Tarot Violence

[Falcor]

I have the Durer. Animal violence didn't occur to me until you mentioned this because I suppose we are all desensitized to violence on some level. For example, almost every deck has the 10 of Swords as a bloody murder scene, right? Perhaps the question/thread is about whether or not these images traumatize you as the owner/reader/sitter? Also, as was mentioned upthread, it may be a question of if you are able to understand the symbolic meaning, which may be different from the face value meaning you are presenting.

It's worth exploring this topic.

I am not sure I can go beyond the image and see only some hypothetical meanings. I read quite intuitively and images are my clues. So some pictures push me off. From other side I am not a big fan of "sunny bunny" decks. I guess I need something in the middle? Only hinted lightly maybe?

Yes , we do have LOTS of horrors and bad things in our real world but is it ok to say "ok, shit happens" and put some of this shit into something as intimate as tarot can be? I really donno. Maybe for some people it's ok, they can take it and some like me(over sensitive?) preferring a more safe approach.

 

[G6]

I am not sure I can go beyond the image and see only some hypothetical meanings. I read quite intuitively and images are my clues. So some pictures push me off. From other side I am not a big fan of "sunny bunny" decks. I guess I need something in the middle? Only hinted lightly maybe?

Yes , we do have LOTS of horrors and bad things in our real world but is it ok to say "ok, shit happens" and put some of this shit into something as intimate as tarot can be? I really donno. Maybe for some people it's ok, they can take it and some like me(over sensitive?) preferring a more safe approach.

I'm not saying it's right I'm just saying it made me recognize that I am desensitized to violence. Depending on where you are from I would say most people are at some level. We live in a violent world. I understand what you are saying, I don't watch local news for that reason because it's the horror report and I don't want to take in all that imagery. Violence creates violence. I was just reading about this that people are not prone to violence. Environmental conditions create violence. At the same time I don't want to be sheltered from it because it is a reality and if tarot can inform me about it then I want to know.

 

[Grizabella]

I don't choose cards of that sort usually. However, I do like the Lovecraft, Ian Daniels Vampyre, Ludy Lescott, etc. Every deck does have some violence depicted so that's a given, but I don't purposely choose decks with that as their primary focus.

There was a deck several years ago that depicted a man sitting in a playground or park setting with a knife beside him, children nearby and no pants on. I was offended with that and took a felt pen to color some pants on him. I couldn't fathom how that particular depiction could be seen as acceptable. On the other hand, the Ludy deck's 3 of Swords shows a blood-covered, horrified woman beside 3 babies with swords piercing them. That's a very shocking image, but I love the deck and can read with it very well. I also love the art work on the Daniels Vampyre deck in spite of the blood and death.

The Tarot of Casanova, which I will always regret not having gotten before it went out of print, is a sexually oriented deck that I don't find offensive so far as I've seen it, but it's not blatant like the other sexually explicit decks I've seen, either.

I guess it all depends on the deck and what the reader finds acceptable or attractive. While I could read with a Tarot depicting giant penises and/or suggesting sexual violence, I just wonder why I'd want to.

 

[Achlys]

Personally, I don't place any significance on this since I look past the images to the symbolic intent.

This. Personally, I adore darker decks. Horror art, etc. is something that I find appealing tbh.

 

[Barleywine]

While I could read with a Tarot depicting giant penises and/or suggesting sexual violence, I just wonder why I'd want to.

Good thing nobody has made a deck out of Aubrey Beardsley's pen-and-ink drawings (or have they?) ("The Examination of the Herald" would meet Criterion #1.)

 

[Nemia]

The cards reflect life. I don't want a sanitized tarot that gives me gentle affirmations in every card because it assumes I can't take the fact that life is hard, unfair and dangerous. I prefer cards that reveal to me the cruel sides of life, too (and leave it to me as querent and/or reader to find the silver lining if there is one).

It's possible to depict them symbolically or in abstract shapes and colours, but they'll still be tough.

I don't see the WU's bull or the Shadowscapes' swan as real animals suffering. They are not. They are symbolic depictions.

I don't want animals to suffer. I collect street cats. I don't eat meat (since 1976). People are different so I can't tell others to have a good look at that swan if they feel so horrible about it. It's everybody's personal matter.

I read sometimes that on American campuses, you can't discuss certain kinds of violence in academic contexts without trigger warnings and diplomatic circumscriptions, and sometimes such topics are banned completely. I don't know whether that's true, but I find it baffling. Research and discussion of these topics are necessary to help understand, combat, prevent them.

