Your most UNREADABLE deck

[Cocobird55]

i have a couple of Marseille decks -- but they never said a word to me. And i didn't like them enough to try very hard. RSW style decks are so much easier.

 

[Mittkait]

Many times, I find Marseille influenced decks easier to read with than Rider Waite.

They involve memorization over just interpreting pictures. But once you really know the standard key words for all the cards, you can then riff on that without someone else's artwork portrayal getting in your way.

 

[Viridian]

I'm glad to know it was in Buffy! It really is a mysterious looking deck with an intensity to it as well as being charming. I posted some thoughts about the way it incorporates the Thoth minors and astrology symbolism in the study group if you want to look at it after you do your comparison.

Thank you Myrrha I will definitely take a look at that!

 

[Annabelle]

My most unreadable deck? The Ironwing, without a shadow of a doubt. I can't even make out any figures or anything on the cards.

That being said, I love it to bits as abstract art, and I've been known to do a reading with it, which even made sense to the querent!

I have over 900 tarot decks, and more than a handful of those fall into "unreadable" territory for me.

But I have to cast my vote for the Ironwing, as well. It is beautiful as a series of works of art. But it is just plain unreadable for me as a tarot deck. It was one of the first "expensive" decks I got, back in my early days as a collector. I love it and wouldn't part with it, but I never read with it.

 

[rylla]

I want to do a poll: do you read RWS style decks (Pictures on the minor arcana) or do you prefer Marseilles (Pips on the minors) decks?

For me: I can't read Marseilles decks. I NEED the picture to read the meaning. An abstract deck like Handl or Voyager? Forget it!

barb

I can read Handl and Voyager - no problem. But I can't read Marseilles decks (I don't get anything out from the pips - well except from my head ) Handl and Voyager I read mostly from my head also (I mean by being familiar with the meaning of the cards), still the pictures add something to the reading. With the Marseilles deck I get nothing to add to the learned meaning of the cards, numerology, etc. I could as well use a piece of paper that has for example 4 of wands, 10 of pentacles, so on written on it. I've read that some people can get a lot out of those pips, that is not my case.

 

[rylla]

I've never owned or really seen a Marseilles deck, so for me I'd prefer the RWS style decks!

I'm no expert in Tarot, so I'd have to say that I find the Nicoletta Ceccoli deck most difficult to read with. The little white book it comes with is very brief, and has around two-three sentences about each card along with a list of keywords. I like being able to intuitively read with it, but it's a habit I'm still getting into. I'm much more comfortable with decks accompanied by books with more in-depth meanings of cards. But that doesn't mean I don't love reading with the Ceccoli deck, it just means it's more difficult.

If Ceccoli is difficult to read with try Beautiful Creature Tarot! When I do a reading with the Beautiful Creature and use Ceccoli after that, reading Ceccoli becomes a dream compared with BCT! None of them reads easily for me but Beautiful Creatures is even harder to read. I think these decks are suitable only for some specific questions and spreads.

 

[gabyrippling]

I bought New Mythic trying to replace my lost (but hopefully still in my family's storage) original Mythic - nothing going, nothing doing. I wasn't fully cognizant of the bad history (read a lot about it here afterward though), but I hated the way it'd been redrawn and I always felt vaguely nauseated while doing readings, and everything came up swords all the time for some reason or another. I ultimately gave it away to a friend just starting out noting that it's a good starter deck (but I kept the book because it was still useful to me - I'm such a stinker).

Mystic Faerie tarot also went to the same friend, book and all. I had bought it on a whim, liking the light and gentle art (it reminded me a bit of imagery I'd loved in my childhood). When I tried to read it though, I couldn't crack it. The entire deck felt too flat and samey (to the point that it felt difficult to differentiate cards) and none of the stories resonated with me. Off it went to the same beginner friend in the hope she'd have more luck with it. I imagine both decks will probably be regifted again - my friend confessed to me that she doesn't like reading decks with people in them! She's really into Wild Unknown, which is another deck I look at appreciatively but don't really connect with (but thankfully realized this before deciding to purchase it, unlike the other two).

I also recently bought the Crystal Tarot without doing a lot of research and only after opening it up did I realize it has pip cards rather than illustrated numbers, and though some of the pips have lovely evocative abstract backgrounds, some of them are recycled within suit for multiple numbers which... ugh. I don't know what I'm going to do with it because I love the majors but the pips are rough for me, since I tend to read semi-intuitively. I might mark them up with correspondences and use them as study cards but they're so pretty I'm a little loath to mark them up.

 

[bonebeach]

I love, love, love a TdM. I frequently find them easier to read that RWS based decks, and I learned on the RWS.

Abstract decks are, I feel, very different in feel from a TdM or a non TdM pip deck system. A TdM I can read mostly whenever; most pip decks I can read mostly whenever; abstract decks are mood dependent.

 

[Barleywine]

I love, love, love a TdM. I frequently find them easier to read that RWS based decks, and I learned on the RWS.

Abstract decks are, I feel, very different in feel from a TdM or a non TdM pip deck system. A TdM I can read mostly whenever; most pip decks I can read mostly whenever; abstract decks are mood dependent.

I guess I have a different definition of abstract stemming from my formal art education. Abstract in the art world means non-representational, or "apart from concrete realities, specific objects, or actual instances," as distinct from portaiture, still life, and landscape painting. The RWS pips are representations of people, objects and scenery, therefore by definition not abstract. The same would be true of any deck showing narrative-style scenes. To my way of thinking, the Marseille pips are closer to the other end of the spectrum, and I personally find their interpretation more abstract, less concrete in terms of specific "story-telling" content. But of course I read mostly with the Thoth and its "semi-illustrated" pips, so I'm used to making sense of suggestions as opposed to explicit meanings.

ETA: If by "abstract" you meant "esoteric, abstruse or philosophically complex," that's a different story.

 

[Electric Maenad]

Unreadable decks

I've got two kinds of unreadable decks:

1. Theme decks that I really wasn't expecting to read with (Welcome to Night Vale Tarot, Homestuck Tarot, and probably, once it arrives, the Hannibal Tarot). Let's be honest, I'm not really getting these decks for reading - I'm getting them because they're combinations of two things I like.

That said, I was a bit disappointed in the Klimt deck. Lovely art, but some of the attributions were a bit... weird.

2. *Really* non-standard decks (Wooden and Mantegna decks, I'm looking at you). The Mantegna just doesn't *work* for modern readings. And the Wooden deck is gorgeous and intuitive, but actually explaining what the deck is saying to anyone else is like pulling teeth.