Defining TdM

[stella01904]

Some thread drift over here:
http://www.tarotforum.net/showthread.php?t=90579&page=4&pp=10
brings up the question of where to draw the line defining TdM.

IMHO: Noblet, Dodal, and Conver are TdM's. Reproductions of said decks are TdM's. Marteau, corrupted though it may be, is a TdM. Restorations, recolored and even with added details that some may find questionable, like the Jodo-Camoin, would still be TdM's. Vieville, though a close cousin, is technically not a TdM.

In other words, decks that retain the TdM lines, and are part of the Marseille tradition, are TdMs.

This unpublished LS deck, attractive as some may find it, is NOT a TdM:
http://www.tarotforum.net/attachment.php?attachmentid=24958
It would be fraudulent to market it as a TdM. This raised the question of Major Tom's TdM. While Major Tom's deck is not technically a TdM, it is not fraudulent
since there is a playful tone that runs through the title as well as the whole deck. TdM with a sly wink, much different than a big company marketing a deck loosely based on TdM and saying it IS TdM.

Cry "havoc", and let slip the dogs of war. :lol:

 

[stella01904]

BUMP!

 

[gregory]

Dogs of war busy just now; back later....

(as the one who asked about Major Tom's - NOT to say it wasn't, just to ask, as I am less of a purist than most...)

 

[le pendu]

Some thread drift over here:
http://www.tarotforum.net/showthread.php?t=90579&page=4&pp=10
brings up the question of where to draw the line defining TdM.

IMHO: Noblet, Dodal, and Conver are TdM's. Reproductions of said decks are TdM's. Marteau, corrupted though it may be, is a TdM. Restorations, recolored and even with added details that some may find questionable, like the Jodo-Camoin, would still be TdM's. Vieville, though a close cousin, is technically not a TdM.

In other words, decks that retain the TdM lines, and are part of the Marseille tradition, are TdMs.

I think most TdM enthusiasts would agree. See also this thread:
http://www.tarotforum.net/showthread.php?t=68869

This unpublished LS deck, attractive as some may find it, is NOT a TdM:
http://www.tarotforum.net/attachment.php?attachmentid=24958
It would be fraudulent to market it as a TdM.

As it stands, I'm not sure.

There's no doubt that the images are related to the TdM. The colors immediately convey that, as do the postures of the figures.

What of the bateleur's table though? Does it have to be a three legged table?

What of the Pope? Shouldn't he have two acolytes before him?

Could you call the deck Serio's Marseille? Could you call it TdM Renewed? 21st Century TdM? It's a tough one and I'm not sure. EDIT: Duh, they refer to it as "Modern Tarot of Marseilles" in the book. That title makes a lot of sense to me.

The "purist" in me (how ridiculous) is inclined to say no; but I think, somehow, that these cards capture the *essence* of the TdM, while there are some that have all the "right lines" but are completely lacking in soul. The "Convos" comes to mind as an example, or the US games TdM based on the Dodal.

IF they had "Scenic" pips (rather then showing the illustrated suit symbols with flourishes ) that would completely disqualify it for me, and I would have no interest in the deck.

I think these images are beautiful, and evocative. Are they TdM? Hmmmm.....

 

[Sulis]

I don't see how a tarot deck claiming to be a Tarot de Marseille can be 'fraudulent'.
Could someone explain.

 

[gregory]

IF they had "Scenic" pips (rather then showing the illustrated suit symbols with flourishes ) that would completely disqualify it for me, and I would have no interest in the deck.

I think these images are beautiful, and evocative. Are they TdM? Hmmmm.....

I think they are.

As for illustrated pips - I would be interested to see them - it would certainly be an interesting deck to see. I'm surprised you wouldn't be interested at all, le pendu. Surely there is such a thing as intellectual curiosity, not to mention an appreciation of art that is stunning. Whatever it's called.

 

[le pendu]

I think they are.

As for illustrated pips - I would be interested to see them - it would certainly be an interesting deck to see. I'm surprised you wouldn't be interested at all, le pendu. Surely there is such a thing as intellectual curiosity, not to mention an appreciation of art that is stunning. Whatever it's called.

Well... illustrate what? There is no predefined system for the TdM. If the Three Swords had a heart with swords through it I would toss the deck into the fire and then have to meticulously wash my hands and burn some sage.

So what would go there??? That's the beauty of the TdM, it's individual and open to interpretation by the reader.

I wouldn't want an implied meaning from the artist. I think the samples shown in the image successfully walk the line of balance.