And are all these students who can't even listen to an academic discussion about violence really never exposed to Game of Thrones or James Bond movies etc? Don't they watch TV or movies? I find that hard to imagine.

I find the violence for violence's sake in some popular-cultural products much more worrying than tarot's unflinching confrontation with Death and Devil.

As humans, we have good and bad potential. Both is part of our lives, our culture, it's reflectee in the cards, too.

And concerning animals: if we're not vegans, our bodies are fed through the suffering of cows, bees and chickens. Even if we're vegan, our ancestors have used horses, cows and bees, have worn fur coats, fished in streams or the sea....

None of us is blameless. As humans, we are aware of this legacy, we can justify it (humanity did it to survive etc), but it still shows that we don't accept animals on the same moral Kantian level as humans. And how bad are humans to other humans?

No, I don't want tarot to be an island of peace and harmony. I can take the Star card and meditate on it if I wish to. But if the Tower is coming to me, and I pray it doesn't come to anyone, then I want my tarot to tell me so. If it needs a cruel image to tell me what I need to know, well, that's fine with me.

 

[Tanga]

Yes, we do have LOTS of horrors and bad things in our real world but is it ok to say "ok, shit happens" and put some of this shit into something as intimate as tarot can be? I really donno. Maybe for some people it's ok, they can take it and some like me(over sensitive?) preferring a more safe approach.

To each his own in his degree of expression and sensitivity.
I can't agree that such things shouldn't be expressed in a deck, as otherwise for me - it's a denial of the variety of humanity.

Just don't use what you don't like.

...Take Doreen Virtue decks - which have had all "the dark" removed. She did that because
she didn't like the dark. Now - that doesn't suit everyone - but if one is looking for a soft and beautiful deck for someone who is in an extremely vulnerable space - such may be the answer at the time...
If one is into Demons and ghosts - use Demons and ghosts.*shrugs*
Better out - than hidden. Can be therapeutic here too.

Etc.

 

[nisaba]

There are many decks on the market that include violence, cruelty to people and animals, sexual harassment motives and sometimes worse(at some erotic decks), death and etc. Decks like Giotto, Durer(medieval), some dark motivated decks with demons and zombies and stuff...

How do you see those decks? Are you able to overcome the sometimes very uneasy feelings they awoke and read with them? Or you will just walk around and continue to more positive imaged decks?

I'm okay with all decks.

Damaged people of all ages, I find, often respond very well to the darker decks: the saccharine-sweet love-and-light decks simply don't reflect their world and feelings as they experience them, and readings done that way are unsatisfying and unhelpful to most of them.

There are exceptions, but they are only occasional. So I make my readings real, not sanitised. And I'm sought-after.

 

[Saskia]

It really depends on each individual. Some people find the RWS too "strong": I've had clients gasp for the Devil when it comes up. The naked pair chained by the horned devil is "too out there" for some. But I personally don't think most drawings or "dark art" decks are that shocking. I don't see vampire decks or chalices full of blood as indications or invites to violence.

However, I'm in the camp of "no sexualised violence or violence against pets/children". I would be hugely put off by any images depicting sexual abuse or cruelty on animals.

To me the cards bring messages to understand truths about life but also find_better_ways forward. And better for me means more civilised, emphatic and mature. I don't consider violence, retaliation, selfishness, cruelty etc. as "more mature" ways and if the cards would focus on these types of themes, I don't think I could get very good readings out of them.

[Some cards in all decks discuss the abovementioned themes in any case, such as the 5 Swords etc., but I meant the whole deck being illustrated with violent imagery].

Of course these emotions and motives need to be recognised in people's actions, but as an advice, I don't think they'd be very helpful.

I'm not sure why some commentators seem to have understood that not liking "more brutal" imagery would mean preference towards sunny-bunny decks? I think there's a good, wide middle ground and I personally don't like angel message type decks either, they are often too saccharine.

 

[Barleywine]

It really depends on each individual. Some people find the RWS too "strong": I've had clients gasp for the Devil when it comes up. The naked pair chained by the horned devil is "too out there" for some.

One piece of advice I've taken to heart is to first find out whether the sitter has had exposure to the cards in the past and, if not, show them a print-out of what I call the "mug shots" of all the easily misunderstood "bad actors" in the deck (Death, Tower, Devil and Hanged Man), explaining that these are the cards most people take one look at, say "Whoa!" and then take two steps back. I give them a brief lesson in alternate viewpoints. I don't bother getting down to the level of the 10 of Swords or other potentially "scary" minor cards.