Have your feelings on "wordy" decks changed?

[Barleywine]

In general, I find the Thoth titles to be very well-integrated with the "feel" of the Minor Arcana cards. For example, "Failure" looks like something you wouldn't want to step in, "Worry" vibrates with anxiety, and "Swiftness fairly flies off the surface. Others aren't as convincing but they at least all land somewhere in the ballpark. If you compare them to Crowley's earlier, Golden-Dawn-centric writing, it seems like in many cases he just truncated the original GD titles by snipping off "Lord of . . ." although in some cases he also dropped illuminating adjectives and adverbs. Still, the images seem to be well-served by the titles.

 

[Maskelyne]

For me, it depends on the deck. Some decks are so visually deep that verbiage feels jarring because it engages the left brain when I'm trying to climb into the image. But then, I'm the type who reads the cereal box if it winds up on the breakfast table and it can be a bit of work to coax the intuition into action. I trimmed my Mary-El because I wanted to let the images speak for themselves. Seeing the title brought up associations from other systems that got in the way. Perhaps once I've worked with the deck for a while and integrated its unique perspective I can deal with the labels.

I also trimmed a Thoth. Not that the titles bother me, but the artwork just seems to come alive when freed of words and borders.

On the other hand, the full Golden Dawn titles on the Hermetic Tarot seem completely appropriate, as do the bits of poetry on the William Blake.

 

[Grizabella]

The Wildwood

Waking the Wild Spirit

And not only does the Wildwood have keywords on it, it's a whole different system than RWS. Well, so is Waking the Wild Spirit, come to think of it.

 

[AJ]

I'm working with Der Akron this week which is a German deck which I don't speak.
I spent a couple of hours translating all the words on the bottom of the cards and I'm glad I did. It is like a mini-book into the artists/authors concept and mind and they are far different from RWS clones.

So I draw my cards, think about the images, then read the translation. Fascinating deck.

 

[Chiriku]

Ah, I just thought of another "wordy" deck, albeit in a non-traditional way: the Rohrig . True, the script (in German and English I think) is integrated into the image in a painterly fashion, but it's there alright, and goes beyond Thoth-like titles, getting into keyword territory, if I remember correctly.

MerryDay Tarot
I am one Tarot
Rosetta Tarot

I forgot about MerryDay, thanks. That one's not Thoth-based, either, is it?

Thoth words feel a part of the overall concept and I love them. It's RWS "keywords" (they never had titles) which really annoy me. They're the ones I can't deal with.

Interesting point. But are there many RWS-tradition decks with keywords? It's too late at night for me to sit here and mentally sort through my old collection (most of which I haven't laid eyes on in years). But I really can't think of any off the top of my head...

The other response to this is: do we accept wordiness on Thothy decks because that's built into the Thoth deck and we've grown to expect and value it in that deck and its descendants?

I really don't mind it in any of these decks. The Magickal Tarot wordiness is the most irritating; "Holy Lord of the Dark Elemental Beetroot." So pompous...

Oh, it's very pompous. No one said it wasn't. But that is par for the course, as that little club calling itself the Order of the Golden Dawn (a pompous name if there ever was one) was made up of quite a few "large" personalities; humility wasn't really their strong point.

I am neither a ceremonialist nor a magician but I do find that its excessive wordiness creates the appropriate atmosphere for , shall we say, "will-driven" readings and thought exercises. We could say the same about Hermetic, too, although calligraphy is invariably more pompous than regular typesetting/fonts.

If I'm having trouble relating fluently to the symbolism in a particular reading, I might bounce back to the card title as a "centering" device, but it doesn't happen often. I kind of instinctively jump right onto cards that the querent might misconstrue ("WHAT??? Failure? Debauch? THE DEVIL??!!!") and try to explain the underlying history and principles behind the choice of words before it can become an obstacle to understanding.

Yes, I've tried to "jump" right onto Debauch and Cruelty and so forth and explain their subtleties, but I wouldn't want to create a GD overload for the querent. I probably have, however; my explanations tend to be thorough.

It's always interesting to me when I hear a professional reader say they use the Thoth exclusively or often for their clientele. Even setting aside the Wordiness, the explicitly esoteric decks don't seem as querent-friendly. What most paying querents want to know is better approached with a Marseilles or Eteilla-style deck, IMO.

