"The Tarot: History, Symbolism & Divination" by Place

I seem to be talkative today...this is my third post in the last half hour!! lol

I also really liked this book. It's extremely well written and thoroughly researched. Place's approach to tarot is one I very much identify with, and I will eventually purchase it...it's got so much information that a single reading isn't enough.

I'm lucky that my local public library has a good selection of books on tarot, so I usually do my reading that way. The only tarot book I currently own, but also really fell in love with, is Michele Morgan's, A Magical Course in Tarot, which has been discussed in other threads. (Sorry, I don't know yet how to provide the links, but I'll learn!) It's approach is intuitive, warm, and very positive. I turn to it again and again.

Oh...sorry. You actually asked for a recommendation similar to Place's book..

I have also very much enjoyed Cynthia Giles', Tarot: History, Mystery and Lore, which, in addition to a good history section, includes a lot of fascinating discussion of quantum theory and more recent scientific ideas that may relate to how or why tarot "works." It's not as daunting as it might sound, and very interesting food for thought, anyway!

p.s. I think it was written in the early 1990s....it would be good to know what she has learned in the interim!

sascha said:

Oh...sorry. You actually asked for a recommendation similar to Place's book..

I have also very much enjoyed Cynthia Giles', Tarot: History, Mystery and Lore, which, in addition to a good history section, includes a lot of fascinating discussion of quantum theory and more recent scientific ideas that may relate to how or why tarot "works." It's not as daunting as it might sound, and very interesting food for thought, anyway!

p.s. I think it was written in the early 1990s....it would be good to know what she has learned in the interim!

Click to expand...

Many thanks sascha!

ok, looks like I came a little late to the party as usual, but I just finished reading this book and I LOVED it! I am just totally swept up an enthusiasm for both the TdM and RWS that I have never felt before. I read it in a big rush over 2 days, but feel that it is going to be my 'bible' for the next few months (years?) and will be referred back to time and again.

things I loved about this book

-goes into lots of carefully researched detail and explodes lots of myths but still maintains the tarot should be seen as mystical. Even if the tarot was a game, 'just entertainment' the mystical and the profane weren't seperate in renaissance Italy and the Trionfi (the procession) was both entertainment and spirtual teaching, which may reflect what is depicted on the majors.

-Explains how kabbalah, alchemy and tarot are all part of the neoplatonic movement and therefore linked but seperate. The spiritual journey of Kabbalah is similar to the one he finds depicted in the tarot. Nonetheless he sees it as rather reductive to pin kabbalah meanings onto cards and reduce (force?) them to mere 'signs' as the images themselves are so much more evocative- and I wholeheartedly agree. Also alchemical/astrological assocaitions- useful at times, but no need to 'force' them all!

-Place uses 3 card readings (always my fave) involving observing the directions the figures are facing, rather than reading right-to-left every time.

-rubbishes SOME of the later occult meanings given to tarot, but is sympathetic to Waite's vision and in fact made me feel the RWS is much more 'in tune' with historical tarots than I had ever previously believed. eg I always wondered why Papesse= High Priestess, but this seems to have historic precedent. Also Pamela Coleman Smith's influence seems to be both mystical (her visions) and grounded in history (influence of Sola Busca deck on minors)

I love this book - especially the history part. Place's deep understanding of Renaissance art gave him wonderful insights into how it took on the Neoplatonism of the time. One warning though, his section on the RWS deck is riddled with errors. This is not his area of expertise nor where his own interest lies. He gives a completely wrong description of the printing technique [see K. Frank Jensen's book on the RWS deck] and far too many of his comments on the deck symbolism and intentions are also wrong. It's my understanding that the publisher insisted he include this section in order to insure book sales.

But, don't let this put you off on buying the book - it's totally worth every penny for all the other sections of this outstanding work. An in-depth survey, would include Paul Huson's _Mystical Tarot_ and Dummett, Decker and DePaulis' _Wicked Pack of Cards_, but Robert Place is an excellent place to start as he is so readable and clear.

