Cult of Tarot Forum

Greetings Friends!

You may have noticed the lovely TdM Temperance image on the Home page announcing a forthcoming reading group for readers of the Tarot de Marseilles. The reading group will be hosted here with the other reading groups here at Cult of Tarot<—-I just love that name! I believe we are looking to start up in August and so I am putting out feelers for whom would like to participate.

To begin, I would like to keep the style of the group rather open; work with a style or method of reading for a time and then explore other styles or methods. It is my personal sense that the Tarot de Marseilles has a way of revealing itself over time and I feel that our group should have the freedom to allow our practice, as a group, to reveal the direction or format we would like to pursue. I am not saying we won’t have any structure, just that it will vary and evolve.

I would love to hear from anyone interested in joining this circle. Come share what you would like to practice and learn, as well as any resources you feel would be helpful on this journey. What are your needs as a TDM reader? Your hopes? I would like to have every voice in this circle shared and heard and, ideally, all input to practice or use.

Happy reading!

Victoria

yes! would love to join and explore the TdM further!!! so bring it on....!
would love to share ways of reading the TdM with others.
right now i use my TdM decks mainly to create stories or layered messages by reading 3-6 cards in relation to eachother, focusing on directional aspects and possible interactions. for the pips i use a combination of several guidebooks, like ben dov’s and jodorowsky’s, combined with numerology and my own intuitive interpretations of what i see on/in the cards. i am not working with specific themes or questions, because the TdM is so perfectly useful for true open readings, unlike the RWS and al its ‘followers’, where the illustrations prescribe and channel the possible card meanings (which is a great way to find answers to very specific questions).
so when i get out my TdM decks i usually just say to the cards: tell me a story..... and go from there.
i own several TdM decks, like the Dodal and Noblet and Camoin/Jodorowsky but also some reproduced classic TdM style decks like the Vergnano, the Piemontese and the Fine dalla Torre and also some modern renderings like the marshmallow Marseille, the seventh sphere tarot and the tarot de aux arcs. i would love to learn more about working with with those decks as well.
hope this will become an active and fun reading circle! thanks for starting it up, victoria!

I tend to think of TdM as a methodology or set of methodologies rather than a deck. As such, i'm not particularly interested in using it for the kind of new-agey/Jungian spreads that you might find in, say, a Barbara Moore book. Nothing against those in general, there's a place for everything. I'm most interested in learning classical cartomantic techniques and spreads and also thinking substantively about the differences between majors-only and full deck reading.

Thus far, that makes three...yay!

Stronglove, I really appreciate and share your enthusiasm. I am also of the thought that this tradition of tarot is more open. We really don’t need themes or questions...I feel like it leads us straight to the heart of where we need to be led, or perhaps more accurately, what we are ready to see. I really enjoy Jodorowskys’ work. I also enjoyed the personality of Yoav Ben-Dov who studied with him and referred to him as a “true tarot master.”

Charlie Brown, I agree with your comments about the use of “new age” recipes for reading. (No offense intended for the many amazing authors and ideas shared through that venue). I just feel like the Marseilles is n0t that type of deck or tarot tradition. When we look at the fact that it started as a card game, it is safe to assume that the original tarot practitioners approached reading in a similar fashion...sacred play, if you will. I think it will be enlightening to look at symbols and colors and a bit of history. When you write that you want to think substantively about the differences between majors-only and full deck reading, can you give an example of what that might look like in practice?

I am really looking forward to doing this together!

I'm in too!

I like Ben-Dov's book very much and have learned a lot from it. I read that he had studied tarot and psychomagic with Jodorowsky and followed his methods but that he also followed French schools of literalism and focussed a lot on symbolism.

I don't know much about Jodorowsky's method other than he didnt read the future and that it seems very psychological and also very Freudian. He seems to divide opinion and from what I can tell some people love his work, whereas others find it flawed. I've no opinion in this but I'm interested to know more.

I'm very interested in the French way of reading cards literally rather than esoterically also.

I have the following decks:
Fournier TdM
Lo Scarabeo Conver historical reproduction/facsimile
Large Conver facsimile
CBD TdM
Grimaud TdM
Flornoy Noblet
Pierre Madenie by Yves
TdM Milennium Edition by Wilfried Houdouin

BreathingSince72 wrote: ↑15 Jul 2018, 11:12 When you write that you want to think substantively about the differences between majors-only and full deck reading, can you give an example of what that might look like in practice?

Well, as I imagine you know, it's very common in Europe for TdM readers to only use the majors (and probably not reversals). What I've seen is that, with a deck of 22 cards (rather than 78 or 156 if you count reversals) one has to 1) have a much broader sense the range of meanings that live in each card and 2) be very, very conscious of the context of the question in order to focus on a specific meaning within that broadened range. I have a couple of French language books that I can sort of slog through that take this approach as a given. Additionally, with majors only, you're guaranteed to have figures on every card, so a good skill in interpreting facing/regarding can be potentially useful in almost every reading.

Here's an example that I love. What, in modern French TdM reading, is the card for broadcast media such as radio, television, etc? There is an answer.

...


...


...


...

...

Temperance, because the water between her cups looks like waves (radio waves, television waves, etc). Some readers, I think, use it for the internet as well but by my adaptation of this logic, it should be Le Pendu, because the internet is a type of far seeing, which matches Le Pendu's French association (athough isn't this common everywhere?) as the card of psychic powers.

CharlotteK wrote: ↑15 Jul 2018, 12:10 I don't know much about Jodorowsky's method other than he didnt read the future and that it seems very psychological and also very Freudian. He seems to divide opinion and from what I can tell some people love his work, whereas others find it flawed. I've no opinion in this but I'm interested to know more.

Well, I love his work and find it to be deeply flawed or, at least, highly idiosyncratic. He says vehemently that he doesn't read the future but, of course, he does. You'll notice that many/most of his spreads have an "outcome" position. I imagine his defense might be that psychological processes are like natural phenomenon with causes and effects, but he's still positing if/then in his readings. What he's really doing, I think, is trying to avoid what he perceives as the stigma of "fortune telling." Neither Jodo nor Ben-Dov, as far as I can tell (which may not be much) have much in common with mainstream francophonic practice but that doesn't mean they aren't both excellent books.