But single words, or at most titles like "Lord of . . . " are about all that I can tolerate. Multiple keywords might be OK in a learning deck, but I find them annoying (and possibly an impediment to free-association) in a deck for general reading, and I won't buy such decks. I prefer the symbolism in the images to tell the story.

Can you think of any decks with multiple keywords? Dunno why everything's escaping me at the moment.

So far I haven't read for anyone else with a keyword deck, and if I did I'd probably just say what I would anyway, and if the querent questioned me on it I'd go into detail of why I differed, if indeed I did differ.

Yes, but it can be a chore with some of the more literal-minded querents.

Keywords DO bother me when they're excessive, in the case of some "beginner's" decks in which a sentence or two about the meaning was pasted onto the card, but that's a slightly different kettle of fish.

I've come to enjoy decks with titles or keywords more and more -- the Jolanda, the Tarot des Femmes Erotiques (which has titles like "defeat of the mind," "she who controls the money," and "juggling work"), etc.

As to excessive, same question I posed to Barleywine, above.

I have a Jolanda and don't remember any more-than-standard words on it...?

Now, that's interesting about the Femmes Erotiques, which I've seen in person but do not own. THAT's wordiness, alright. But it's wordiness in rather a different way than the Golden Dawnism we've been discussing. I don't know if I like this new sort of wordiness but I can't put my finger on why just yet...too descriptive, too mundane perhaps. Not allegorical or figurative enough. It's like looking at a photograph of a person and simply describing what they're doing in it (even though I know the photos in the Femmes Erotique don't show anyone "doing" anything other than being a photo op).

I am fine with wordy decks, including the Magickal. I think that may be because of so many years with the I Ching which is essentially a book oracle. I guess the Golden dawn titles could sound pompous, but to me they seem to open ideas up. They seem darkly mysterious.

When I read the words, colours and images sort of flow together in my mind, along with my mental grab-bag of numerology and goodness knows what else.

Interesting point about "book oracles." As to your point about "flowing together in your mind," count yourself lucky, as many people's brains over-fixate on words in a manner that impedes all other potential "flow."

Wordy decks in my collection:

Sun and Moon
Sacred Circle Tarot
Shapeshifter

Forgot about Sacred Circle, which is astonishing, given its omnipresence in the late 90s. That one has black borders, too, which further highlights the text.

In general, I find the Thoth titles to be very well-integrated with the "feel" of the Minor Arcana cards. For example, "Failure" looks like something you wouldn't want to step in, "Worry" vibrates with anxiety, and "Swiftness fairly flies off the surface. Others aren't as convincing but they at least all land somewhere in the ballpark. If you compare them to Crowley's earlier, Golden-Dawn-centric writing, it seems like in many cases he just truncated the original GD titles by snipping off "Lord of . . ." although in some cases he also dropped illuminating adjectives and adverbs. Still, the images seem to be well-served by the titles.

I agree that the Thoth Minors achieve with great panache the feat of communicating on a visual level their GD roots/titles.

 

[Chiriku]

On the other hand, the full Golden Dawn titles on the Hermetic Tarot seem completely appropriate, as do the bits of poetry on the William Blake.

The Wildwood

Waking the Wild Spirit

And not only does the Wildwood have keywords on it, it's a whole different system than RWS. Well, so is Waking the Wild Spirit, come to think of it.

I'm working with Der Akron this week which is a German deck which I don't speak.
I spent a couple of hours translating all the words on the bottom of the cards and I'm glad I did. It is like a mini-book into the artists/authors concept and mind and they are far different from RWS clones.

Except for the Hermetic, I don't have any of the above named decks, and I think it's interesting how different in system they seem to be, with Wildwood being pagan/shamanic/Wheel of the Year if what I hear is correct, William Blake having the poetry angle, and the others being described here as non-RWS-y.

That's interesting to know, thanks. Because the most famous examples of wordy decks are heavily esoteric and explicitly esoteric, one can forget that there are multiple other ways to be wordy.

While we're at it, let's add in the Shakespeare Tarot (I know many decks have this title but the one I have has quotations from plays on it, if I remember correctly).

