The Case for a Firm Foundation
AUTHOR’S NOTE: I’ve written in the past about the advantages and disadvantages of using secondary factors (numbers, elements, astrological correspondences, etc.) when reading tarot cards. But the more I see and hear of the current pop-culture “buzz” surrounding the practice of tarot, the more I think that applying such nuances of thoughtful study and contemplation is going to become a lost art.
A common refrain I encounter on the internet is “I don’t bother with the traditional lore, I just say what I feel.” The inference is that an intuitive awareness of the cards is superior to a knowledge-based one, and it frankly caters to the infantile “instant-gratification syndrome” so prevalent today. My thought on this myopic attitude is that it’s all well and good if what we want from the cards is mainly an “imagination-jogger” with no deeper undercurrents of meaning, but it strikes me as promoting psychic guesswork at best (and subjective navel-gazing at worst) rather than competent analysis of the archetypes presented in the cards. To “read” something in the sense of divination is to be able to decipher its message at multiple levels of comprehension, but if we don’t (or choose not to) understand the language it speaks and just make up our own as we go, we might as well be talking to ourselves. Our suggestible clients certainly won’t know the difference, but if we’re honest about it we will recognize that we’re only “winging it” with no safety net to catch us when we inevitably stumble. (On the other hand, if all we’re offering is shallow entertainment to the idly curious, who cares?)
The “language of the tarot” doesn’t consist solely of boring stacks of keywords; those are just “training wheels” for coming up with our own vivid impressions over time. Think of them as hints that keep us focused and oriented in a fruitful direction without attempting to be too prescriptive. It’s a living language that is highly elastic, and the fact that it is encoded in books doesn’t make it any less flexible, it just means that it has a documented history and accepted conventions for use like any other language. As children we must learn to equate words with pictures in order to communicate what we see; the difference with tarot is that not everyone “sees” the same thing and the interpretation of its significance is not consistently handled. In some cases its customary import is ignored entirely or mangled beyond recognition to agree with an opinionated vision of the truth. If we don’t master the vocabulary, it can be difficult to make our points in a compelling manner, so we may fall back on gauzy generalities that are more mystical than concrete, all the while flattering ourselves that we are being “intuitive.”
Intuitive insight is of course crucial to fleshing out the wisdom of a knowledge-based observation when the details of the “standard” meaning don’t click with the client and a more fluid “connect-the-dots” approach is needed. But it certainly isn’t the only way to read the cards, and I would argue that it is far from the best one if it isn’t augmented by a firm grasp of the fundamentals. Personally, I would rather have the inspired epiphany (the so-called “Aha! moment”) come from the querent as a result of my judicious input rather than trying to generate it all by myself. I might spin a fascinating yarn that has absolutely nothing to do with the sitter’s private view of reality. I usually start small with a few salient points from my own extensive study and experience, then ditch the monologue in favor of a dialogue that opens up the reading for joint exploration. Over many years and with considerable practice, I’ve built numerous interpretive innovations into my own private lexicon of key words and phrases that I like to think of as “can-openers” to let the storytelling genie out of the bottle. I may not be able to grant wishes but I can almost always spot opportunities for their imminent or eventual arrival.
In my opinion, the well-rounded tarot reader profits from both a solid grounding in “book-learning” and an unerring feel for the “flair” of creative and imaginative extemporizing. Together, the two form the cornerstones of effective consultation; one provides a sure footing in the basics and the other often yields visionary illumination. Saying that books are unnecessary is tantamount to “throwing the baby out with the bath water.” Unfortunately, reading anything is rapidly losing ground to video “sound bites” offered by those who may be expert in their discipline but are only mediocre presenters. So much of the amateur YouTube fare makes me cringe that I’ve now stopped watching most of it. I don’t need an “influencer” to coach me in how to penetrate the mysteries of prognostication, I just think for myself and extrapolate from there with due respect for the contributions of past masters in the cartomantic arts. The written word is my preferred mode of delivery since it benefits from methodical reformulation (aka editing) unlike the “verbal diarrhea” that passes for information exchange in the internet age, in which philosophical depth is often sacrificed on the altar of glib immediacy. It’s impossible to tell whether this is a cultural or generational phenomenon, or just an overall “dumbing-down” of the general populace, but it certainly seems like creeping “Idiocracy” is slowly overtaking us.
Originally published at http://parsifalswheeldivination.wordpress.com on March 5, 2023.
