Defining TdM

[le pendu]

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 !

I appreciate the reminder to be more open-minded. Thanks gregory.

 

[gregory]

I appreciate the reminder to be more open-minded. Thanks gregory.

!!!!!

 

[Sophie]

Nice deck, wrong name

I think that LS deck looks interesting, and I would definitely buy it and enjoy discovering it!

But I wouldn't call it the Tarot de Marseille. Just as I wouldn't call every city with a tall metal tower, a medieval cathedral, an arc of triumph and a glass pyramid "Paris".

But why want to call it Tarot de Marseille at all? It makes no sense to me. As Stella writes, the Vieville is not a Marseille, despite the similarities. Likewise, this LS deck is not a Marseille, not even a modern one, despite the obvious inspiration. Why? Because they tampered with the core symbolism. That's what tarot is all about, after all.

The two acolytes and the three-legged table are important - in a Tarot de Marseille. They are part of the core symbolism of the Pope and Bateleur.


It would be like doing a deck showing a Three of Swords without a heart, and calling it RWS. It might be largely inspired by RWS - like the DruidCraft was - but the heart pierced by three swords is part of the core symbolism of the RWS deck, and so any deck calling itself RWS or Modern RWS would have to show some variation of 3 swords stuck in a heart.



So - nice looking deck, well executed - something of the Liber T about it, which is fun! - but wrong name/title for it.

 

[Major Tom]

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

...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.

Thank you very much for saying my deck isn't fraudulent.

I spent a great deal of effort and 78 weeks of study to ensure that Major Tom's Tarot of Marseilles retained the TdM lines to demonstrate the Marseille tradition is alive in the 21st Century and not dead - not stuck with regurgitating the hidebound past.

What technicality makes Major Tom's Tarot of Marseilles not a TdM for you?

I would submit the playful tone you detect in my deck was also present in (for example) the Noblet when it was first produced. In other words, the playful tone is part of the tradition. In my opinion we've only lost that playful tone with the reconstructions attempting to recreate the 'true' Marseilles.

As to the LS deck I'm with Fudugazi:

But why want to call it Tarot de Marseille at all? It makes no sense to me. As Stella writes, the Vieville is not a Marseille, despite the similarities. Likewise, this LS deck is not a Marseille, not even a modern one, despite the obvious inspiration. Why? Because they tampered with the core symbolism. That's what tarot is all about, after all.

It would solve LS marketing difficulties if they gave this intriging deck its own title without reference to Tarot of Marseilles.

 

[Sulis]

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

Thank you thinbuddha for that excellent explanation. I thought the word 'fraudulent' was a bit strong but now I can see what stella01904 meant by 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.

And thank you gregory for that comment too. I completely agree.

 

[Rosanne]

It sure is more attractive than any of the others in the range(TdM)- but hard to see how that style would translate into pips without pictures- they would look deformed. Love the look of the trial cards.
Tarot de Marsaiform- Tarot for the Anginophobic
I would buy it. Is it a Marseille? Not yet- its missing some Major Cards.
~Rosanne

 

[BrightEye]

To my untrained eye it looks like a modern reinterpretation of TdM. I love Serio's art and will have to have that deck. When?

 

[Mariana]

It's not about to be published. You can email LS if you think it should be, though, maybe we on AT can make a difference.
For more details, see this thread:
http://www.tarotforum.net/showthread.php?t=90579&page=1&pp=10

 

[gregory]

To my untrained eye it looks like a modern reinterpretation of TdM. I love Serio's art and will have to have that deck. When?

THANKS - that is JUST how I feel it deserves to be described ! (I too feel untrained. I know just what the TdM - er, I won't say purists, but you know who you are ! - mean - but life does move on. Even for the TdM !!! It lives.)

I would buy it. Is it a Marseille? Not yet- its missing some Major Cards.

See the thread with Mariana's link; Serio was never asked to finish it. I wish he would. E-mail LS, as Ric suggested !!!

 

[Sophie]

I am not a purist, far from it. If I were, I could not enjoy tarot and its variety.

Nevertheless, I don't call a cat a dog, even though they both have tails, fur, 4 legs and their owners love them. My cat used to come walking with us in the mountains, like the dog. That didn't make him a dog.

Core symbolism matters. Take it away or change it and - you have something else. Something good, maybe, but still, something different. How trained does an eye have to be to see that a Pope is missing two acolytes? What is a Pope without followers? In what way does he differ from the Hermit?