Disappointed by the Jodorowsky-Camoin TdM

[Raphory]

Hi all,

I recently received my deck of the Jodorowksy-Camoin Tarot de Marseille. I was eager to learn about all the modifications in colors and details, based mainly on the Conver edition of the TdM.

Finally, I did read the little booklet and... I learnt nothing at all, excepted that Camoin used some "secret knowledge" in order to modify the cards... Ah ah, so easy...

He speaks a lot about the fact that he did a lot of analyses of the cards with computer tools (comparing the Conver, Dodal editions, etc.), but you NEVER know what kind of conclusions this work was leading to, why it ended with such modifications of colors/patterns ("New computer graphics and printing techniques have enabled us to give the features and colors of the TdM a precision never attained before").

I even found some sentences in the text that... doesn't mean nothing to me, excepted some kind of "New Age" generalization, sentences like "(the TdM) is but a humble and grand instrument in the service of the Cosmos" (???).

So we're supposed to let him decide for us, once and for all, what was the "original" TdM, and he doesn't give you the detailed work he had to run through in order to achieve it.

There are many small differences introduced in this set of cards, compared to old decks. For example, the right eye of the horse in the right, in the Chariot card, is closed, just like it seemed to be in the Conver edition. But you don't find this detail in older decks like the Dodal or the Noblet editions. And the ambiguity of the Conver edition about this eye becomes a deliberated "esoteric sign" for the Jodo-Camoin edition...

One other example is the DIABLE card, where Jodo-Camoin choose to add the "belly-face" on the devil, and add the detail of the tongue going out of the mouth of this belly-face. The belly-face doesn't appear in the Conver edition, but it does appear in the older Noblet edition. But in the Noblet edition, the belly-face doesn't show a tongue at all, so where does it com from?...

And in the Noblet edition, the devil hands a fork with two points. But in the Conver edition, it becomes some kind of torch. Finally, in the Jodo-Camoin, it's the same torch-like stick as in the Conver.

So that Jodo-Camoin took some details from the old Noblet version, and melt it with details from the later Conver version, it looks to me as they did some kind of synthesis from the two sets. But what are the justifications behind their choices?

Don's ask them, they already have the most powerful justification: "Knowing secret facts regarding its history, manufacturing, tradition, symbolism and being in possession of original plates, we were the only ones who could restore the orginal Tarot of Marseilles".

Ok, so they know "secret facts"... So easy to do it your way when you don't have to share your "secret" knowledge with others...

I bought the Jean Noblet edition of the TdM, restored by Jean-Claude Flornoy, I hope I'll receive it quickly, it looks to me that the work done by Flornoy is far more respectful and "humble"...

Regards

Raphory

 

[Ross G Caldwell]

I think this secrecy is because Camoin is exploiting his family connection to the Tarot.

He gives seminars and workshops costing hundreds of euros, explaining his Tarot system. Probably the esoteric bookshops you know have his pamphlets advertising his weekend retreats.

He would not want to put everything in one book for 20 euros (or even 50), and have everyone buy that and not come to his seminars.

 

[Téa]

Hi Raphory and welcome to the forum! I appreciate your take on this. Have you tried reading with this deck despite your disappointment? It seems like you have a lot of knowledge of Marseille-decks, which one is your favorite out of them all?

 

[Fulgour]

I think this secrecy is because Camoin is exploiting his family connection to the Tarot. He gives seminars and workshops costing hundreds of euros, explaining his Tarot system. Probably the esoteric bookshops you know have his pamphlets advertising his weekend retreats. He would not want to put everything in one book for 20 euros (or even 50), and have everyone buy that and not come to his seminars.

I think "exploiting" is a poor choice of words for someone
who is trying to make a living and pay a few bills through
the presentation of his personal point of view for money.

How many people attend his seminars, and how many are
supreme idiots that must be molly coddled and spoon fed?
How many people are helped, and uplifted, and educated?

 

[Ross G Caldwell]

I think "exploiting" is a poor choice of words for someone
who is trying to make a living and pay a few bills through
the presentation of his personal point of view for money.

How many people attend his seminars, and how many are
supreme idiots that must be molly coddled and spoon fed?
How many people are helped, and uplifted, and educated?

"Exploitation" seems a neutral word for me. "Capitalizing" would have been more pointed. So...

I am simply disappointed that C&J don't give more information about their choices in the reconstruction in an accompanying booklet, and instead try to capitalize on the mystery of their own creation. It is therefore not scholarship, but mystery-mongering (mongering meaning "selling"). As a reconstruction, it is therefore inherently suspect. As an initiatory path, it might be reliable, but except for his name, why should I think so?

Many people may be uplifted, helped and educated, there is no question. But why can't I get the basic information from the LWB? That was the essence of Raphory's question. Camoin is selling the mystery of his name and his design choices; for several hundred more euros, I might be able to find out why the "original" Devil, in Camoin's card, has a tongue coming out of the mouth on his belly.

 

[Sophie]

Jodorowsky, in La Voie du Tarot, is a little more explicit about the work they did together to create the Camoin-Jodorowsky deck, though he doesn't give a blow-by-blow account. But if you look at a variety of TdM and Besançon decks - or other old French decks (e.g. Tarot de Paris), and are curious about alchemical plates, then you won't find it hard to find most of the sources of their alterations. The egg of the Papesse, for instance, is an alchemical reference. The colouring is a little more difficult to place, and owes much, I suspect, to Jodorowsky's very baroque imagination.

