Cult of Tarot Forum

Good Morning All,

So far for the Tarot de Marseilles Reading Circle, we have myself, CharlotteK, stronglove, and Charlie Brown! With ten days left before we start, I wanted to put feelers out for HOW we would like to structure our groups’ reading activities. Would we like to have one week of majors only, styles of draws, etc, or focus on different ideas like this for the entire month? At this time, our for,at is pretty open so please share your ideas about what would best suit your needs.

Additionally, if you would like to share reading methods you currently use or methods you have learned from specific authors, now is a great time to add those for group consideration.

Thanks in advance, friends. I am so eager for August!

Victoria

FYI, it's usually the practice on these forums that sign-up opens at the start of the month and is closed after a week or so. Readings are usually due at least a week before the end of the month so as to allow time for feedback, but people are generally pretty quick to do it all. I mention this because you may very well get a lot of people showing up shortly after the first of the month who wouldn't think to be looking for this at this point in time.

Charlie Brown wrote: ↑21 Jul 2018, 16:11 FYI, it's usually the practice on these forums that sign-up opens at the start of the month and is closed after a week or so. Readings are usually due at least a week before the end of the month so as to allow time for feedback, but people are generally pretty quick to do it all. I mention this because you may very well get a lot of people showing up shortly after the first of the month who wouldn't think to be looking for this at this point in time.

Thank you so much, Charlie Brown! I did not know the practice. I appreciate the point in the right direction! Have a great weekend!

Victoria

though this is called a TdM reading circle, i am wondering if we should proceed in the same way as in the other reading circles, that is to say: do we pair up and read for eachother, then give feedback? i am a bit hesitant about doing it this way, because for me the TdM, and the way i read it, is so different from the RWS style decks. for me, using it in the same way as the RWS decks would be confusing. also i feel i have a lot more to learn, especially about all the different ways to read TdM.
charliebrown, i read your post about the temperance card as representation of the radio and the hanged man as internet, and though i found it interesting, i couldn’t imagine myself ever succeeding in finding or understanding such a connection..... nor could i even begin to understand how to use this kind of information in a reading. .... i think all of us are approaching the TdM from different directions and we use it in different ways. i would really be interested in further exploring those differences.

i think i would like to start off with just the majors, since they already are so full of possibilities and contain so much information. i have been reading valentin tomberg’s ‘meditations on the tarot’ off and on for a couple of years now and am still trying to process (the depth of) all his thoughts on the different cards, figuring out how they might translote to/in an actual reading. this reading circle might be the best place to try this out.

Hi stronglove,

I am in agreement about this reading circle being different...even the name is different...and there was an intention for that. I know the new traditions of tarot quite well but the old tradition, the TdM, is an entirely different style of reading. I thought instead of pairing off, unless everyone wanted to pair off, we could all help one another.

For example, one day or week, someone posts a draw...let’s say three cards, and everyone shares what they see in the draw and how they arrived at that conclusion. We could talk about line of sight or how the color symbolism influenced the interpretation, etc. This gives everyone a chance to share on every spread and it gives all of us the chance to learn from one another. What do you guys think?

I can see us sharing different styles of reading such as tableaux (much later on) or three to five card spreads. Sometimes the Marseilles lends to rather direct and speedy answers, which can be alarming. But one could also end up with an hour of interpretation from three cards. I think majors is a great start!

I have that same book you mentioned and it is amazing...yes the depth of it takes a while to take in. I thought I would start with my birth card and my hidden teacher cards. My birth number is 33 but we know the majors only go to 22, hence my birth card of six and my inner teacher of fifteen...and what an instructor that is.

Soon I’ll be receiving an English version of a Jean-Claude Flornoy book and am eager to share what I learn there too.

I know Charlie Brown had an interest in contrasting the use of majors only, which is about as traditional as it gets, to using the whole deck. I truly believe we can find a common starting point and work up I to a pattern or plan that works for all of us.

BreathingSince72 wrote: ↑24 Jul 2018, 04:04 I know Charlie Brown had an interest in contrasting the use of majors only, which is about as traditional as it gets, to using the whole deck. I truly believe we can find a common starting point and work up I to a pattern or plan that works for all of us.

I'm not necessarily suggesting this, but I thought it would be relevant to bring up the basic progression of reading that was presented in a French book that I came across. I was a little unclear if this was being presented as a historical progression, a pedagogical method or, I think, a bit of both. This was all majors only.

• 1. One card answers
• 2. Triptychs—a three-card draw (2-1-3) in which cards 2 and 3 are not read independently, but are commentaries and/or elaborations on the basic answer presented in the middle card.
• 3. Three-card lines (1-2-3) in more or less the fashion we all understand them.

