The Victorian Romantic Tarot

[baba-prague]

I've been a card player since I was a kid, and I know by the feel of the cards how much abuse they can take. I never have bent any cards, even though I'm a die-hard riffler. These cards although they seem thin compared to some others, are standing up well, and still look new (although I would like them to get that 'used' appearance...ha).

Yes, it's good card-stock with the usual carbon layer inside. But we thought it would feel thicker too - though it's nice in use and I think pretty robust.

I'm really, really pleased that people are generally getting so much out of reading with this deck. I think all our decks tend to be layered and so they sometimes take time to give of their best. But they DO read - and I think maybe this one reads rather like Tarot of Prague in a way, or at least this is what I find. It's quite a serious deck and can deal well with weighty issues. It's also got an odd hypnotic quality in readings - if you allow it to take over a bit.

On the book. Well, I hope people read it - but I might be prejudiced! If you don't want to have an impact on your interpretations just yet you could read it but NOT look at the keywords. The keywords are of course very useful for many people (during reading I still tend to turn through keywords in my mind before opening out an interpretation) but they can lock things down for some - especially if you really want to take a direct intuitive approach. But I think that the discussion of the cards is pretty open-ended if you just ignore the keywords.

Okay - another incentive to read the book. There is a quote in it about cartomancy which I think I was the first to find and which I've never seen referenced elsewhere. Now you have to find it

 

[Shaymus]

Okay - another incentive to read the book. There is a quote in it about cartomancy which I think I was the first to find and which I've never seen referenced elsewhere. Now you have to find it

Oh, I do love a challenge. It's not that I will never read your book (I've read the books you did about the Prague and Fairytale decks, and I enjoyed both), but since then, I want to spend time with this deck, and I will eventually read your book. I must say, that you do a great job on your books as well.

Back to the cardstock, actually, I prefer that weight of card...it's much easier to shuffle and riffle.

As an aside, when I put all the cards out in a spread of 10 cards or so, just step back and look over the colours and images without doing interpretations right yet, gives a very interesting overall picture (I'm not explaining this properly, but try it with different room lighting...very interesting).

Shaymus

 

[jeseryn]

I ordered this deck a little bit ago and it came with a bent Queen of Pentacles that the author is kind enough to be sending along a replacement so I can actually use the deck.

The queen of wands is the card I most see myself as. The queen of wands in this deck TOTALLY turns me off. I'm really really dissapointed because it just strikes me as not only totally creepy but not anything I would have even remotely associated with the queen of wands.

Anyone else have a more positive way of looking at it? Because pretty sure I'm going to just end up storing it away even though the rest of the cards are quite pretty and fairly deep.

 

[Erzebet]

I think the Queen of Wands in the Victorian Romantic is absolutely beautiful! Perhaps we can help you better if you explain what or why exactly you find her creepy and a complete turnoff? Her face, clothers, expression? Things like that. I can't wrap my head around her being creepy in any way! Such a beautiful flowing dress and I love that parasol. It's a very bright positive card I've always thought.

Let us know what is about her that bothers you so much?

 

[jeseryn]

Oh sheesh. I am so sorry. I was talking about my gothic bohemian deck. I have a wicked cold today and my thinking is all whacked.