prudence

Well, I am about as crazy for the TdM as anyone, I own many decks that would qualify as Marseille, and many that are related.....They are the only decks I use, and the only decks I seem to like anymore.

But, I would love to see this deck published, and do not feel it is my place to dictate to the artist what he may name his deck, or what he may put in his deck. I do not feel a sense of ownership or possessiveness over the "tradition" of Marseille decks, and I do not feel as though I can speak for the long dead woodblock creators of those old decks.

Maybe that is just me, and maybe I am not as serious a student of Marseille decks as I should be, but to me this is not in any way harming the "tradition" of TdM. Maybe if Serio were suggesting we destroy all evidence of the original TdMs (I should say the oldest extant decks) I would feel concerned about the tradition being harmed in some way....

Nothing wrong with being flexible and rolling along with what life hands us, you know?

__________________
"...he wanted to illustrate with his figures many Moral teachings, and under some difficulty, to bite into bad and dangerous customs, & show how today many Actions are done without goodness and honesty, and are accomplished in ways that are contrary to duty and rightfulness."~Francesco Piscina, 1565

stella01904

But are you saying you would consider it a TdM?

Or simply that you don't care if they call it a TdM, even though it obviously isn't?

raventepes

Just becasue a deck is inspired from a base respective deck or tradition type, dosn't mean it is that deck. We've all seen deviations from the RWS, Thoth, just to name a couple. But do the purists go complaining about them that they tainted the original concept and design? Think about Serio's Liber T here. EVERYBODY loves it and while there's no doubt in everyone's mind that it's a Thoth influanced deck, nobody's really said a word about it, and it's quite popular. But yet when he goes and starts painting something along the lines of the TdM, Everone's throwing a fit! THIS IS CALLED A DOUBLE STANDARD, PEOPLE!!!!. Grow up, already!!!!!!

__________________
That idea ain't worth a velvet painting of a whale and a dolphin getting it on

If you love someone, set them free. If they come back, put several 8 inch blades through their head. If they come back again, run. Just run.

Keeper of the Sacred Spirits

prudence

Does it really matter what or how I might consider this deck?

Who is insisting that it be considered a TdM?

I am not that locked into the label TdM as it is, thanks to kwaw, I now know that it was only in 1889 that Papus used the term Tarot De Marseille (this is the earliest published reference of which kwaw is aware, and I am inclined to trust his research) which was then picked up by Marteau in the 30's .....We do know that the pattern itself predates this by at least a couple of hundred years. So, it is not as though the original woodblock creators considered their own decks TdMs.

In my own little world, I consider my Zoni Bologna deck to be a Marseille. In my own little world "close enough" is just fine.

__________________
"...he wanted to illustrate with his figures many Moral teachings, and under some difficulty, to bite into bad and dangerous customs, & show how today many Actions are done without goodness and honesty, and are accomplished in ways that are contrary to duty and rightfulness."~Francesco Piscina, 1565

Gavriela

I know there are TdM purists out there, but we do have a good number of pure TdM decks on the market.

And then there are those of us who love the variants, too. Corte dei Tarrocchi would never be called a TdM, but it's a beautiful deck. The Roy Nissanka is another pretty deck that was obviously inspired by the TdM pattern - and it's completely readable.

Or my all-time fave, the Vacchetta (and yes, Ric, I am glad that LoS put that one out too, I can live with the keywords better than no deck). It's extremely readable. Not likely to be mistaken for a TdM, but you can see the influence.

For that matter, the Vieville isn't a proper TdM, either, but I'm glad that one's still around!

I'd like to see the project happen. I understand that the logistics may make it impossible. Agreed that tacking the 'M' word onto it would upset any number of important people in the community, but does it really need the word in the title? I think anyone who's seen a Marseille will get the idea, and for those who haven't - well, a note in the LWB about the inspiration should be fine.

If it turns out to be a classic, let history decide if it falls into the Marseille category or no.

stella01904

No. And the issue here is not about "tainting the original concept and design".
The originals remain the same.

The issue is about manufacturing a deck that has only a fleeting, superficial resemblance to TdM and marketing it as a TdM.

As a rule, a RWS that retains the RWS lines, retains the name. It may be recolored, but it's still RWS.

On the other hand, a deck that is only based on the RWS images and system, like the Russian Tarot of St. Petersburg, is NOT called RWS.



The Liber T is called the "The Liber T". Not the "Crowley Thoth."

Common sense.

Scion

Stella, I'm not sure I follow you. And it is not only not common sense, it makes little sense to me at all.

The Crowley-Harris Thoth and the Waite-Smith are two specific decks designed and executed at a specific moment in time and space. The Tarot de Marseille is a loose designator covering a field of decks that were only lumped under the title in the late 19th century. And more significantly, with the Waite-Smith or Thoth, there is an identifiable "master" document to which the others can be compared. The same is not true of the TdM.

So actually, publishing any deck as a Tarot de Marseille is EXACTLY like marketing a deck as a Waite-Smith clone because TdM is a designation of a subgroup of decks that generally follow a pattern. Like Waite-Smith clones, different TdM's have different details, colorations, symbols, etc.

Now, I understand if you believe that a reinvented TdM bears "only a fleeting, superficial resemblance to TdM" but that is a completely subjective judgement... All the more so because there is no one standard to which all TdM afficionados adhere, let alone the world at large. I know some purists reject the JodoCam & Hadar as modernist chimeras; I know that some people believe they are closer to the TdM source. Subjective and arbitrary on both counts. Not really a rubric for anything. I never understand why people want to stand on the sidelines and scold other people for trying something difficult.

The trouble is, there can't be an argument for purity in a tradition which is vague and undefined. I understand why TdMers would object to "illustrated" pips. But the fact is, every occult Tarot ever created stems from attempts to present a menaingful structure for the TdM pips. That includes the scenes of the WS and the moody details of the Thoth. If Serio (or anyone else) were to execute a new Marseille that provided pips (nonscenic or otherwise) that were still decorated in traditional TdM style in ways that convey certain basic symbolism about number and element, then the decision that it isn't a TdM would be individual. TdM is not a single deck or a brand. That artist's interpretation would be just as singular and idiosyncratic and valid as every one of the "real" Tarot de Marseille variants.

Frankly, Serio is pretty much the artist I would trust to do something exceptional and "outside the box" with the TdM minors in a new deck. I can personally think of 10 ways that the pips could be structured in a pre-Enlightenment non-Golden-Dawn format that would still provide some symbolic footholds for divination. I'd LOVE to see what he would come up with.

Who is it that has ownership of the (vague, arbitrary, completely artficial, after the fact) "Tarot de Marseille" designation that is going to be violated, wounded, or compromised by the attempt? Is this ficititious person equally furious at Hadar, or Rodes & Sanchez or Camoin & Jodorowsky? And more importantly, why should I care?

Scion

__________________
Faustus: 'Tis magic, magic that hath ravished me...

frelkins

ATers take note: this is possibly the only time I am in complete agreement with Scion. Listen to Scion! He is correct here!

gregory

Yes - exactly.

So would I - which is why the argument that illustrated pips are a total no-no is so depressing,.


No one will be harmed by it and a whole new concept can come out of it. And about that I DO care.

__________________
~ ~ I probably shouldn't be here. But this was the only universe which had a vacancy. ~ ~
(Granny from Hell)

Madness takes its toll. Please have exact change.

People are entitled to their own opinions, but they are not entitled to their own facts.