missy
F.M. Tarot said:I received this tarot as a gift from a friend last night!
Do others consider this a tarot or an oracle? No court cards make me think it's more oracle. I too am not sure how I feel about the no court cards, they are now to me so important in my readingsSo I assume then to just approach this deck as an oracle?
I haven't had a chance to look it over much, I got it last night and now I am heading off for work. But I thought I might get some opinions on it! I am going to bring it with me to flip through on my break. I know that I do enjoy and get a lot out of Lucy Cavendish's books and other decks, so I have high hopes.
I have this deck and consider it a tarot, not an oracle.
I believe that is how Lucy meant it to be, as she sticks for the most part by traditional tarot meanings with "modern" updates ("Tradition" for the Hierophant, "Change" for Death, "Bondage" for The Devil and in the Minors, the 10 of Wands is "Put Down Your Burden" as an example), as you will see from working with the cards. There are no courts as you mentioned, so I view it as a tarot without courts, which is what I think Lucy intended.Oracles don't have 22 Majors, plus Minors in four traditional tarot suits (minus courts) as this tarot has.
There are keywords on the Minors, but for more advanced readers they can be somewhat limiting, so I tend to view them as suggestions, not the definitive interpretation. I find it to be a very upbeat deck and a good deck to read with for a sitter who might be afraid or skittish of tarot. There isn't a lot to be afraid of here.
I would be curious as to what you think of the card stock. I like it and am wondering if you find her Wild Wisdom of the Faery Oracle to be of similar card stock.
The art style is unique as is the deck. I hope you enjoy yours! I am very glad to have mine.
