Classification of Tarot

[jmd]

This thread reminds me a little of the important similar threads that periodically make their appearance.

One more recent one in particular that I will link here was opened by Rosanne in mid-2005: Stripping to the Bone.... (and there are others).

As far as I'm concerned, no diminishment is made by calling a non-tarot deck by its own name. Where I personally disagree is where some have simply used the term 'tarot' to mean something like 'divination'.

In terms of using tarot in an oracular fashion, and irrespective of the intent of the deck designer(s), its meaning may very well vary from situation to situation - this does not take away from either the design intent nor the many books that may have been written about the deck.

Rather, its usefulness in practical reading situations is independent to whether the deck in question is or is not a tarot deck, or forms part of its derivations... or is entirely a different kind of deck altogether.

 

[room]

Umm, Umbrae could you please expound on why WCS is not considered Tarot? I feel so wounded!!

I wouldn't feel wounded, it's only someone's personal opinion.

 

[suedeheadsmiths]

WCS not RCS

Oops, didn't realise I hit R instead of W. I hope Umbrae recognizes this.

Chris

 

[suedeheadsmiths]

Being silly

Thanks Room. I was being silly. I really have alot of admiration for Umbrae. He speaks to my heart , well everyone on here is wonderful.

Chris

 

[FaeryGodmother]

...As far as I'm concerned, no diminishment is made by calling a non-tarot deck by its own name. Where I personally disagree is where some have simply used the term 'tarot' to mean something like 'divination' .....

This still begs the question of WHY is Tarot regarded as the be all and end all of divination? What is tarot any more valid than any other cartomancy or oracular system? Is this just a popular culture thing or does it also exist in places such as this, Aeclectic? Is there a snobbery attached to Tarot- something which regards oracle card systems as the "poor cousins"?

 

[room]

I was being silly.

Me too!

Funny, I've never thought of oracle decks as poor cousins. In many ways they have less interference from rigid categorization or subjective and fantastical "history," and so are more useful and interesting.

 

[jmd]

I do not think I have ever heard claims that Tarot is the 'be all and end all' to divination - rather the contrary, in fact.

Toothpicks, cloud patterns, astrological charts (in one manner of interpreting them), bibliomancy - in fact the mantic arts are not only vast, but as unspecifiable as one may care!

Aeclectic Tarot is not 'eclectic divination' - so the 'bias' on these boards, I would hope, is in fact about tarot. Similarly, when I contribute to a Masonic Forum, or an Anthroposophical Forum, I would 'expect' that discussions centre around (respectively) Freemasonry and Anthroposophy, and not, for example, on (again respectively) Martinism and the Theosophical Society - no matter how related these may be.

When I have in the past used Runes, for example, or used standard playing cards, or used sand, or flower readings, I did not (nor would) call these tarot - without in the least presuming they are 'inferior'.

There are then different questions that seem to be mixed.

One of these may be: 'which is the best divinatory 'system'?' (to which the reply may well depend on who the answer is to be given, and the context - for example, wishing to learn it).

Another may be: 'irrespective as to whether or not tarot can be used for divination, what makes tarot Tarot?' - and for this question, its status amongst users as a preferred oracular tool is only, at most peripherally relevant, in my view.

 

[ilweran]

This still begs the question of WHY is Tarot regarded as the be all and end all of divination? What is tarot any more valid than any other cartomancy or oracular system?

I'd guess part of it is it's age and the myths surrounding its origins. There is nothing mysterious or ancient about an oracle that someone invented last week

That sort of thing can be very appealing to people- you just have to look at Wiccans who still insist Wicca is the continuation of the religion practised in prehistoric 'matriarchal' times, despite evidence to the contrary. People forget that everything was new once.

 

[Briar Rose]

My feelings are that Tarot cards and Oracle cards are a form of art. So that means they are subjective. Every person is going to see them differently, and have different feelings about them.

It's unfair to call someone's work of art 'bad' or, "That's not a Tarot deck."

What if someone lived a Rock n' Rock lifestyle? To them, the Rock n' Roll Tarot might be the best Tarot deck they have ever used. It might work for them.

Who are we to judge?

 

[Briar Rose]

The Scribner-Bantam Dictionary defines:

Oracle: 2,anyone speaking with wisdom, inspiration, or authority; 3 adivce or opinion of such a person

Tarot:set of 22 playing cards bearing allegorical figures, used in fortunetelling

Let all be Oracles, and leave the Tarot to just be what the artists created.