Tarot of the III Millennium

[Rosanne]

8 of Cups / Coupes, 10 of Coins / Pentacles

I would like to talk about two very different cards in this deck, well the images evoke something very different from usual in me.
8 Cups/Coupes:
Coupes is the Suit of Water, spiritual nutrition, birth and life.
The Number 8 : Knowledge-Every doubt can be dispelled even if it leads to new doubts. Learn by finding your limits to your own knowledge.
The servant in this image appears to be milking a stallion. The Artist calls this card simplicity.Even if it is a mare, and she has an udder, it is not a simple job to milk it. It brings to mind the thought "If horse milking can be demonstrated, we can be fairly sure that the horses were domestic." In some decks this card is Saturn in Pisces and so this might show that introspection would be a useful thing. You will learn something from this action of attempting to milk a stallion, a new perspective maybe.

10 Coins/Pentacles
I really like this card. Number 10 is perfection; the suit of Earth and our existence.The artist calls this card Hope.
Well for me it brings in the occult view of inheritance; the foundations of current prosperity, are laid by the previous members of one's family. The inheritance in this card is is the heretical belief of the father about to be burnt at the stake, in this case a sign of the burden the ones family can impose impose. The guard seems to be barring the way of the lad and here lies the Hope I think. Here we have the completion of one cycle and therefore the beginning of a new one. Is this Mercury in Virgo? True knowledge that accumulation of wealth in a material sense should not be the goal. Is this how you might see these two cards?
~Rosanne

 

[blashamma]

I knew it! I knew there were special rules we'd have to follow.

Rosanne, I think you came up with a great solution of maybe moving this to another forum, though I do appreciate all the effort from Sulis. I was sort of discouraged, actually when I found that this would be all split up. I mean, it's just my presonal preference, but I like when you're talking about one thing that that one thing stay all together. For this deck, it may be okay to do separates for the majors, but once you get to the minors, because of the way this deck is done, I don't think it'd really be a good idea to do separate posts for all the cards.

As for III Millennium specifically, I've been playing with it again. Yes, it's been put away, well as with most of my stuff since I move frequently. But I got it out, and I'm all revved up.

A friend of mine does tarot as well, and her and I would go to some place somewhere, and we'd do readings for each other. Her cards (I don't remember the specific deck) were more traditional. They were good and beautiful to look at, but she even agreed that mine (III Millennium) were more fun because it became an interactive experience that was equally different and equally the same every time you did it.

I admit I'm not very much into astrology, and I don't know much about it, so I'm not particularly sure what the III Millennium is or the Age of Aquarius is or whatever. I know I'm Pisces, and another friend of mine is Aquarius, and we agreed that they must be pretty much the same except Aquarians are more intellectuallly minded while Pisceans are more Spiritual minded. It's true of us anyway. So I guess that the Age of Aquarius (it is synonymous with the III Millennium, correct?) would be a moving from the intangible world to the tangible world. It'd be moving from gods and religion to science and technology. I find that theme much in the tarot deck. It seems there is a combination of etherial imagery with technology.

The Hermit looks at a fantasy creature with fear and curiousity while right nex to him, he is cleary running out of time (hourglass)

The Hierophant is seen from behind because in this new world of science, he can no longer see and govern us.

The lovers face is also turned away. Love is an emotion, not measurable or able to be exactly reproduced and cut apart and tested in a scientific manner. It too must be left behind.

The tower shows many religious-like temples from around the world, yet they are all together just as how technology has brought us together.

The Star is a nude figure like a mystic oracle, but behind her is a mapped out chart of the night sky

The Sun "I traced a perfect circle with my finger because it was already in me." The perfect circle is science, perfection, roundness, and technology (Just try to freehand a perfect circle, and you'll see).

The World, wide eyed, and being the spherical child of the new age, carrys away the old world on her fanciful hat.

Much of the minor deck shows images of sorrow, pain, the old world, and fantastical creatures. the are slowy being covered by symbols of the new age, charts, barcodes, web addresses. Eventually, the past will meat its demise to the new, just as the great philosopher shown in the four aces.

Also, many of the faces in this deck are forlorn or solemn, like they know some deep dark secret that we don't. The past will be outrun by the future. It's inevitable. That is the theme of the deck.

 

[Sulis]

Moderator message

Hi Folks,

After a little bit of thought and with your comments in mind, I reckon that this group could be feasibly left as one thread.
This is not a very well used or popular deck so an exception to the study group guidelines seems appropriate.

I have added the group to the main Study Group index which can be found here: http://www.tarotforum.net/showthread.php?t=34124

If you do decide to use separate threads for any of the cards, or for the Majors (for example), please let me know by PM and I will add the new threads to the index thread.

