DoW 15 - Nemia's Jane Austen Tarot (Jacqui Oakley)

[Nemia]

Let's see whether I'll succeed in tickling some sense out of this pretty dunce!

Sunday:

Knight of Diamonds - the Star - Jane Fairfax

Four things to get organized somehow! The Knight of Diamonds (Pentacles/Coins) - the Taurus-like sober good sense and work ethos. The Star - which seems to be exactly the opposite of the Knight of Diamonds. And why is Jane Fairfax associated with the Star? I harbour the horrible suspicion that it's because of the scene where she plays the piano and sings and is the star of the evening, in the modern sense of the word, and Emma (here: Queen of Diamonds, okay) is so jealous of her. The booklet says nothing whatsoever about the reason for the triple Knight of Diamonds - Star - Jane Fairfax, only gives the most shallow summary of Jane's character.

Jane Fairfax was orphaned as a girl, yet she grows up to sing, play piano, and sew, and marries happily.

That's all. Mrs. Jennings might have summed up Jane's life!

Oh dear oh dear, I knew it, it's a pretty dunce, neither tarot substance nor Austen substance, but very easy on the eye.

I must confess now that of all the many Emma adaptations, only the Kate Beckinsale one made any sense to me. the old BBC one was just an audio book with moving pictures - Gwyneth Paltrow's version is a vehicle for her and the whole thing just a fantasy (that tent!!) - Romola Garai is lovely and could have played her differently but it seems the director made her roll her eyes all the time and behave like a modern teenager - and I didn't see that last one. The Garai version also put in too much kitschy non-Austen background information; Mr Woodhouse was ludicrous. Beckinsale had just the right amount of arrogance and unpleasantness because Emma is not supposed to be totally likeable.

And the best thing about the Beckinsale version are the supporting players. This version has the best Miss Bates, the best Mr Woodhouse, and by far the best Jane Fairfax. She is just as imagined her. (Okay, Mr Knightley is the achilles verse of that version, Mark Strong is not really likeable in that role although quite close to the grumpy-but-kind man in the book - closer anyway than divine Jeremy Northam or cute, harmless Johnny Lee Miller).

there are so many misunderstandings about Jane Austen - best shown by the clueless heroine of Lost in Austen who waxes lyrical about the charming times of Jane Austen when there was so much more courtesy in the world, and love won everything. No, not at all, Jane Austen pairs off people according to their status in the world, and marriages that cross class borders are notoriously unhappy. Money is everything. It's a cruel world, women are helpless and have no rights, as Austen shows in her private letters. An adaptation that doesn't even hint at the cruelty of that world is just a marshmallow, a fantasy.

This deck of course swallows the escapist fantasy, and I really regret not getting the older deck when it was available, even though I really hate the art.

Here we have lovely art, a dignified looking Jane Fairfax, and she looks a little surprised to find herself in the position of the Knight of Diamonds (because she was destined to be a governess and work hard?) AND the Star (because she knew to play the piano, sing AND sew?).

It seems to me that the wish to make Jane Fairfax the Star came first, and that they looked at the court cards, and the Knight of Diamonds was left, and they stuck her there.



Monday:

Ace of Diamonds - the World

Well well, now here we have a more convincing pairing. If you want to associate the World with a minor card, the Ace of Diamonds is a fair decision, even clever. Aces open something and the World closes it, but where these two processes meet, there's an opening for light and much potential.

Booklet, please.

One deserves a bouquet when a demanding endeavour has come full circle to success.

Does one indeed? Mrs Hyacinth Bucket would agree

Again, this is the most anemic interpretation of either Ace of Diamonds or The World that one could give. At least one thing can be said for the text: it doesn't club us over the head with new age happiness that makes every card sound exactly the same, i.e., a happiness therapy from start to finish (unfortunately, the lovely Star Tarot comes with a book that explains all the symbols, which is great, and serves all the cards with the same kind of happy-ever-after sauce, which is unfortunate).

Now connecting all this to my very own life. The Knight of Pentacles is one of the cards I get most often - a calling card from my decan, Worry, and a kick in the butt to work harder. To make an effort.

The Star and the World are beautiful cards that everybody loves. They're encouraging - think of the future, think of the end.

It's funny, I still don't regret getting this deck. It's the Harriet Smith of Tarot decks and I can't help liking Harriet Smith.

[Rachelcat]

The Harriet Smith of tarot decks! Lol! Perfect!

I can see Jane Fairfax as the Star: she's perfectly accomplished, as Emma wished she were.

Thanks for sharing the deck, and your take on Emma movies. I look forward to seeing more cards through the week.

[Nemia]

Ah, Rachelcat, you're brilliant! What a pity you didn't write the booklet!

[Nemia]

O-oh, here we go again

It's confrontationl Martian Tuesday, the world is going crazier by the day, and we have a crazy and confrontational young lady as - Knight of Hearts.

This is Lydia Bennett, she even has the slightly cheeky smile, and the card is again utterly charming.