The author gave a cleaver analogy between this progression of reading and a progression of religious representations in the Renaissance or some such. With a one-card draw, you're getting a single image, like in an illumination from a sacred manuscript.
This could be a tarot card.


While the triptych is similar to, you guessed it, a triptych, which was an extremely popular medium for sacred art in the Renaissance.

Notice how all the real action is still happening in the middle, but we get a lot more context and flavor with the sides.

When you start reading lines of three or more left-to-right, it then becomes like you're actually reading the scriptures/sacred texts.


And then, of course, you have the tirage-en-croix.

FWIW, my gut tells me that the triptych approach is the root of what ultimately became elemental dignities. I have absolutely no factual evidence for that claim, however.

wow, this is so interesting!
i like that tryptich idea and the explanation. i do a lot of my own readings that way, combining tarot and oracle decks, where i have one card in the middle, as the foundation, and draw 1 or 2 extra cards from another deck to provide context. i am getting all excited by the idea of letting the cards switch position, and putting one of the other cards in the middle, just to see how the reading of the cards/ the story is different....

BreathingSince72 wrote: ↑24 Jul 2018, 04:04 Hi stronglove,

I am in agreement about this reading circle being different...even the name is different...and there was an intention for that. I know the new traditions of tarot quite well but the old tradition, the TdM, is an entirely different style of reading. I thought instead of pairing off, unless everyone wanted to pair off, we could all help one another.

For example, one day or week, someone posts a draw...let’s say three cards, and everyone shares what they see in the draw and how they arrived at that conclusion. We could talk about line of sight or how the color symbolism influenced the interpretation, etc. This gives everyone a chance to share on every spread and it gives all of us the chance to learn from one another. What do you guys think?

I can see us sharing different styles of reading such as tableaux (much later on) or three to five card spreads. Sometimes the Marseilles lends to rather direct and speedy answers, which can be alarming. But one could also end up with an hour of interpretation from three cards. I think majors is a great start!

sounds good to me!

Sounds good to me too. Happy to start small with majors and explore from there.

Greetings All,

I’m in. I like the idea of the Triptych. I am thinking we could approach this in a few different ways. We could each post a draw and each other member shares their insights. We could pair up and read for a partner. Or we could each do a draw for each member. What are yours thoughts? What do you feel would be the best way to organize our activities?

Victoria

CharlotteK wrote: ↑24 Jul 2018, 10:39 Sounds good to me too. Happy to start small with majors and explore from there.

I’m all for working with the majors, but I do need to contest Charlotte’s notion that it’s a smaller task. On the contrary, I feel that it introduces a number of challenges. First and foremost, when you only have 22 cards, each card must be capable of expressing a much wider range of signification than they would in a 78 card deck. Otherwise, majors-only reading would be a hobbled practice, which it isn’t. Second, by definition, all aspects of the question will be answered by majors. Therefore, any Thothian notions about “majors represent external forces beyond the querent’s control” immediately go out the window. A majors-only reader needs to have many more meanings for each card and also be adept at paring down those meanings within the precise context of the question.

Because each card needs to cover more interpretive ground, it’s important to develop several different interpretive levels for each card. The ones that are probably most foreign to Anglo-American style readers are the literal and the extrapolated. On the literal level, you get things like The Fool showing up to refer to a pet or The Tower to refer to your apartment building. By extrapolating you get to places like Hanged Man = Psychic phenomenon = far-seeing = internet or Death is reaping the fields, therefore he represents agriculture. Ultimately it becomes important, I think, to recognize the things that are important in your community and to your querents and ascertain what their signifiers might be. For example, because of the water creature, The Moon can be held to represent oyster farming. Now, I bet that neither you nor I have much call for an oyster farming card, but in Brittany and Normandy, it’s a significant industry.

Imagine that we’re reading for Britney from Brittany, who asks: What can you tell me about my next boyfriend? We draw the following spread:

What is he like? (Pope)
What does he do? (Moon)
Where will I meet him? (Hanged Man)

So, he’s kind of Pope-ish, works down at the Oyster farm, and you’ll meet him on the internet. In my imagination, The Pope is probably a young man who is suitable for young Britney. Therefore, my first thought is that he's kind of a know-it-all. But, I don't really know. To help figure it out, I might draw two minors and get 8 of Swords and 2 of Swords, so two swords, two even numbers. So he’s probably kind of a thoughtful brainy guy who might have a habit of getting himself stuck in analysis paralysis. Britney, go get on Ok Cupid and set your filter to within 10km of the coast. Voila!

No need to contest Charlie Bown. The "small" was reference to the suggestion we do a three card draw with majors.

CharlotteK wrote: ↑28 Jul 2018, 20:50 No need to contest Charlie Bown. The "small" was reference to the suggestion we do a three card draw with majors.

But would I be Charlie Brown without being just a touch controversial?

