JSNYC
I don't use the actual, concrete adult or child descriptions, they are only analogies, useful as descriptions. I will refer to stefficus's post:conversus said:This is a very interesting contribution to the larger conversation. However it is not enough to define the King and Queen as active adults and the Knight and Page as some sort of incomplete image of the Adult. If you are going to develop a system of Descriptors for the Honour cards you out to try harder for the Knight and Page. If the King is a Field Marshal, what scope does that leave for the Knight and Page to fill.
CED
Nope, I don't. I never could use that. I don't view the Knight and Page as incomplete images; they are simply different variations. And I certainly don't use the Knight as an actual teenager, or the Page as an actual child. They are just general descriptions, a way to understand the energy of the Knight and Page. To use your example; both the Knight and the Page have just as much potential to be the Fieldmarshal or Mastermind, or an Inventor or Architect as the King and Queen, but the Knight is taking something, some aspect, or some particular personality trait, to the extreme, possibly too far. The Page can also equally be the Fieldmarshal, Mastermind, Inventor, or Architect, but the Page is exhibiting an immature or undeveloped aspect or personality trait of the Fieldmarshal, Mastermind, Inventor, or Architect...stefficus said:still, it's a damn sight better than the old "a dark-haired youth" designations i've seen thrown about. does anybody really use those?
I think assigning anything to the Knight or Page is flawed; they are examples of specific aspects of a personality, or particular traits. All the court cards are described by the temperament, and each court card highlights and exemplifies different aspects of that temperament, but more importantly, they highlight and exemplify different aspects of an actual person, which isn't specifically addressed in the individual, general personality traits or temperaments.
In that sense I think the King and Queen should be treated exactly the same as the Knight and Page, they also represent a particular aspect or personality trait of the overall temperament. However, since their traits are mature, well-defined, or "normal" their interpretation is closer to the actual definitions of the personality traits or temperaments, which describe the normal or ideal pesonality.
Now I think I am venturing into the realm of over-explaining my approach. So I will leave this thread for a while to give others a chance to express their views on the topic. However, I appreciate the question, I thought I was being too vague, and now I think I obviously was.