about the Thoth deck, then surely the Book of Thoth should be the starting point of study for anyone who has a serious interest in Crowley's Tarot.

Vincent
 

Little Baron

Vincent said:
If Crowley's Book of Thoth is good enough for Banzhaf to use as a primary source in writing a book about the Thoth deck, then surely the Book of Thoth should be the starting point of study for anyone who has a serious interest in Crowley's Tarot.

Good point; the 'Book of Thoth' can also be downloaded for free as well, to my knowledge, so that's a saving of many pennies all round.

Yabs
 

rachelcat

A cool thing about DuQuette's book is it has a little blurb from letters from Harris to Crowley for each card. It gives you a small idea of how much collaboration there really was as the painting was going on. I wonder if a fuller version their correspondence is published somewhere?

Another thing in defense of DuQuette's book. He is a good apologist for Crowley. I looked at the various on-line Book(s) of Thoth and was pretty much convinced it was just so much pretentious babbling. With the "little bits," I am better able to appreciate the babbling (and just smile at the pretention).

That said, I usually agree that the source is best place to go (and I don't have many doubts about my reading ability), so it's back to the web and Book of Thoth. (And hey, free is the best price!)

And, while I'm asking questions here (!), do you know of a good source for in-depth info on the decans (minor card astrological attributes)?
 

lark

rachelcat said:
A cool thing about DuQuette's book is it has a little blurb from letters from Harris to Crowley for each card. It gives you a small idea of how much collaboration there really was as the painting was going on. I wonder if a fuller version their correspondence is published somewhere?
Try this rachelcat....
www.hermetic.com/crowley/crowley-harris.html
 

Vincent

rachelcat said:
Another thing in defense of DuQuette's book. He is a good apologist for Crowley.
And so he should be; he is a member of a religion that uses one of Crowley's books, in a similar manner to the way Christians use the Bible.

So, shouldn't Duquette being an apologist for Crowley, be a point for the prosecution, rather than the defence?

One criticism of Duquette, and his books, has been that he tries to whitewash both Crowley's ideas and his character; to not only dumb his ideas down for consumption by the masses (Duquette as Hierophant), but also to reduce Crowley to the status of a quaint, and harmless, old English eccentric, (Duquette as the Moon)

rachelcat said:
I looked at the various on-line Book(s) of Thoth and was pretty much convinced it was just so much pretentious babbling. With the "little bits," I am better able to appreciate the babbling (and just smile at the pretention).
Well, you are in good company. The fashion over the last 30 years has been to diminish Crowley's contribution to his own Tarot deck as much as possible.

Of course, reading and understanding Crowley isn't easy. One problem arises when people read him, and because they don't understand it, believe that there can be nothing there to understand.

Angeles Arrien, for instance, says that Crowley's ideas are actually "counter-productive" to understanding the deck.

Duquette, on the other hand, probably does understand what Crowley's ideas are, but he ain't telling. Even he will admit that his oaths prevent him from doing so.


Vincent
 

Parzival

Thoth Companion Book

There are several fine exploratory books on the Thoth Tarot. All, even co-creator Crowley's profound, illuminating book, are at most pointers toward the deck. Of course, he can best indicate his original esoteric intentions, without need of summaries of his summaries. Later guides tend to be Jungian and user friendly, bringing the deck to life as a wisdom-guide ( Arrien, Ziegler, Banzhaf', Wanless,etc.) No one book offers the apotheosis or revelation beyond the others. The Thoth Tarot truly is " Mirror of the Soul" as Ziegler's subtitle beautifully describes it. To use a mirror, dust it off and look into it.
 

rachelcat

Dear Vincent:

I truly appreciate you letting me know what strongly held opinions are out there regarding this deck. And thank you for the links and other information. As a humble tarot-reading Buddhist, I had no intention of putting my foot in a moist, steaming pile of sectarian controversy. I just want to play with the pretty pictures and maybe learn something along the way. (I know I don't have to point out sarcasm to you, but I just want to make sure you realize that when someone SAYS they're humble, they most certainly are not! I hope a little self-depreciation on my part goes a long way.) Sorry to cause any ripples. Glad to learn from anyone.