 

[AJ]

I used the Shakespeare Oracle Tarot last week, we got along fine as always.

I've been thinking about the question. I've sold/traded/given far more decks than I currently own, and I'm sure some of them were for keywords but I don't remember any.

Oracles on the other hand.. Graven Images. Hated the keywords.
Rumi, liked them
5 keys to happiness, liked some, thought others were weird
Answer Deck, didn't even finish the week with it
Wisdom of the Four Winds, lovely
Guardians of Wisdom. Tons of words, with reversals words! The art saved this deck for me.

I guess it's a case by case thing for me.

 

[Barleywine]

Yes, I've tried to "jump" right onto Debauch and Cruelty and so forth and explain their subtleties, but I wouldn't want to create a GD overload for the querent. I probably have, however; my explanations tend to be thorough.

It's always interesting to me when I hear a professional reader say they use the Thoth exclusively or often for their clientele. Even setting aside the Wordiness, the explicitly esoteric decks don't seem as querent-friendly. What most paying querents want to know is better approached with a Marseilles or Eteilla-style deck, IMO.

I've always loved the challenge of trying to render the symbolism intelligible at a level, and in words, the querent is able to make sense of in their present circumstances. Sometimes it flows, other times it's a lot of effort, with a good deal of back-and-forth to get it "right." But I've seldom found the effort to be wasted.

 

[Barleywine]

Can you think of any decks with multiple keywords? Dunno why everything's escaping me at the moment.

I'm looking at a few examples right now, from Anthony Clark's Magickal Tarot.

6 of Swords: "Lord of Science;" "Intelligence" and "Humanity" (for Mercury in Aquarius); "Balance" (for Tiphareth)

5 of Cups: "Lord of Disappointment;" "Disturbance of Ease"

4 of Cups: "Lord of Pleasure;" "Luxury;" "Abandonment to Desire"

9 of Swords: "Lord of Cruelty;" "Heartless Passion" (probably for Mars in Gemini)

Some of these are based on the astrological attributions, but most seem to be an amplification of the meaning of the formal title. Can't think of any others right now; most likely I didn't buy them and forget which ones they were.

 

[Chiriku]

I'm looking at a few examples right now, from Anthony Clark's Magickal Tarot.

That's a prime example, yes (we discussed it upthread). Also one of my personal favorite decks. Striking imagery.

I've always loved the challenge of trying to render the symbolism intelligible at a level, and in words, the querent is able to make sense of in their present circumstances. Sometimes it flows, other times it's a lot of effort, with a good deal of back-and-forth to get it "right." But I've seldom found the effort to be wasted.

You're right; when the querent is receptive and you the reader are on top of your game, it can be very fruitful for the querent (from my perspective) to get into some GD-ism/Thelemic roots (the latter with respect to the Thoth). Once I did a reading with the Thoth for a man who reads tarot fairly recreationally for himself and his friends and he'd never seen the Thoth, though he said he thought he might have heard of it. In deference to his identification as a reader himself, I thought I could get into some heavier discussion of Crowley's commentary on the Minors in his reading (as opposed to with a querent at a festival or somesuch). But he would excitedly interrupt with his own interpretations that were much more Waite-y. I am not one who polarizes Waite and Crowley; to me, their decks have much more in common with their shared GD roots, than not. But this guy was taking it a bit far, IMO. There ARE notable differences in some cases.

I used the Shakespeare Oracle Tarot last week, we got along fine as always.

I've been thinking about the question. I've sold/traded/given far more decks than I currently own, and I'm sure some of them were for keywords but I don't remember any.

Oracles on the other hand.. Graven Images. Hated the keywords.
Rumi, liked them
5 keys to happiness, liked some, thought others were weird
Answer Deck, didn't even finish the week with it
Wisdom of the Four Winds, lovely
Guardians of Wisdom. Tons of words, with reversals words! The art saved this deck for me.

I guess it's a case by case thing for me.

Mine's not the Shakespeare Oracle; will have to look mine up later.

Rumi's among my favorite decks; why on earth did that one escape my list?

I am interested in your opinion especially on wordy tarot decks because you are also a user/lover of non-tarot oracle decks (see my first post for an interest in oracles' wordiness).