Re-censored decks?

[Shade]

I also was not raised with the "Devil" in my beliefs and in it's place is Torment. I see this as following the native belief system. Is it wrong, maybe for someone who doesn't know this belief system, but for me no. But I don't think the overall definition of the card is changed.

Some deck themes definitely do not mesh well with certain card names, usually the more religious figures: Trumps II, V, and XV. The image of an oracular woman that so many decks use for the High Priestess is just so much more accessible to modern people than the original Female Pope.

Three different Arthurian decks have all handled the Devil differently. The Tarot of Avalon has a giant Satanic beasty which seems completely at odds with the theme of the deck, The Matthews' Arthurian tarot makes him the Green Knight - one of the more mystical villains from the legends keeping a balance between the theme and tradition, and the Legend Arthurian makes him the Horned One (something a number of pagan decks have done) and plays up the idea of the scary wildness of nature. To my mind, the least successful Devil of the three was the one that tried to be the most traditional.

 

[poopsie]

Hi everyone, thanks for shedding light. Am so glad there is still freedom of creation in the tarot.

 

[Laura Borealis]

Hi. I got this term "recensored decks" from the "which deck style resonates with you ...." . I opted to put a separate thread because I need to understand this more.

Is "re-censored" the same as "censored"?

I think you're talking about this post:

I agree with what's been said re censored decks - if the tarot is meant to be able to guide us through all aspects of life, I don't see how that can be done with an imbalanced deck that's had the nitty gritty removed from it?

She means "re" as in "regarding" -- "regarding censored decks" -- that's all