New schools of thought in Tarot- what's new? Trends?

[Teheuti]

Tarot at Burning Man
http://wheeloffortune-tarot.com/

 

[ravenest]

The 1 thing that tempts me to 'catch up with everyone' and get an iphone.
Presently still resisting temptation.

'Ye Olde Tarot iphone app '

 

[Teheuti]

Hi, I am just learning about Tarot. Wondering what the trends are- are there novel new approaches, new philosophies?

The biggest change I've seen is that the "old rules" have, on one hand, totally broken down and, on the other, are understood in a much deeper way than when simply followed by rote.

We put words on decks or cut the borders and words off decks.

We can create our own spreads and shuffle and draw cards in any way we want (including via computer random generators).

We can easily create and self-publish our own decks using anything from stick-figures to photos to collages to exquisite paintings and even with by multiple artists.

We can break down the boundaries between Tarot and other kinds of oracle/divinatory decks (despite the protests of many) as in many of the Hay House decks.

We can produce "living Tarots" and other creative, multi-media experiences.

We can research Tarot and come to honor it even if it did just start out in Renaissance Italy as "just a game."

 

[ravenest]

Not interested in astrology, the inner sanctum of the GD, which plant, herb, animal, mineral, cupcake flavor of the month, when Lady Gaga had her period - or whatever other 'layer of meaning' has to be 'glommed on' (one of my favorite phrases!) to the cards in order to answer the question "Does he love me?"

Why on earth would anyone even consider using such deep and complex considerations ( leaving out the sarcastic ones) for such a shallow and trivial question let alone think it 'has to be gloomed on to answer such a silly question?

I dont think you understand their usage at at all .... or what sort of usage tarot can have that might utilize those correspondences.

You might be better off picking the petals off a daisy " He loves me .... he loves me not ...."

 

[ravenest]

Do you really think so? From my experience at AT new readers are encouraged not to explore further. In any thread (I'll find a good example a bit later, I'm in the middle of lifting) the voices clamoring "you don't need this" drown out any others. Sometimes I feel the "intuitives" try to "save" new readers from me before I "poison" them with my own views. Seems underwhelming actually.

ETA: Classic example, someone asks a specific question, and instantly gets voices defending an entirely different approach. Actually that thread is odd in how blatant it is.

http://tarotforum.net/showthread.php?t=226687

went there got confronted by an advert where I could see up a womans dress and it said 'love again.com' ... 'date older women' .... oh dear ... someone has that attached to their post now.

I will try again later and hopefully the advert will have changed?

 

[ravenest]

Yes ofcourse. And so it's up to the person answering the 'newbie' to recognise this and give what is hopefully appropriate guidance for them.
And - each individual's journey is their own. So it remains for them to stumble about finding things out - if that is what will happen for them. As this is one form or how we learn and what moulds our individuality.

Of course ... but when so called newbie specifically asks about Kabbalah and astrology .....

IMO (after a few years of observation here)... some seem 'threatened' by these subjects association with tarot.

 

[Tanga]

"Tarot Trends"

Of course ... but when so called newbie specifically asks about Kabbalah and astrology .....

IMO (after a few years of observation here)... some seem 'threatened' by these subjects association with tarot.

"Threatened"?? My word! Heaven's forbid!
As for me - I'm fascinated and curious about it all. Just seems - huge subjects to wrap my wee brain around.
I read here and there... and will happily be taking up some of those books recommended on this thread.
Very many thanks for all those recommendations folks.

 

[GlitterNova]

In reply to post #19 (can't quote on my phone) I think the real irony in the phenomenon you're describing (and I've seen it too) is that for many it is more difficult to 'just read intuitively' than it is to learn a set base off card meanings and work off those. Goodness knows I wouldn't have had a clue what to do if I hadn't memorized the basic RWS meanings before getting my first deck.

Getting back on topic, I wonder if we might actually see a split/division in tarot in the near future between more oracle-like 'intuitive" tarot decks and TdM/pips influenced decks (or even fully illustrated ones) that have 'set' or 'structured' meanings.

 

[ravenest]

I use 'set meanings' for cards but in a reading i would get nowhere without utilizing my 'intuition'.

Set meanings for each card within a position makes a reading like a series of unconnected bytes ... a sort of digital linear progression IMO, I prefer the modular holistic approach where multiple possible meanings of a card (within that cards 'field') come forth or retreat depending on all the cards in all positions and relationships in the reading.

Thats when I use my intuition ( ie. the unconscious calculates all that and delivers results to the conscious. ) I have dredged up the process and done it consciously and out loud ... (since I got asked "How do you do that? " once)

.... ummm , that's probably not a good thing to show people .

 

[3ill.yazi]

I use 'set meanings' for cards but in a reading i would get nowhere without utilizing my 'intuition'.

I do that to some extent as well. What I find interesting/amusing/annoying is that sometimes I seem to get heat from some people for noting that I do use "traditional" meanings, and by that I mean those GD/Waite-inspired assigned meanings that dominated the how-to books for much of the recent past.

One detail, not quite tangential to this discussion, is that I see a kind of tension developing. In some of the more recent books I've read, there is much more a stress put on intuition, and some disdain for "keywords" and "book meanings." and yet in some of these books, the author will include a slew of meanings for each card, as if it's expected for the price of admission. I see a tension there. I think Enrique Enriquez seems to be the only exception, where he apparently just throws out the old guidebook entirely. (I'm basing that only on the documentary about him and the various threads I've read here).