Thanks
Sulis - Tarot Study Groups moderator

 

[Rosanne]

I have housed my deck now- it always takes some thought for me, to decide what I am going to make for the deck. So it is a black wood box, the lid has a circuit board stuck on top and painted over- it looks very dalek/star wars- ey. Shiny shiny black like a mirror.
Well I have noticed some things that interest me.
I wonder if the original 22 cards were drawn on Papyrus paper- a linen type texture comes through.
On the cardboard outer box, the Magician is painted in colour. I like the choices, I wonder if there is a whole deck in colour somewhere.
The Moon 'Diana' or Egyptian time model has a key planted in her head. Her stand is very puppet like and stopped mid track of movement.She also has a plumb bob hanging from her headdress. Our historical clock and calendar- wonderful way to represent her! Has she stopped as an indication of how we use another method now?
I see something new every time I look- I have not tried to read with the deck yet- in fact for the first time I am a little nervous about that. I also wonder why the Tarot of Bologna was used as the card insert?
I just picked a random minor to question. VII Wands. Loss- Cap in hand for a job? Not sure ,but has he lost his right eye?
Does the Artist play Tarocchi?
~Rosanne

 

[blashamma]

Ha! The magician has done what he does best and tricked you! You see, the magician on the box and the magician on the card are not the same. The most noticeable difference is the location of the die on the table top, but look carefully at his collar, the folds of fabric in his clothes, his wand, and the size of his hat. You see they are not the same after all!

You know, as for the Moon, I had always thought of those as ornamentaion and the stance of a mystical dance, as she is very similar to south-east Asian dancers in appearance, especially Javanese dancers, and the shoes look a bit Japanese in appearance, and we know by Temperance that he's not afraid to mix cultures in a tarot deck. However, I do like your interpretation, and it seems fitting that it wouldn't be as it seems.

I don't know, maybe as an artist, I take these thigns forgranted, but the paper can be any linen or faux linen paper, or with today's modern advancements on the computer, it could be an added texture. I always thought that his art was traditional, btu I must admit that even with my keen eye, it has become difficult for me to distinguish computer art from traditional art. And it's expecially difficult on a printed card or computer screen. And yet all of this fits into the theme of the deck!

Also, with the symbols, such as the clockwork moon goddess (or whatever), the funny thing is, he may not have meant for his cards to have so many meaningful symbols. If he's anything like me, I like to create art that looks meaningful, and people apply their own meanings to the symbols, eventhough they're meaningless to me. He may or may not have done that. It's something to think about.

It's interesting that we all find different things in the same thing. It goes to show how Tarot is unique and changing, and how it's definately no science. It sort of what I meant when I said reading always seem to be equally different and equally the same every time I do one. You see new things or thing gain new meanings, yet they are the same images with the same meanings too. I never got this same feeling from other tarot decks, but it's all depends on the person too.

I have no idea why he chose Bologna as an insert. Maybe it was the only deck he had lying around, so he scanned it in and placed it on. it could also be for contrast of such a simple and traditional deck with a modern and very untraditional deck. Or maybe he just wanted to find a new way for people to know the cards without using numbers of titles. Maybe he never intended to do a minors deck at all, since he did do originally just the majors, and you see the minors are more sketchy and rushed looking. Maybe he didn't make them. He could have just done a giant picture for whatever reason, and then someone else took his picture, altered the ink color on a computer to better match the majors, cut the picture up for differnt cards, and added some graphics and the Bologna cards. It's not cool or mystical, but it's the sad fact of what happens to some artist's works when someone else gets a hold of them. It's all in how we use them. Our treatment of the cards and our mentality goes beyond the cards themselves. I mean, if they were just cards, people wouldn't be making forums about them now would they? ha ha!

And as for the VII of wands, I think the card you're showing is the VII of swords. That's one thing I always hated was that it's so difficult to tell the difference between the wands and swords, and I usually ignore the Bologna card because of that. so our new word is violence. Frankly, I have no idea what's going on here, except what he's lifting in heavy as can be told by the arm muscles (I took too many anatomy classes). It looks too that he has both eyes, but I did always wonder about that goo on the side of his face. Maybe he wants to throw that stone (?) at somebody but can't lift it, and the goo is just an unerased mistake? Who knows?

 

[Rosanne]

hehe blashamma! I was tricked by the Magician. Oh wands are straight and swords are curved.(wands are polo sticks originally) just look for the curve.
Interesting what you say about art and what the artist portrays. When I draw I am trying to convey something definite. I would be disappointed if the message was obscure. So I guess I am an illustrator more than an Artist's artist, if you get my meaning. I loved your interpretation of the World card. I have looked carefully at what is on the platform hat, and it seems to be a follow on from the Tower card with different denominations of world religions on pedestals. Maybe that is the Universal bowling ball and that hat is goal- to bowl them all over?
Hmmm I am spending quite a bit of time musing on this deck. I guess it is not strange it is not popular- not that it would have worked with fairies and dragons ~Rosanne

 

[PeterS]

Old Thread but new deck

I know that this thread is pretty old but I have to ask a question. I got this deck a couple of days ago and thought it was okay. It was a new approach blah. . . blah . . . Blah.

