“You Have No Power Over Me” — Benefic and Malefic Tarot Cards
AUTHOR’S NOTE: My title comes from the final exchange between Sarah (Jennifer Connelly) and the Goblin King (David Bowie) in the fantasy movie The Labyrinth, in which she informs him that she is no longer susceptible to his wiles. But the inspiration for what follows comes from The Discarded Image by C.S. Lewis (who knew a thing or two about fantasy).
In discussing the cosmology of the Middle Ages, Lewis ponders why, in a universe supposedly founded on Divine benevolence toward all things (which he ascribes to the Sun as imparting “the revelry of insatiable love”), there can exist the idea of malignant planets (specifically Mars and Saturn, the “Lesser and Greater Malefics” of classical astrology). He observes that these planets are not inherently bad, but are only so in relation to our personal affairs (in short, the problem lies not with them but with us). Within their own province, they are unremarkable and as essential in their operation as any archetype. His prose is compelling, and sets the stage for bringing this premise into the realm of tarot:
“The human imagination has seldom had before it an object so sublimely ordered as the medieval cosmos. If it has an aesthetic fault, it is perhaps for us who have known romanticism, a shade too ordered. For all its vast spaces, it might in the end afflict us with a kind of claustrophobia. Is there nowhere any vagueness? Not undiscovered byways? No twilight? Can we never get really out of doors?”
Within the tarot community there is an ongoing (and never-ending) debate about the relative merit or misfortune present in the individual cards. There is a general belief that each one embodies both positive and negative qualities, and the meaning that prevails will depend on the context of the question and the nature of the adjacent cards. Dr. James Wanless put it this way: “There are no bad cards, only opportunities.” And yet I recall an online conversation with Mary K. Greer a few years ago in which she offered the opinion that there are definitely less fortunate cards in the deck, independent of their contribution to a specific reading. We could say that (like Mars and Saturn) they fill a necessary niche in the panorama of ups-and-downs conveyed by the 78 images. Contrary to the popular aphorism, it isn’t invariably “all good.”
I can see both sides of the argument, but I’m inclined to accept Mary’s view based on the concept of necessity as opposed to that of contingency (the two words that Lewis uses to differentiate the flawless aetheric realm of divinity from the corruptible aerial zone of corporeal existence). If we truly need to experience a “Tower moment,” we’re going to get one! What remains is to fit that episode into a larger worldview that looks beyond the exigencies of the present. Why did it have to happen? What will I gain from it in the long run?
In my opinion, the mechanics of a tarot reading are best wrapped around the assumption that we are going to uncover a range of possibilities (or, if we’re lucky, probabilities) reflected in the series of cards pulled for the session. These cards will hold sway over the querent only as far as the individual lets them dictate a particular response. Otherwise, they should merely be “taken into account” as input to a more comprehensive set of decision-making options. There is little point in advising flexibility if the seeker believes that the answer is already “locked in.”
As a former engineer, technical writer and one-time Mensan (long lapsed), it goes without saying that I like to emphasize the rational but perhaps “a shade too ordered” aspects of the matter in my interpretation and stay well away from unalloyed freestyle intuition that has no established precedent to recommend it. But I’ve been involved with the tarot for over five decades and recognize that we must allow for some vagueness of expression (I prefer to call it “fluidity”), some twilight and some undiscovered byways in our narrative approach (the last of which is a phrase I’ve used in the past when describing the virtues of reversal). A tarot reading shouldn’t be a forensic dissection leading to a clinical diagnosis but rather an animated and imaginative exercise in anecdotal storytelling with the goal of both enlightenment and entertainment. In its best form (that is, in a face-to-face setting) it is as much a performance art as a counseling initiative.)
In cautioning our clients that they are not committed to anything we observe in the cards, and are only being forewarned about potential events or circumstances, we are making it clear that no advantage will be gained by flexing the images that isn’t already within their grasp. The tarot isn’t giving “marching orders,” it’s just highlighting things they already know at the subconscious level but haven’t objectified. Ideally, the reading will give a nudge to surfacing that awareness so it can either be embraced in a productive way or rejected as inimical to the querent’s best interests. Depending on the “lay of the land” revealed by the spread, one or the other will usually stand out.
Originally published at http://parsifalswheeldivination.wordpress.com on December 15, 2024.
