Traditional meanings with non or semi traditional decks?

[Madrigal]

As I'm expanding my deck collection some it's clear that different artists and authors have different interpretations of the cards. I realize that the card meanings are mutable in the sense that influences like the question, the other cards and the querent will all affect the interpretation. But that said...

When you're reading for someone, or even for yourself, do you stay with the imagery and meanings in the cards you're using or do you take into account some of the differences? Do keep the traditional narrative running in the background as you read?

For example, a querent chooses a particular deck and the cards have a slightly different meaning than the standard RWS meanings. When you encounter a card where some of the traditional imagery is missing do you bring it into the convo or do you decide ok, querent *chose* this deck therefore I'm not going talk about, say, the crab that is normally in the Moon card because, by its absence, it's not germane to the discussion.

Clear as mud? Would love to hear how some of you approach this.

 

[Sulis]

I read the cards that are in front of me so I take into account any differences that there are.
I think each card has an energy or core meaning and I get that from the number, element and symbolism used on the card.. Context adds another variable in there and that's a massive variable in my opinion but if you're not reading the cards in front of you (so that means each deck is different) then in my opinion, you're not actually reading cards, you're remembering set meanings and are using them.. If that's the case, flash cards with key words would do just as well.

 

[astrofeather]

This question's got me thinking!

I believe I generally mention things included in other decks, just because they're good supplements, and are only there to reinforce the general theme of the card. But, I make sure to only use them as little supplements to round off corners, 95% of the conversation is about the card in front of me. If it was a deck that didn't follow RWS structure, then I'd generally run with just that deck's meanings.

Depending on the person, mentioning those helpful extra bits could also help them understand the card that they have in a spread! My friends tend to ask for my Wild Unknown deck because they think it looks cooler, but because it looks simple/empty at first glance, I usually give a little bit of bonus explanation sometimes.

 

[Barleywine]

Other than for the non-scenic TdM pip cards, which are a much different animal, I have a system of correspondences - very similar to Sulis' - that works for pretty much any deck I pick up. Once I've explored those I look carefully at the imagery on the cards to see what else it might tell me. This will obviously differ from deck to deck. A good point is the Chrysalis Tarot. It's sold as a tarot deck and meets the criteria overall, but in many cards the images bring a much different set of intuitive associations to the mind's eye. It just drives the imagination in a much different direction, and I go with it to good effect.

 

[Madrigal]

I read the cards that are in front of me so I take into account any differences that there are.
I think each card has an energy or core meaning and I get that from the number, element and symbolism used on the card.. Context adds another variable in there and that's a massive variable in my opinion but if you're not reading the cards in front of you (so that means each deck is different) then in my opinion, you're not actually reading cards, you're remembering set meanings and are using them.. If that's the case, flash cards with key words would do just as well.

Re the bolded, that's really where my question lies, I guess. By context do you mean the lineage the card arose out of or the contextual situation of the querent? Subtleties perhaps but they feel important in helping me understand.

Other than for the non-scenic TdM pip cards, which are a much different animal, I have a system of correspondences - very similar to Sulis' - that works for pretty much any deck I pick up. Once I've explored those I look carefully at the imagery on the cards to see what else it might tell me. This will obviously differ from deck to deck. A good point is the Chrysalis Tarot. It's sold as a tarot deck and meets the criteria overall, but in many cards the images bring a much different set of intuitive associations to the mind's eye. It just drives the imagination in a much different direction, and I go with it to good effect.

I find myself in a bit of a push-pull wrt intuitive reading. It's a skill that comes naturally to me but I sometimes feel a kind of tension between wanting the scaffolding of the lineage to fall back on. I've had a couple of decades relationship with the cards but it's only in the past year that I feel that relationship has deepened. Off to take a look at the Chrysalis

Thanks for all the replies. And yes, Astrofeather, the WU deck is one I imagine might need expanding on. I have it but have yet to delve into it.

 

[Sulis]

Re the bolded, that's really where my question lies, I guess. By context do you mean the lineage the card arose out of or the contextual situation of the querent? Subtleties perhaps but they feel important in helping me understand.

By context I mean the question, the background information, the spread, the other cards and the position of each particular card.. I don't tend to use spreads with positional meanings but if I did, I'd include those here too.
I can see a card that means one thing in one reading and it can turn up 10 minutes later in another reading and mean something completely different.. When I'm reading I try to weave a story out of the cards in front of me and the meaning I choose often is the meaning that fits the story best. The actual symbolism on the cards is very important to me though.. I like to think that when I'm reading I read symbols and those include numbers (as most of the cards have numbers on them), elements and how the numbers and elements interact with each other.

 

[Madrigal]

By context I mean the question, the background information, the spread, the other cards and the position of each particular card.. I don't tend to use spreads with positional meanings but if I did, I'd include those here too.
I can see a card that means one thing in one reading and it can turn up 10 minutes later in another reading and mean something completely different.. When I'm reading I try to weave a story out of the cards in front of me and the meaning I choose often is the meaning that fits the story best. The actual symbolism on the cards is very important to me though.. I like to think that when I'm reading I read symbols and those include numbers (as most of the cards have numbers on them), elements and how the numbers and elements interact with each other.

Thanks, Sulis, that's very helpful. I find myself pulling from many different interpretations as I read. I find it hard to discount other meanings and just focus on what's in front of me if it feels relevant to the spread/context. Perhaps that's a skill that comes with practice, a feeling of confidence that develops over time.

 

[Madrigal]

Other than for the non-scenic TdM pip cards, which are a much different animal, I have a system of correspondences - very similar to Sulis' - that works for pretty much any deck I pick up. Once I've explored those I look carefully at the imagery on the cards to see what else it might tell me. This will obviously differ from deck to deck. A good point is the Chrysalis Tarot. It's sold as a tarot deck and meets the criteria overall, but in many cards the images bring a much different set of intuitive associations to the mind's eye. It just drives the imagination in a much different direction, and I go with it to good effect.

It's funny, this deck held no appeal for me for months. I'd see it and pass it over, see it again and pass it by and on and on. But I just went and gave it a more thorough look and then visited the website and then downloaded the app and have had time to peruse it in more detail. While the artwork isn't really my style, I'm impressed with the multi-contextual layering that seems to characterize this deck. It's in my cart now. Thanks to your comments about this deck and a reference to another deck in another thread this has been a doubly-enabling day

 

[danieljuk]

The further you stray from the RWS style, the least the traditional meanings fit the card. The first thing is the image, what do you see in it or what does it mean? that is always the most important. Often a deck will have a little white book with what the author intended for each card. You might go with what they have written or go with what you get from it but it can be a helpful guide to find out what the author and / or designer intended with the card.

I remember reading the Wildwood Tarot and trying to work out the RWS equivalent of each card but it was much easier when I ignored that! Now I take every card as it is and read it from there.

 

[Barleywine]

The further you stray from the RWS style, the least the traditional meanings fit the card. The first thing is the image, what do you see in it or what does it mean? that is always the most important. Often a deck will have a little white book with what the author intended for each card. You might go with what they have written or go with what you get from it but it can be a helpful guide to find out what the author and / or designer intended with the card.

I remember reading the Wildwood Tarot and trying to work out the RWS equivalent of each card but it was much easier when I ignored that! Now I take every card as it is and read it from there.

I suppose I should have mentioned that my storehouse of past associations doesn't include individual deck references, just the more universal correspondences like numerological, astrological, qabalistic and elemental concepts, and a little "esoteric color theory" (red = desire, yellow = mind, etc.) I resisted the RWS for decades, so there's no way the imagery is burned into my brain.