 

[Le Marseillais]

From Teachers to Masters to individualisation

Hello all,

Raphory is freshly coming here and his words are like arrows in heart of Truth.
Thanks for your franky style and your views that I share partly
Yes Fulgour I was one of this spoon feeded people and paid about 400 bucks for 4 days of courses with Philippe Tourrasse alias Camoin. And 2 times... I have no regrets coz it was part of my path to take a walk on the wild side of La Force... Ha Ha !
I have to confess also that I still like his deck even if now I know how wrong it is.
Thanks to our real good amatores that are present in this Forum like Ross Caldwell, Fulgour THE Scorpio, Diana (who was here and moved...), Helvetica, and our German friend I forgot his Forum name.
After 2 years of intensive Tarot studying, I see the distance I performed and feel more confortable with all Historical Decks.
Raphory be sure that you will have no regrets at all when you'll receive your Flornoy decks. This man is honest and his works is valuable. I met him and have his main decks.
Me too I am/was claiming for full explinations of all details provided by PhilippeTourrasse alias Camoin but it is now easy to see like says Helvetica that a mix of various decks was performed.
But to add details without a clear explinations is not valuable coz I am at this stage sure that all details are part of an all system. Hope my english is not too bad to exprims my thoughts.
If any of you have occasion to go to Marseilles don't hesitate to contact me and we will talks for hours about Tarot or other items.

Bone Annee 2007 a toutes et tous !!!! et meme a Philippe va.

Yves Le Marseillais

 

[Raphory]

Hi all,

thanks for your comments about the Jodo-Camoin deck. I must precise something here: my opinion is that this deck is a quite beautiful one. It's a really great deck... as far as esthetics is concerned. I just don't like the way it's sold, with this pretention about the "real heritage of the TdM tradition" and the "I know secrets" alleguation. It sounds to me as if I'm being told I'm too stupid to be part of "the-happy-few-who-know-it-all" band. I really don't think that someone pretending to hold the "cosmic" wisdom about Tarots would really act this way with other human beings

On the graphic side, my feeling is that the Jodo-Camoin deck is more respectful of some colors used in some old decks (I think of the skeleton's spin for example, which is light-blue), but in the end it's just one of the numerous "varations" of the famous TdM pattern.

About the fact that Camoin do workshops for living, I don't see nothing bad about it, as no one is FORCED to follow it. I'm just skeptical about it. Do we have to consider that the value of these "secret facts" about TdM only worth the price of the workshops or what? In the end, I'd rather spend the price of a workshop to buy a first edition of the book by Paul Marteau, "Le Tarot de Marseille" (first edition 1930), at least I would have a piece of the real history of TdM with me!

Regards

Raphory

 

[TenOfSwords]

If the TdM is to be considered a serious area of research and not just another subject of random people's desire to tell fanciful stories about imaginary conspiracies throughout the ages (enough people are doing that already), then appealing to external authority like 'secret knowledge' to justify ones own subjective interpretations should be frowned upon because it sabotages the ability of other researchers to falsify the claims and to criticize the interpretation from an informed position.

From a research perspective, this is simply not acceptable behaviour.

 

[jmd]

Since Camoin and Jodorowsky created their deck in 1997, there has been quite a lot of research that has come to light in the general domain.

Interestingly, Hadar was working on his own deck during the same time, and completed his in 1996.

With these two, we see the beginning of a new resurgence in the Marseille. Not that other Marseille-style decks were not available - they were, and a number of handcrafted or limited edition decks were on the market, as well as the more or less ubiquitous Grimaud Marseille, created closer to the beginning of the 20th century. In addition, to those who were able to see what was available (but not widely circulated), a number of photographic reproductions of earlier decks (including the Dodal, Paris, Vieville and Conver), as well as non-Marseille (but close relatives) such as the Schaffhouse and Besançon were increasingly made available.

So what can be claimed for the work achieved by Camoin?

What he did achieve is what numerous amongst us have done without either creating a deck, or making claims that surpass what is warranted: he compared carefully details from myriad decks, and included aspects that brought to the fore either details that had been nearly lost (such as the rear legs of the horses on the Chariot, or the platform on which the Star kneels - both of which I consider correct careful perception), or 'added' details that seemed to be there but remain, in my view, unjustified (such as the hem of Justice made into a snake, or the egg on the Papesse).

Part of the problems with overlaying image after image of related decks is that details might indeed seem to appear that were never there. I suspect that this is what happened with the 'egg'. Of course, once 'found', an exegesis or meaningful interpretation of the detail can likewise be unveiled to the imagination - especially when such a symbolic image has so much to offer!

There are other details that seem to me to be, similarly, 'errors' - such as including the door on the Tower. Certainly there are some early (if I recall Swiss) decks that include the doorway - but not all that is included on each deck looked at needs to be added. This is one of the unfortunate overlayed additions that, for me, take away from the deck.

Despite all this, the deck really brings to clarity details that can then sharpen the eye to look at similar details (or their lack!) in early decks.

As a basis for study and discovery, it is therefore a very important contribution, and, I would suggest, has been influential and instrumental in generating deeper interest in the Marseille in general - not only in France, but internationally.

Would they have designed the deck in the same fashion were they to begin the work now, some ten years later? Given the amount produced over the past ten years, I would suggest not.

When I wrote a short review of the deck, what struck me most was not that this deck is 'correct' in terms of either its details or the claims made by its authors, but rather the importance brought to the minutia of study that the deck warrants from historical, symbolic, esoteric and comparative perspectives.

Having said all that, I do personally wish that Camoin would take not only an honest critical look at the deck he has wonderfully created, but also openly bring his views into some kind of booklet that can trace the choices made.

It is not a deck I frequently use, but it remains one I bring to light for others to be able to easily take note, of their own accord, of details that otherwise require an explanation.