|
aravain -> RE: Tarot (1/18/2009 12:19:59 PM)
|
SO I started writing this in response to Raechard's question about using ordinary playing cards as tarot, then just decided to write my responses to everyone in the entire thread... thereby creating a really long post (tm).
EDIT: And it appears there was a ton of posts while I was writing [8D]
You could, it would be severely difficult and not really tarot so much.
Tarot 'works' because of the archetypes of what is depicted ON the card (less so the numbers, more so the pictures, which also incorporate the numbers). When I used to read tarot more often I focused less on the usual standards of meaning and such, and applied only trend and instinct with the artwork on the cards. Different numbers have trends (I believe it was... sevens that were one of the big conflict numbers? I don't know, it's been two years since I seriously studied tarot) in their meaning, as do the different person cards and each of the major arcana. Aces, for instance, are the 'pure' energy of the suit. Unadulterated, almost feral (in my opinion) and with the right combination can be highly discouraging, or very encouraging.
kittinSol talks about 'fluids' where I choose 'energies' but I believe that we're talking about the same thing, here.
In any case, I was mildly successful at readings because I usually was there to guide the reader (what I called the person I was 'reading' for) to their own conclusions. It usually started with an explanation of the spread that they chose (the way the cards would be laid) while they shuffled the deck and I focused on some hocus pocus type stuff (mainly energy-sharing work to create a temporary 'bond' between myself and the reader, which would then extend to the bond I have with my cards... if you believe in that stuff, that is [:D] Otherwise I'm just intently watching them shuffle the deck of cards, to you). I would then take the deck from them and hold it to them sideways (the long way facing them) and ask them to place it down. This is to help decide which cards within the deck will be upside-down and which won't. Usually they're sitting right next to me, if they aren't I invite them over so that they can see precisely what I'm reading from... then I facilitate THEM reading the cards individually (by giving pushes, nudges, and short explanations after asking them to examine and dissect each card one at a time) and applying that reading as a whole within the pattern. It's a fun little exercise, too, and a very light level of seriousness. Enough so that it IS serious, but not enough that it's all dark and dreary.
There's a glimpse into how I do it. I can't really explain it too much in text beyond that (especially because so much depends on the spread, the cards within the pattern, and even the depictions on the cards). :)
And, also, note that MY cards have very few words on them... they have roman numerals (so that I don't have to freaking count how many pentacle symbols there are, or exactly how many swords are on the boat, that sort of thing) and for 'face' cards they have which face they are. When it comes to major arcana, I wish that there would be no words on them at all, much more powerful, in my opinion. No one had to write words or meanings, the symbols used and depicted are (as I said before) archetypes that are fairly universal, though they do sometimes imply different things between cultures which is, in itself, an interesting study.
Re: Death:
Ok, I had to go dig out my cards for this :P I hope that you guys take the credit if I start reading more seriously again. Keep in mind that the major arcana cards (of which there are 22, 0-21) tell a story of the life of a man (in the non-gender specific sense). Death is number 13 (the 14th installment of the story), and represents (usually) a shedding of the self from The Hanged Man (number 12), and the beginning of a 'new' way to live life. Sometimes it's seen as the instigator of the mid-life crisis, in joking around, since directly after it comes Temperance (the good), then The Devil (the bad), then The Tower (the ugly).
I have two decks, one traditional rider-waite and a non-tradition set of more gothic cards.
Rider-Waite: The picture is of a skeleton knight riding a majestic white horse with red eyes and bearing a black flag with a white symbol. At the horse's feet is an older person laying on the ground, a child kneeling and facing the knight, a woman kneeling and looking away from the knight, and a bishop standing before the knight both hands outstretched, palms together, the sun coming down on the horizen, above his hat.
Gothic: A man in a tuxedo holds the right hand of a woman in a red dress in his own right hand while pulling back a dark green curtain with a rose on them. Between them is a small table with four squares (black and red in a checkered pattern) and a king, queen, bishop, knight, rook, and a pawn (left to right) on it. Behind the curtain can be seen a body of red liquid plainly 'angry' and a dark sky with a single bolt of lightning hitting the liquid in the distance.
In both decks there is no 'traditional' representation of Death as a harbinger, really... I'd even argue the opposite. In my Rider-Waite I'd argue the bishop is 'rebuking' the skeleton knight (to put DnD terms onto it).
|
|
|
|