Then it hit me. It is a puzzle. LWB, "Fragmentation: the images are not independent of one another. Each is a part of a whole and is related to the others by a connection, or even the lack ofone. they may be composed like a puzzle but taht is only one aspect of their connection."

I was wondering if anyone has attempted, like I am now to put the pips in to a single image. I have fit all the cups together, the aces form another image, the courts are almost one image but I have two that fit together but not with the other fourteen.

I am interested and stumped. I was/ am hoping for a connected whole or some image that relates together.

I am asking for help. Anyone have any for this puzzle.

PeterS

 

[mrpants]

Nice work, all!

So nice to see a great discussion generated, and finally an official study group thread, as such!

Ok, to start: terribly sorry I fell out for a bit, to those of you whom I've contacted in the past months. It's been a hectic life, and I simply didn't have the time to devote to study. But, as life tends to come and go in cycles, thankfully so does my interest in the Tarot.

A couple of you know that I purchased this deck last summerish, and what happened was that I completely fell in love with the artist. (Un)fortunately, he's extremely hard to stalk on the internet, so I have yet to receive a personal audience, much less email correspondence, with Ghiuselev. Thusly, I'm filled with questions like these:

What are the artist's intentions here? (The LWB gives beautifully cryptic indications in certain directions...) Is this a functional reading deck? Psychoanalytical tool? Purely masturbatory intellectualism? (Perhaps D: all of the above... ?)

What are the historical precedents leading up to this amazing creation? Specifically, how does the artist see his deck in the legacy of the Tarot?
Does he attempt to continue the Italian tradition over the French? What are the Golden Dawn influences, if any?

And the big one (for me): The Minors! Among the several questions I have here, I really want to know a little more about the artist's system regarding DMs.

------------------

So, dear group! I ask you: Intersted in any of these topics? I'm certainly anxious to respond to some of your posts, but am much too tired and sick with cold to form them tonight. I'll try to get clever and whatnot in the morning. I swear!

Good hunting,

Corey

 

[PeterS]

Giving it a try

There might not be a bunch of us responding to this tread but I have just got my cards. I am drawn to the Majors, they are superb, and yet challenged by the Minors.

I also just read the new Lo Scarabeo book on their history.

I don't know if you have gotten it yet. It is great for anyone who loves the LS decks.

Here is what it says about the Tarot of the III Millenium

"Of all the decks Lo Scarabeo has ever printed, The Tarot of the III Millenium has teh distinction of being the only pack of cards capable of an all-out assault on the intellect. It is also, of course, a commentary on the disconnection and detachment that has come to characterized urban life in the twenty-first century. Familiar sights are presented in unfamilar ways."


I guess I see this best in the Minors when there is the three layers of imagery. First the colored ancient tarot card, the background black and white part of a larger image, and then the modern circuits, bar code etc.

I don't know yet how to order them into a single meaning if at all it is possible. I beleive that my OCD personality wants it all to connect but the deck was created to illustrate that disconnect.

Peter

 

[mrpants]

Peter S:

Glad to hear about the book! I haven't gotten it yet, but I'm sure I will soon. I just picked up Lo Scarabeo's Tarot of the Imagination; another fantastic art deck...

In answer to your previous question about the puzzle, No. It doesn't ALL fit together, but you even quoted the artist's intention in the same post: It's all intentional. You may find meaning in the gaps and holes in the puzzle, "big picture" or "Grand Narrative" as I call it. I haven't particularly gotten anything from the missing bits yet, because I sort of got stumped on the idea of systems, and ran off on a wild goose chase regarding the history of European Divinitory Meanings for the pips. I tried to figure out which system Ghiuselev was using when drawing up his cards, and came up empty-handed. It may be that the artist wasn't overly familiar with that history, and that Lo Scarabeo gave him a general set of numerological guidelines with which to work. At any rate, I'm back at the start, and happy to simply search the cards and the basic system that the LWB refers to.

The thing most curious to me about Ghuiselev's pips are the overlays of maps, schematics, etc. Have you looked into those yet? Some thoughts:

Each suit seems to have its signature stamp, each in a unique color. For example, the suit of swords has what appears to be a kind of electrical schematic on each card, in purple. However, a few cards break the pattern, by adding a second stamp or replacing the signature stamp with a different kind. In (almost) all cases, the addition/substitution is in the form of a bar code, per the suit's designated color. These cards are:

chalices--- 3,5,6
pentacles- 2,7
wands----- 5
swords---- 2,7,9

Any ideas? I'm fresh out, but I'll take a look this evening...


corey