Mary

This and Spirtual Tarot are wonderfull reads they help a lot with the 21 ways to read a tarot sstudy group I am in.

I have this one coming to me so I will let you know.

xx
Vad

edit- it arrived... may the reading begin!... of the book that is.

Love this book

This was my first book on the Tarot, and I loved its no-nonsense style.

Teheuti mentioned earlier that Place's description of the symbolism of Waite-Smith deck was "wrong". I'm not sure I agree, since you can read three diferent books that all say three different things. As in any interpretation of symbolism, there are going to be variances. Perhaps Place is "right" and K. Frank Jensen is "wrong"? Place obviously is into alchemy, so a lot of his interpretations were seen from that perspective. Though as to who is "right" and who is "wrong" who can say for sure?

I guess though if Place says "Waite intended for the symbolism of this card to represent A" and you can find something written by Waite himself where he states that it represents "B" you might prove Place wrong in that regard.

Anyway, I appreciated the scholarly approach to the material. I enjoyed all the art history especially. I didn't expect that much of it to be in there, but it really is helpful in understanding the Tarot, since it was created during a time in which, art, symbols and symbolism were more prevalent in culture than now.

Splungeman said:

This was my first book on the Tarot, and I loved its no-nonsense style.

Teheuti mentioned earlier that Place's description of the symbolism of Waite-Smith deck was "wrong". I'm not sure I agree, since you can read three diferent books that all say three different things. As in any interpretation of symbolism, there are going to be variances. Perhaps Place is "right" and K. Frank Jensen is "wrong"? Place obviously is into alchemy, so a lot of his interpretations were seen from that perspective. Though as to who is "right" and who is "wrong" who can say for sure?

I guess though if Place says "Waite intended for the symbolism of this card to represent A" and you can find something written by Waite himself where he states that it represents "B" you might prove Place wrong in that regard.

Anyway, I appreciated the scholarly approach to the material. I enjoyed all the art history especially. I didn't expect that much of it to be in there, but it really is helpful in understanding the Tarot, since it was created during a time in which, art, symbols and symbolism were more prevalent in culture than now.

Click to expand...

I think what Teheuti was referring to was more about the placement of symbols/why he changed some etc than about the meaning of them or the cards. Also she was referring to the actual printing technique used in the deck when referring to Jensen, as in Place just got the wrong technique (that's something there can't really be a debate about, more as in there was only 1 used so only 1 right answer).

Hopefully Teheuti will come and clarify, she's a wonderful tarot author (Mary Greer, I've read most her books!) so I really respect her opinion.

Splungeman said:

Teheuti mentioned earlier that Place's description of the symbolism of Waite-Smith deck was "wrong". I'm not sure I agree, since you can read three diferent books that all say three different things. As in any interpretation of symbolism, there are going to be variances. Perhaps Place is "right" and K. Frank Jensen is "wrong"?

Click to expand...

If you read my post again you'll find that I said:
"He gives a completely wrong description of the printing technique [see K. Frank Jensen's book on the RWS deck]."
I researched the printing method long before Jensen's book and came to the same conclusion that Jensen reached. Frank is a publisher and works extensively in book arts. I worked as a typesetter/graphic designer in London and in the US and studied commercial graphic design in college. You'll find a good description of commercial lithography printing techniques in the 1911 edition of the Encyclopedia Britannica.

Place obviously is into alchemy, so a lot of his interpretations were seen from that perspective. Though as to who is "right" and who is "wrong" who can say for sure?

Click to expand...

I'm not questioning Robert's knowledge of alchemy, nor his right to interpret Waite as he sees fit. However, a careful reading of Waite's other works clearly demonstrates much of Waite's own intent - which I've been analyzing for years. Place made some erroneous statements that can be found in works by others, thus he sometimes perpetuated the errors of others rather than checking to see if this information could be substantiated in any way. Unfortunately because his Tarot history research is of a much higher caliber people tend to believe what he says about the Rider-Waite deck. This is where I felt he did a disservice to the Tarot community - although, I'm sure, with the best of intentions.

Mary