It is a larger problem in life, though, that people think the only difference with reading majors is that they just get to forget about the 56 other cards.

I'd like to join in.

I was hesitating because I read an ersatz Marseille deck (US Games Angel deck from the 80s) because I like swords that look like swords. And I read minors in in ersatz way (numbers = planets, Golden Dawn-like). It works for me, but I wasn't sure I'd be welcome in a "real" Marseille group.

But since you're starting with majors, I feel like I could fit in. So count me in!

If anyone is interested, I posted a reading report on the triptych I just did.

viewtopic.php?f=78&t=378

Rachelcat wrote: ↑02 Aug 2018, 18:51 I'd like to join in.

I was hesitating because I read an ersatz Marseille deck (US Games Angel deck from the 80s) because I like swords that look like swords. And I read minors in in ersatz way (numbers = planets, Golden Dawn-like). It works for me, but I wasn't sure I'd be welcome in a "real" Marseille group.

But since you're starting with majors, I feel like I could fit in. So count me in!

We are about as unreal a Marseilles group as they come. Just kidding. We are really playing this by ear. And my goal in calling it a reading circle is to clue people in to the fact that a circle can always be made larger. All are welcome. The idea is that we get practice, not perfection. Super excited to have you join in.

Victoria

I'm not in the circle but i want to add some art historical facts about the triptychon convention.

It's much older than Renaissance - it's a medieval tradition. The foundation for it is the Christian cultus - the difference between a "regular" secular day and a holy day. A church had a holy image on the altar but it was revealed only when Mass was read or some other religious celebration took place.

That's why the altar image was put in a wooden frame with two additions at the sides, half the size of the altar image each, that were hung on hinges and could be closed like window shutters.


Bernardo Daddi, The Virgin and Child Enthroned with Saints, 1338


The two smaller panels were used to "comment upon" the main image in the middle, or to add context.

Let's say you have the Madonna and Jesus the infant in the middle. Then you might have to each side supporting figures of the main figures, let's say saints and angels. The angels tell us that the Madonna and Jesus belong to Heaven, and the saints from different times tell us that these divine figures are not bound by the irreversible flow of time (which is the reason why Baby Jesus and Crucified Jesus and Jesus as Ruler of Heaven can appear in one and the same work of art and nobody says: that's impossible!)


Hugo van der Goes, Portinari altar, 1475 (in the side panels: name saints of the donors and the donors themselves praying)

And kneeling before the saints we can sometimes see the donors - contemporaries of the artist who paid him money to be depicted as living in the eternal and divine presence.

Many modern artists play with the triptych convention. Mordechai Ardon uses it to depict the horrors of the Holocaust, David Hockney hints at the tradition when he depicts his Mr and Mrs Clarke with Percy in different areas of his painting and an empty, narrow middle part - in short, this tradition has never fizzled out but is still very relevant, filled with new content and taken out of the Christian context.

I don't think there is a connection to elemental dignities. The elements are four and are much much older than the medieval triptychon tradition. Aristotle wrote about the four elements when the idea was old already. Roman mosaics and sarcophagi use them (death iconography), and they enter Christian iconography in the symbolism of the evanglists and inspired by the Old Testament (Jewish) vision of Ezechiel. All that's so much older and more powerful.

The triptych was formally a development from the diptych, a Roman convention of hinged ivory tablets for writing.

By the way, don't use the word triptych as synonymous with altar piece or altar painting. There are many altar paintings who are NOT triptychs and quite a number of triptychs that are NOT altar pieces. The most famous one Bosch's Garden of Earthly Delights. It also shows a "flow of time" from left to right: Garden of Eden before the Fall - earthly delights after the Fall - punishment in Hell.

But usually, both sides of the triptych function as commentaries and context to the main panel, and they have equal weight and value.

Nemia,

I love this contribution you have made here. Always insightful, you are. Thank you so much for sharing.

wow, nemia, thanks.... i am currently reading: francis bacon - invisible rooms and it is full of tryptychs, he created loads of them....
the connection with our marseille reading circle completely escaped me....

Francis Bacon had his own personal account to settle with Christianity, especially the Catholic kind.... and by using the form, the subversion of the whole tradition is more poignant.

Nemia, when I look at some of the images that you and Charlie Brown have posted in this thread, I can almost smell the incense. The art is so evocative and beautiful. It speaks to the soul. I look at the Golden triptychs you posted and my child eyes open. I enjoy opportunities to look at anything with a sense of wonder. Can you imagine what it was like to physically handle one of those pieces of art? There truly is incredibly history in this...

This looks right up my street! Can’t wait to sign up next month.

Flaxen wrote: ↑19 Aug 2018, 06:57 This looks right up my street! Can’t wait to sign up next month.

Awesome! We can’t wait for you to join next month! Yay! The more the merrier.