Who is better?

[Papageno]

Who would you consider to be the better tarot reader---the one who uses standard meanings as their basis for reading or the one who reads totally intuitively and knows nothing of the standard meanings?

Editing to add another layer to the question:

I'm using the New Orleans Voodoo tarot now part of the time and, although it supposedly follows RWS, it does so extremely loosely and I'm not using those standards, if you'd call them that. So, if you'd rather have a paid reading from someone who knows and uses standard meanings, what would that do for you if, having paid for a reading, you discovered the reader didn't use a deck for which standard meanings would apply? (This is actually what prompted my whole question in the first place but I got lost. )

I really don't see how someone who knows absolutely nothing of the standard meanings can begin to do a reading unless they're born with some extraordinary psychic ability in which case it is only the images themselves that are evoking a response in the reader.
otherwise, it's like laying out eggs, flour, butter and sugar to someone who can't boil water and asking them to bake a cake.

I would think, as with most things in life, there has to be a foundation of knowledge with which to work. People can read intuitively but there's generally a background provided by booklearning and or mentoring to some degree.
Going back to the baking analogy, you start off with a basic recipe and in time come to understand the chemistry of what makes a cake, what gives it structure, what makes it rise, what flavors it, how to control body/texture and so forth. from there you can experiment, be creative, redefine the recipe and create something new and wonderful.
maybe I'm not understanding the question.

I don't know if you're still using the NOVT, it's been awhile since we've (you me LB Emily et al) discussed this. how are you coming along with it, if you don't mind my asking.
I could be wrong (someone please correct me) but I think there are only a very few decks that don't follow the standard structure/meanings of RWS Etteilla Thoth Marseilles....the NOVT being one of them.

The NOVT is unique in it's concept and application......and some people are downright frightened by the name alone. I might hesitate to use it in a reading for someone, let alone charge for it. It would probably give excellent readings but I wouldn't dare spring it on the querent as a surprise.

edited to add:

oooooooh look at this.............my 666 th post. that must count for something LOL!!!

 

[Alpha-Omega]

I think a Mix of both is the best

 

[Emeraldgirl]

I think a Mix of both is the best

I agree while it is great to have some fundamentals in tarot you also need to be flexible enough to stray from the book meanings and explore what the cards are actually saying to you as they are all spread out. Different card groupings can change the whole effect of a spread which may not come across as well if you are just saying book meanings by rote. There does come a time in any line of study when you need to take what you have learnt and and use it and mould it into something that works well for you.

 

[Grizabella]

What prompted my question was the thought (and there have been people like this, I hear) that someone might get a pack of cards and not read any books or memorize the LWB---just take the cards, make their own meanings, and then read using those meanings. As I understand it, that's basically what Umbrae did in the beginning. I'd absotively prefer a reading from Umbrae over a reading from someone who used memorized book meanings, wouldn't you? So that's why I asked the question.

It's also almost certainly what the first tarot card readers did hundreds of years ago. They had no books or LWB's.

 

[huredriel]

I really don't see how someone who knows absolutely nothing of the standard meanings can begin to do a reading unless they're born with some extraordinary psychic ability in which case it is only the images themselves that are evoking a response in the reader.

Really? Am surprised at reading this, specifically because that's how I started my tarot journey. In fact, although I have some tarot books, I rarely ever look through them. Sometimes copy-type something for querant at AT since I read *intuitively*. I think each way of learning has its own merit to be honest, and also comes down to the personality of reader.

As for the original question ........ I would probably veer more towards someone who read intuitively ....... although results & correct specific information are what would keep me coming back.

 

[sacredashes]

late for the party again

I think a person who truly wants to read and study tarot has to find their own way. Those who are serious, will. They'll follow suggestions found here, journal, use books as necessary to further their education if that's what works best for them, and in general take what they can use and leave the rest. Most of all, they'll have it in their blood and not be able to put it down.

Those who just wanted to read the cards to make a quick buck or to flamboozle their friends will memorize some meanings, leave it at that, and lose interest after a period of time, probably without having made the quick bucks or impressing many people.

I seem to miss all the interesting threads around here and by the time I find it, it's either in full swing with everyone happily drunk or have gone home to crash...

Lyric, I think you've just answered your own question. Quite eloquently too, I might add.

My journey started with me memorizing standard meanings from books written by readers who've been around as long as the stars, it seemed. LWB goes where I go, no question about it. Didn't matter if the cards made absolutely no sense and supportive friends (I didn't give readings for money till much, much later) would politely hide incredulous looks OR stare at me as if I spoke Klingon in dialect.

That went on for years (more than 5 to be exact) because I followed my tarot books and LWB faithfully and all that time, I was secretly envious of those who actually received messages. I started to wonder if these people were for real or were they, like Lyric so nicely put it, "winging it" coz I certainly was letting fly all kinds of nonsense.

Then, one day I just got fed-up. Last bid to learn how to "read" the cards, I signed up with ATA and a mentor was assigned to me. My training under her started with tongue lashings that sent me running for cover because she spotted right away that I was regurgitating straight up from the books.

My reading were NOT meaningful because I was NOT tapping into the messages, simple as that. She mentioned throwing away the LWB (something she has in common with Umbrae, I see). She insisted that I had to know key phrases, part of the criteria of ATA but she actually showed me how to receive messages from the cards and they actually began to make sense... FOR REAL!!! It was almost like an initiation process, a crossing over.