For instance, for me, the 3 Swords makes me think of the Three Musketeers. All for one and one for all, camaraderie, unity in purpose, fighting for what is right. That's MY interpretation of the card, sometimes... but it changes. If that were illustrated on the card, then it is just too limiting, in my opinion, and take the deck out of balance, and certainly out of "TdM".

I don't want to see someone else's interpretation for a meaning on a TdM deck, for me, that is where the line is absolutely crossed.

I'd like to say I think it would be interesting to see, and I suppose it would on some level; but I suspect it would render the deck tremendously less useful, to me.

(Did I mention that I really love these cards and am trying to positively encourage them to be published?)

 

[thinbuddha]

I don't see how a tarot deck claiming to be a Tarot de Marseille can be 'fraudulent'.
Could someone explain.

Interesting question.

I think that the claim can be said to be fraudulent, though perhaps not the deck itself. Surely if you buy a pack of cards marked as "Poker Cards" and you find a deck with a 11's, 12's & 13's in place of Jacks, Queen's & Kings, you would be a bit miffed that the claim was made? Sure- you can play poker with such a set of cards, but are they still poker cards? Some of my favorite poker games couldn't be played with such a deck (suicide kings & one-eyed jacks are wild). This is a bit of a radical example- but what if the Jacks Queens & Kings are all there, but they are radically different- perhaps not in the look (a casual glance at the cards may not reveal that all the Jacks have 2 eyes, or that no Kings have a sword through their head). A collector buying the deck and expecting an "English" deck of cards would feel defeated and defrauded if it was advertised as such. It might be in the same style, but the content of the cards is different than the norm.

In a TdM, if the hermit is suddenly holding a book rather than a lamp, does this not change the character of the card? Other seemingly subtle changes throughout the deck will change the character of the whole deck, no? So if you have such a deck for sale, and claim it to be a TdM, isn't it a false claim?

If a RWS deck was sold as a "Tarot of Marseilles", wouldn't this be false advertising?

I have the Tarot of Bologna, which I consider to be TdM, but some do not. The differences are pretty subtle, but for some people, they are enough to change the label this deck carries.

The interesting question is "where is the line drawn: what makes a TdM?". Is it a style, the content of the cards, or a combination of both?

If it is a style, then we are limited to woodcut decks (or decks that were made to look as if they were woodcut decks). Bold black lines surrounding a limited pallet of colored areas... Almost as a cartoon from a modern newspaper.

If it is content- well, this is where there are differing opinions. I don't have the time or knowledge to say much about this, so I'll leave it to someone else.

My feeling is that there is a little bit from each category. Clearly content is important. Scenic pips prettymuch disqualify a deck from being considered a TdM, in my opinion. Also, decks with one or more majors replaced with different cards (Juno & Jupiter, for example) get the axe. But can the hermit be wearing earmuffs rather than a hood? Interesting question that I'm not prepared to answer.

For my money, the Serio deck seems to qualify based on the scans above... Certainly it is outside the norm for TdM.

-tb

 

[le pendu]

Well said TB.

 

[gregory]

Well... illustrate what? There is no predefined system for the TdM. If the Three Swords had a heart with swords through it I would toss the deck into the fire and then have to meticulously wash my hands and burn some sage.

So what would go there??? That's the beauty of the TdM, it's individual and open to interpretation by the reader.

I wouldn't want an implied meaning from the artist. I think the samples shown in the image successfully walk the line of balance.

For instance, for me, the 3 Swords makes me think of the Three Musketeers. All for one and one for all, camaraderie, unity in purpose, fighting for what is right. That's MY interpretation of the card, sometimes... but it changes. If that were illustrated on the card, then it is just too limiting, in my opinion, and take the deck out of balance, and certainly out of "TdM".

I don't want to see someone else's interpretation for a meaning on a TdM deck, for me, that is where the line is absolutely crossed.

I'd like to say I think it would be interesting to see, and I suppose it would on some level; but I suspect it would render the deck tremendously less useful, to me.

(Did I mention that I really love these cards and am trying to positively encourage them to be published?)

I know you are.
But you did say you wouldn't be interested - that was what surprised me. Whether others are OK with the title or not, what piqued my curiosity in your post was the idea that someone like you, so into knowledge, could not be INTERESTED ! We all have our preferred ways of reading, and if you like unillustrated pips I have NO quarrel with that.

But if Serio can "see" illustrations for them - I would LOVE to see those, whatever he called them. And anyone who didn't want to have a deck with his pips if they were illustrated ones doesn't have to buy it...

And if his inspiration COMES from the TdM, I think as an artist he has the right to recognise it by calling his deck by that name. Whatever I or anyone else thinks. For him, it comes from that tradition.