Qualities/criteria for an Oracle deck

[GryffinSong]

Mostly, that whatever messages are included have some practical relevance to my life - at least, at the time I'm purchasing it.

...

Generally, what I don't like is ... offensive/things I don't believe in, or excessively negative and anxiety inducing. There's enough negativity and anxiety in life already. If I'm consulting an oracle, I want a way to turn that around or minimize/eliminate it, not to exacerbate it.

I've quoted parts of Mellifluous' post because much of what was said is how I feel. I don't care what system, what style, or how many cards. I care that the cards are relevant to my life, and that they trigger ideas for moving forward in a positive way.

 

[rachelcat]

I agree with the consensus: There has to be a theme or some cohesiveness, not just a random collection of nouns. I personally like decks based on traditional divi systems, like I Ching, runes, astrology, etc., or even language of flowers, crystal meanings, etc. But a truly coherent theme works, too.

And using a divi system gives meaning to the number of cards: 36, 52, 24 (runes), 20 (ogham), 78, 64 (I Ching), etc. (I often check the number of cards when trying to get a clue on what kind of oracle I'm looking at.)

About the balance of positive and negative: Call me a cheater, but I seem to like the positive weighted a bit. I gave away Caroline Myss Archetype Cards because there were reversed keywords with negative meanings for each card. And that seemed to give the whole deck a negative cast to me, so it had to go.

ETA: I noticed someone mentioned the Graven Images Oracle, and that made me think of this: It's very good to have a theme or system, but maybe it can go overboard. I really liked the Graven Images. It has a (very intelligent, intriguing) suit system. But I decided the system was too much for me to learn when there are so many other traditional type systems out there I haven't learned yet.

So that might be something to keep in mind. You might have a complex system that is a thing of beauty, but will people be willing to take the time to learn it to be able to use the deck? (I'm now also thinking of Caitlin Matthews' decks, Celtic Book of the Dead and Celtic Wisdom Oracle.) Just another thought . . .

 

[Le Fanu]

Very interesting comments here.

I would say that much as I love Lenormands, I do prefer more cards than 36, although I can read with the Lenormand. I have no doubt that Lenormands can pronounce on any subject whatsoever but as I don't have all the infinite variations, it still feels like 36 cards to me (and not infinite variations).

I like the 52 cards of Sibillas, BUT there seem to be too many people cards. I once took out all the cards in a Sibilla which don't seem to mean much to me and there were 36 left, so that says something. Not sure what.

And - as others have said - those Oracles which have a convoluted system never quite grab me. I don't think I'm a lazy person but if it's an overly elaborate system, I find myself thinking "I might as well learn the Liber T" as there is still that niggling feeling that if you've got the energy and can learn a new tarot deck, it would put you in better stead long term than any Oracle. I think I believe this. I cannot think of an Oracle which if I devoted a year to would be richer and more rewarding than a year devoted to a tarot deck. Why do I think this? Don't know but I do.

But I haven't given up on Oracles. That's why I'm thinking of making my own. I am drawn towards 52 cards. And I think an oracle has to be entirely personal. So there are cards which would mean nothing whatsoever to anyone else.

I also think that I would prefer stark, vivid images and a single, well-chosen and not-too-narrow keyword, to any companion book. I love the Fallen Angels Oracle but you really have to study hard. There are things which if you didn't know, would make a difference. And I think "would my time be better spent if I invested in the Thoth. Or astrology?"

 

[Carla]

I am new to oracles, but I like the ones that you have to have back knowledge to read, such as Druid Plant and Animal Oracles or Victorian Flower Oracle. I don't know that I could do much with an oracle such as Devas of Creation by Cilla Conway, unless I used to in conjunction with tarot. To be honest, I only use oracles in combination with tarot. I've never tried an oracle-only reading.

 

[SloughSister]

I will echo others and say, not only a system, but a sound framework, a sensible architecture. Then I want something that I would call solidity or substance, and depth, in the meanings, without getting too heavy and serious. I guess that's what other posters might call the useful-to-life quality.

