Tarot, How to Read the Future (Fred Gettings)

[Jeanette]

My mom got this book for me at a yard sale and I just brought it home last night (haven't yet had much chance to look at it). Does anybody else have this book, and if so, what are your thoughts about it? It seems very in-depth and I was so happy she was thinking of me (plus it's hardback)!!

 

[jmd]

As far as I'm concerned, it's one of those rare books well worth spending five times its original price on.

Fred Gettings does make errors in that book, but as a 1975 printed book (if I remember correctly - as my copy is in another location), it still ranks, along with his other important books on imagery associated with Astrology and other esoteric interests, wonderful.

There aren't many books I would encourage everyone to have, but this is one of them.

 

[Jeanette]

I started reading it this morning over coffee (while still sleepy). This book is going to require my full attention, I think! I definitely will have to be awake and able to concentrate, it's not a book of "fluff."

 

[firestorm]

As far as I'm concerned, it's one of those rare books well worth spending five times its original price on.

Fred Gettings does make errors in that book, but as a 1975 printed book (if I remember correctly - as my copy is in another location), it still ranks, along with his other important books on imagery associated with Astrology and other esoteric interests, wonderful.

There aren't many books I would encourage everyone to have, but this is one of them.

I understand he wrote several other books as well. Are they well worth the effort as well?

 

[jmd]

I have only two of his books - this one and his The Secret Zodiac: the hidden art in mediaeval astrology - both of which are quite excellent.

I have also seen a number of his other books on a colleague's shelf a couple of years ago, and rather too briefly perused them.

Personally, I find his style quite engaging, and he does not hold back on that so important aspect of imagery (and relevant and appropriate imagery at that!).

 

[Yatima]

Gettings book was published 1973 but there are still later editions up to the 90s.

It is a wonderful book regarding several perspectives:

Firstly, there is his obsession with mind(spirit)/matter-symbolism, which he traces within the graphic structures of the cards (mostly Marseille-related).

Secondly, more than others he relates his interpretations of the iconography of the cards to Renaissance-artwork in sometimes unexpected ways: for instance his alledged relation of 'Temperance' with Raphael's 'Crucifixion' and its two chalices taking the blood of Jesus.

Thirdly and most problematic: His depiction of the House of God (scrambling tower with falling figures, extremly similar to Marseille-depictions of the XVI. trump) in the house of God, the cathedral of Rheims, that (as far as I remember) - wasn't it jmd trying to verify this? - couldn't be found.

Was it found in the meantime?

 

[jmd]

Yes... I have since found the source he incorrectly refers to in the book. The image, along with numerous other Tarot images, is from the Amiens Cathedral, and the text he gives is not from the Golden Legends, but from a pseudo-infancy gospel.

I mention these, by the way, in the thread on La Maison Dieu in the Marseille section of the Historical area of the Forums

 

[catti]

The Book of Tarot- F. Gettings

I just bought this book at a local used book store. Hardback, published in 1973; I bought it for $15

I dont usually buy Tarot books as I am content with my reading methods and dont need another "introduction" style book but this book is clearly a different type. I am happy with the purchase, so far I have really only browsed the book , but for the pictures alone it would be worth half the price.

I dont think this is the same book that Jeanette has
Any other opinions?
Catti

 

[shaveling]

The edition I have has the same title as Jeanette's copy. I'd read about the book in the Marseille forums, and sought it out on the Internet.

I refer to the book frequently. Gettings does a lot with the composition of the pictures in the way a college art course does: "these three items make a triangle, and note that it is under the cross formed by these other two items." And he gives his interpretations of the meanings of the geometrical forms he's identified. I find myself looking for those elements when I'm looking at the cards later.

He doesn't deal with the minors in any detail. But the system of interpretation he gives for them is basically that of Papus. I'm grateful for that, since it's the system I'm working with, and it's rather a minority approach. Seeing other people, especially the author of a book I admire, using the approach I'm using is encouraging. Still, that's not a big part of this work. Gettings is writing to improve our understanding of the Trumps. (He even gives the Celtic Cross as a majors-only spread.)

I'm glad to have the book. It's in use enough that it never quite seems to make its way back to the bookshelf. I always keep it a bit closer to hand than that.

-shavelinig

 

[catti]

about the majors only~

Thank you for responding Shaveling,

In the introduction of my book ( or maybe copy) the author explains that he considers the trumps or atouts for divination and the full deck for playing the game of tarocchi and bases his conclusion on historical usage.
I too enjoy the in depth break down of the triangle square etc...makeup of each card. Like I said I still havent given the book in depth attention. I almost want to go back to my older decks and see just what I can see first then read further.


Catti