I was aware that - as in other decks by this artist for LoS - there is a lot of adapting of images. the Art Nouveau Tarot is just too much for me; one of the reasons why I could never imagine myself getting this deck. So many of the images are copied from Classical/poached/drawn on (whatever you want to call it) artwork. The Sorcerers Tarot seems less so. Definitely a Preraphaelite thing going on though (like in the Lovers).
I quite like the childish bent. I like the
7 of Cups, with the child listening to monsters and goblins as only children know how.
Like so many LoS decks - and maybe this is just me - I don't feel an urge to study or journal or anything with this deck. I don't feel an urge to get excessively familiar with it, but so often their decks work well when you don't know them particularly well and you use them with no preconceived ideas, no particular familiarity. Just take them down from the shelf when you need them, lay them out and read, with no expectations. They speak loud & clear with no consciousness of a *system*, does it/does it not deviate etc etc. Just take them on their own terms.
One niggling pedantic grammatical thing here r.e punctuation. It is officially called "The Sorcerers Tarot" but shouldn't it be The Sorcerer's Tarot (i.e the tarot of a sorcerer?) OR is it The Sorcerers' Tarot (i.e the tarot of sorcerers = plural, more than one)???
Actually, come to think of it, is The Mermaid's Tarot or the Mermaids' Tarot??