Overly light and fluffy annoys me, as does even thinking about the not-for-me sweet and sunshiney flavor of most angel, dolphin, etc. themes. I am keeping the Gentle Wisdom of the Fairy Realm because it helped ease the heaviness of serious tarot reading for a friend, but I'm not really interested in it for my own use.

I would like art to be not only good-looking but evocative.

I will again echo others with wanting to have good explanations in an LWB but not having to rely on it - I find I like a few or several keywords but want them to be in a nice, clear (old eyes, doncha know) font, use a small amount of the card so they don't overbalance the image/s, and have a useful range of meanings. Verb meanings help me more than noun meanings but unfortunately aren't generally available.

I want a lot of cards. I don't know a doggone thing about the symbolism of numbers or numerology but I am emphatically in favor of decks with 52, 54, 64, 72, 96. I spent a moment trying to figure out what divisors those share but then got dis-inclined. For instance, I didn't pay attention when I bought the Ogham-based Green Man Oracle and find it has way too few cards and meanings to cover the vast range of life.

And I get all confused with how big I want the cards to be - I like to look at and study really big cards, but get so cranky with shuffling or transporting them. Nice, small cards are great to shuffle and lovely to carry around with me all day long, but they often don't have enough on them or are too hard to see. A lovely finish in the cards makes them ever so much more desirable to me. The very best finish I've found in a deck so far is the silky matte of the Javanne Tarot.

Just one geek's opinion - hope that helps!

 

[Bumpy_Boo]

It may be a little simplistic, but I am working on an Oracle deck myself, and here's how I tackled keywords: a small (but readable) strip along the top and bottom of the card, the same colour as the border so that it blends....I put a few keywords along the top, then a few along the bottom, for reversed meanings. If you get it just so, the words do not interfere with the artwork, and can still be read comfortably.

Of course, the cards should have a lot more depth than this. But the right handful of keywords make an ideal starting point, and can suggest concepts larger than themselves

 

[linnie]

.....But from a personal perspective, what number of cards do you prefer?....

Bodhiseed, your post made me wonder whether in most oracle decks, the images come before the individual card names/titles or vice versa? It's like with music, something always comes first, lyrics or melody!

If I'm "doing" Oracles, I like them to be their own system.

Yay... I get to talk about my deck... (am I allowed to?)

Preferred number of cards?... I 'knew' it had to be a 'magic number', and, as fate would have it, 77 cards came into being...

Images or card names first? ... Both!... In the B&W cards of this deck (my 'minors'), the inages came through, all 59 of them, before I even realised it was to be a deck... and I then sat with them until I understood what they were telling me... and thence the naming. With the Coloured cards (my 'majors', sort of ), I had the theme, or key words, and then meditated on which symbols would best illustrate the energy of that keyword, or theme. Oh, but I don't have keywords anywhere on the cards themselves, because the intention behind this deck was to allow people their own, unblemished, interpretation of each card, which I personally find difficult to achieve when there are words embalzoned on the face of the card. (I did include a fairly discreet number so that those who need LWB assintace can look the card up and read the outline as a springboard to therir own understanding).

Their own system?... Yes... The A'HA layout, created specifically for this deck, came to me only when the deck was all but complete. I hadn't seen any such layout before, and it suits the cards beautifully. (It's either a three card, or an unlimited number, layout, but it is in the selection of thecards that it differs. Mind you, since publishing the deck a few years ago, and finding AT last year, I've since read of one deck that does something similar.)

A theme? Yes... Eclectic, loose, and 'free', yet the cards of the deck gel into a complete organism, I think... Nothing specific like plants/animals/gnomes/fairies/crystals as an overriding theme... just... um... energy, I guess, energy and intention, and the Life Force that penetrates all things...

Best wishes if you go ahead with your oracle creation, Le Fanu... I am already persuaded that it would be entirely intriguing! Have fun.