It's a process of learning and then take flight because the cards opened up new doors when I learnt how to read intuitively.

I think that method in reading the cards matters not as much as the intentions behind learning to read them in the first place and what the reader intends to do with the knowledge, their own inner motivations when they sit in front of a querent.

Sometimes, what a person gives (good or better) is just a reflection of how much they are able to give, how much they've learnt and what they want out of it ultimately. A quick buck or to provide some form of help despite the mockery they endure; and providing does not necessarily mean to give without anything in exchange. Learning certainly didn't come free for me and STILL doesn't.

As for assigning meanings to the cards, well.. I've placed cards in front of some friends (people who had no prior tarot knowledge) and had them tell me what they saw. You'd be surprised at how universal art can be when it comes to communication.

In their own words or description, they were able to express one or several facets of the card's meaning.. keywords, if you will. Some of them even brought in interesting perspectives that were not entirely irrelevent, just different views I had not considered before.

Some decks out there defer very much from RWS but RWS was once a "new" deck with refreshing ideas. While boundaries are useful, I think that when we put a limit on our imagination, what we also limit is the journey of discovery and growth.

 

[Tara2007]

I have found that a blend of what the card is said to mean in books or articles, etc. and what you believe it means to you regarding the question is what works best for me. I can't disregard either method entirely. And one thing I have found to be very important, through trial and error, is that the question should be considered first and foremost. Putting too much emphasis on the cards, the spreads or anything else can take away from what you should be considering most, and that's how the cards pulled can give you that answer.

 

[Umbrae]

What prompted my question was the thought (and there have been people like this, I hear) that someone might get a pack of cards and not read any books or memorize the LWB---just take the cards, make their own meanings, and then read using those meanings. As I understand it, that's basically what Umbrae did in the beginning. I'd absotively prefer a reading from Umbrae over a reading from someone who used memorized book meanings, wouldn't you? So that's why I asked the question.

It's also almost certainly what the first tarot card readers did hundreds of years ago. They had no books or LWB's.

I wouldn’t say I made up my meanings. I discovered my meanings. I had no access to books back then.

And there’s a difference between inventing meanings and discovering. My discoveries were based on what was on the card. A guy with one staff, another staff affixed to the wall, and he holds a globe while looking over a body of water.

So it became a quest of what does it mean for me? He has one staff and the other looks like he has it. If you were on the body of water it would look like he has two. What’s the globe? An instrument of navigation? Are these symbols of sending out or coming back? Is it a waiting? An in-between time? I’ve always seen this card as relating to a business trip. This is the guy that is like a movie producer. He financed ships. He watches their planned progress on the instruments of the navigator (which he is).

When you finance the ships (or the idea), you don’t know if your captain and/or representatives will instill an aura of cooperation with those whom they will meet.

This card tells me that we are in a time of waiting and that we need to cultivate patience.

So that’s kind of the step by step of each card. Look at the picture. The image should lead one to meaning.

I mean – ain’t that what’s so cool about the Pixie Smith art? Isn’t that why it rocks? That you don’t need to invest in the entire British Library to learn to read?

The baking analogy does not work here. It makes the assumption that the ‘baker’ gets one and only one shot at baking a cake. Learning to bake takes time. So does learning sans books. And yes – I learned how not to make the cake fall.

 

[sacredashes]

I wouldn’t say I made up my meanings. I discovered my meanings. I had no access to books back then.

And there’s a difference between inventing meanings and discovering. My discoveries were based on what was on the card.

That was how Sandra changed my focus from what was written in LWB to what it was I saw on the card. She didn't impose what she saw; rather her mentorship was more of an exchange of thoughts based on what we individually read from the same card for the same question.

That's what, I think, makes us all unique from one another in our interpretation of the cards. If we all shared the same views, read the exact same way, we'd be little more than clones ourselves.

I do feel that having an understanding of the basic meanings, keywords helpful but in intuitive reading, you can read from any deck yet notice subtle changes in the message because of the difference in imagery.

 

[euripides]

I mean – ain’t that what’s so cool about the Pixie Smith art? Isn’t that why it rocks? That you don’t need to invest in the entire British Library to learn to read?

Yes!~ Yes! that's it. That's why the art is SO important. If the artist has done their job properly, the images should speak to us directly.

Its a bit like going to an art exhibition. You should be able to look at the pictures on the wall and know what they are about. They should make you feel something, know something. Sometimes it might take a while to 'get' what they are saying, but in my opinion, if you've got to read the plaque beside the picture to understand it, the artist has failed.

The exception would be where the 'system' it is based on is outside of our experience - at one point most western art would have been easily accessable to any educated viewer, but nowadays most people would need the Homeric myths explained, for instance Circe or the Lotus Eaters, but they might at least recognize Helen of Troy. While an Andy Warhol would be immediately legible to them.

The strength of Pixie Smith's artwork is that the stories within it are for the most part archetypal, as they are intended to be, with the look of a 19th century Medieval theatre production, staged and so a little melodramatic, but speaking a dramatic language that we can understand.

We might lose a little meaning - some of the Majors and Courts are particularly prone to this - as we lose the religious and cultural roots of the Tarot - and we can also add meaning.

But within those images there is plenty to discover.

I've found this with other decks too - they each have a particular accent, belong to their own tarot 'art movement', but they are all intelligible in themselves. The ones where I find myself reaching for the books are the ones that try too hard to fit the Tarot to a particular external mythology.