Books vs. No books

[Umbrae]

I can see how reading poetry would be great for improving Tarot skills. One of my favourite sayings is that "Tarot is visual poetry". Wish I could remember back to where I heard that, but I have always loved that saying. It is so true. Reading poetry helps us see symbolism and that can only help Tarot skills.

Babs

as can living on the hard, unforgiving, right hand edge of a stock chart...in real time with real money on the line.

 

[DrTodd]

I have been influenced by Enrique Enriquez's work, which sees Tarot as an optical language through which the sitter uses anagogical reasoning (akin to anological reasoning). Books do help in identifying the history of symbols and images, but I find the optical approach liberating and more intuitve.

 

[Sophie]

Poetry, books on psychology, self-awareness books, religious themes, fairytales...

I could go on.

Since tarot does touch on so many subjects, it's a good thing to not limit oneself to only tarot-related books, even though there are many of them available.

Yay! That's why I think Gregory's (and other's) way is not the way of "no books". By her own admission, she has read many books - such as those you list above, Eco. It's just that she hasn't learnt to read tarot by reading "page-per-card" tarot books. But there is no doubt that her vast book-learning and book-loving has shaped her mind in a way that can only influence and strengthen her tarot-reading skills. Only it's at one - glorpish - remove from the "page-per-card" method of learning.

You know the three indispensable books to read if you're to understand the tarot? The Bible (Hebrew and Christian), a good primer on Christian neo-platonism and a history of art book that covers the Middle Ages and the Renaissance.

Will they make you better readers? No. Nothing but practice will do that - reading the cards till you drop - but paradoxically, practice steeped in knowledge is much stronger and more valuable, and hones your judgement, in the way that getting a prediction right hones your intuition.

 

[gregory]

Glorp glorp............

But see, that's why I took issue with your "what's with the anti-intellectual attitude" post. I bet EVERYONE here reads books. All sorts. But the question was whether reading TAROT books is essential to a good reader. And I posted no. Which would (in the tenor of that post !) make me anti-learning. As you say here - NOT SO ! And I think no-one here is anti learning - or they wouldn't be here at all ! As Scion has said in other ways - it pretty much boils down to "what do you mean by........?"

 

[elvenstar]

Hmm, I hadn't realised we were strictly talking about 'tarot books'? I've only properly read one (my first deck's companion book) and half of a general one (skipped the meanings bit). Nothing against them, but no real itch as yet. I thought the subject was about vaguely tarot-related books and learning in general, mythology, philosophy, mysticism etc., or at least that's what I was talking about. Have I been totally off topic all this time?

So yeah, 'what do you mean by books?'

 

[Sophie]

Glorp glorp............

But see, that's why I took issue with your "what's with the anti-intellectual attitude"

I read anti-intellectualism and book-bashing fairly frequently on this forum and it gets up my nose. I wasn't aiming at you, G - I didn't even quote you. I was speaking generally.

The notion that one can learn anything without learning from others is nonsense, IMO - as nonsense as wanting to learn without practicing and developing skills - and that also goes for tarot. It so happens that much of other people's learning is now contained in books. But it doesn't have to be page-by-card books, nor does it have to be about the mechanics of reading (an art that is far from mechanical). I doubt it's possible, in this day and age - unless you have a gipsy granny - to learn tarot without opening a single book on tarot, symbolism, allegory, divination - something related to tarot.

 

[Splungeman]

I read anti-intellectualism and book-bashing fairly frequently on this forum and it gets up my nose. I wasn't aiming at you, G - I didn't even quote you. I was speaking generally.

The notion that one can learn anything without learning from others is nonsense, IMO - as nonsense as wanting to learn without practicing and developing skills - and that also goes for tarot. It so happens that much of other people's learning is now contained in books. But it doesn't have to be page-by-card books, nor does it have to be about the mechanics of reading (an art that is far from mechanical). I doubt it's possible, in this day and age - unless you have a gipsy granny - to learn tarot without opening a single book on tarot, symbolism, allegory, divination - something related to tarot.

Well then you get into what is meant by "learning" Tarot. Learning to read the cards or learning what they mean from an outside source? What if you just got a deck, didn't get a book, used the LWB for birdcage lining and made up your own meanings...then went on to become a professional Tarot reader of great skill.

Side note: Heh! Mentioning the birdcage linining just brought back a memory of a friend in high school who was (or at least claimed she was) psychic who, just for kicks, used the poop patterns on the bottom of her parakeet's cage for divination. Talk about glorp.

 

[Sophie]

What if you just got a deck, didn't get a book, used the LWB for birdcage lining and made up your own meanings...then went on to become a professional Tarot reader of great skill.

Then you'd have every right to call yourself the Mozart of oracular skills . Even then, I'd doubt you never learnt anything relevant to reading tarot from anyone else in any way - and being a Western person living in the West - including from books - at some point in your development. Just - not the card-per-page kind of book (which I'm not very fond of either, apart from Rachel Pollack's 78 Degrees, because she has thought deeply and interestingly about the tarot).

I think it's common ground that there are different ways of learning, according to our basic personalities. Teachers from infant school onwards know that, and a good teacher will take those differences into account. Some need more structure, some can't make head-or-tail of structure but thrive with imaginative methods, some need a lot of discipline instilled into them, some have it naturally, etc. All ways need work and commitment, but it might not be the same way of working, that's all. The only thing with books is - they do contain a lot of useful stuff for a lot of people. How they ingest that useful stuff is dependent on their personalities: if they are more "learning by doing" kind of people, books right at the beginning might be a hindrance; if they need the structure and theory first, before they can get to the practice - then they'll need books from day one. We are back to what Scion says, with this difference: that each personality will find his or her own balance and rythm in how they learn. Although I am a lover of books, I hardly read any tarot books for years. I had 78 Degrees (which got me hooked on the mythical element in tarot, but I quickly expanded Rachel's meanings into my own) and a Dictionary of Symbols, and later (3 years later!), Tarot for Yourself. Mostly, I learnt by doing - by reading tarot for other people from the very start, and logging every reading I did in a notebook. But I had a background in theology, myth, history, literature, symbolism, law, mountain sports, you name it - and 25 years of reading voraciously. I brought all of that to the table and to my querents. And later - much later - when I did start to read tarot books, they deepened my practice, and keep doing so.

 

[Umbrae]

Thanks Scion, well said (for the umpteenth time), and it needs to be said even more.

I learned without the books. But I studied. I studied the cards, I worked with them. I owned one deck for 29 years

I used it for readings (live face-to-face for strangers). I also read playing cards.

I read my first book after 12 years of reading.

(I should have stated that was my first book on Tarot - it was on the bookshelf of the Phinney Ridge Home for the Frivolously Educated and Socially Inept in Seattle...

I doubt it's possible, in this day and age - unless you have a gipsy granny - to learn tarot without opening a single book on tarot, symbolism, allegory, divination - something related to tarot.

So…uh…what is it you’re really trying to say? I'm not special, I'm no different than anybody else. So can I ask for clarification?

 

[The crowned one]

Why limit yourself?

edited for clarity.