Now let me think why Lydia might be a Knight/Page of Hearts (it's a playing card deck so the Jacks are both Knights and Pages). She's lead by her emotions, not her head, she's naive, but if I had to put her anywhere, I'd put her into the Fire suit. She is impetuous, and Austen suggests that she is sensuous, passionate - otherwise she wouldn't elope with Wickham. Wickham is calculating, she is not. She is lead by desire and the wish to be loved. (We have the same constellation with Maria Bertram, oh, poor Mrs Rushworth of course, and Mr. Crawford).

The Wickham-Lydia relationship is interesting. It's Lydia's way of not only getting a husband she desires but it's her way of getting back at her elder sisters ("I go first now, Jane, I'm a married woman" - a scene much more hurtful in the book than in the series since Julia Sawalha is so charming and warm, something book Lydia is not towards her sisters).

In the Bennett family, there are two "camps". The two eldest daughters are in Papa's camp - educated, civilized, kind. The two youngest are in Mama's camp - silly, frivolous and without principles. Poor unattractive Mary is all alone (I think it's not by chance that quite a number of novelists took up Mary's story). It's a cruel story.

Whenever Austen takes sides, I get suspicous. For example, I suspect that if Mrs. Elton told us the story, Emma would appear just as Mrs. Elton appears in Emma's eyes.

Lydia seeks male attention, supported by her mother - they don't get any positive attention or appreciation from Mr. Bennett so they seek it elsewhere. Lydia doesn't focus on Mr. Wickham until she sees that he pays attention to Lizzie. She is jealous of Jane and Lizzie. Austen doesn't give us the privilege of Wickham's perspective - it's surprising that he seduces Lydia instead of trying to win higher-ranking Lizzie's hand (the older the sister, the higher her rank, compare the way of address and also Queen Victoria's and other daughters). Austen presents it as a momentary distraction - Wickham only wants to have his wicked ways with her, without the intervention of Mr Darcy and Mr Gardiner, he wouldn't have married her. It's strange that Wickham gives in to that inclination, it's one of the cloudy spots of the novel. Austen manipulates the reader, we're ready to believe anything evil from Wickham but his elopement with Lydia doesn't really makes sense. Only if we assume he has a self-destructive little streak which makes him fall out with his superior officer, the Bennetts and everybody who knows him all at once.

Anyway - as difficult as it is to understand Wickham's motifs, Lydia's are obvious. She is the youngest and in order to take first place, she has to marry. She has never heard a kind word from her father and never profited from his instruction concerning conscience and morals, so she does whatever she wants. Her father of course doesn't love her because she is so much like his wife. He must have fallen out of love with her a long time ago, punishes her for the fact that she was pretty but silly by not even trying to "improve" her (he married down, she married up in every sense), and kept making babies with her because he wanted an heir. Lydia was the ultimate disappointment for her father - the last and useless daughter. He left her completely to his wife's instruction although he knew what would be the outcome. (The same is true for Kitty but less drastically).

So it's no wonder Lydia elopes with Wickham, believing him that it's the way to the altar. She is curious about sex (both her parents, Austen hints, have a healthy sexual appetite - her father married her mother because she was so pretty albeit silly, her mother always loved handsome officers....) and she wants to out-rank her sisters, at least for a while. By offering them "to find husbands" for them, she reveals that she would like to make her higher rank permanent, i.e., if she managed to find a husband for Jane or Lizzie, it would certainly be one inferior to Wickham, and she could patronize them. That's a stronger motivation even than her infatuation for Wickham.

Isn't she a complex character? Emotionally neglected by her father, indulged by her mother, more or less despised by her elder sisters.

Austen writes dysfunctional families so well, it's amazing.

Jane and Lizzie never make an effort to bridge the gap between their father and sisters, they quite enjoy the privileged position that they have in his life.

Well, that's how i see the family dynamics in the Bennett household. There is vulnerability somewhere in Lydia, that would fit the Page of Hearts, and there is the ability to feel strong passion, that would fit the Knight of Hearts.

Now let's have a look at the booklet!

Now isn't that simply ridiculous? It would have been better to release the deck without a booklet, really. Obviously, I disagree completely with this view of Lydia. And it reflects really badly on the underlying understanding of the Hearts/Cups suit and the court cards.

Any connection to my life? Not really. The Page of Cups is always my youngest daughter for me - very clever with her heart, very intuitive, very good with people, very receptive and insightful above her years. Artistic, too. We're closer now than we have been in a long time. I'll go and give her a hug now and the card has done its job.

My conclusion for now - the booklet is the Achilles heel of this deck.

[Nemia]

I can't stop doing these daily readings - how would I otherwise know which day it is? Wednesday? We're on total lockdown, we're not even allowed to go shopping, for two days, the country is completely locked down (because of the holiday). We're separated from our parents and most of our children, and like the rest of the world, I confess I'm worried.

The Nine of Spades/Swords is an honest card, and it expresses what I feel about the situation. Actually, referring back to the good old RWS - I don't sleep well at night, wander around, think, try to read (I'm a voracious reader but even I found it difficult to get "into" a book while worrying about old and fragile family members). Last night, I fell asleep on the couch.


So, yes, Nine of Swords, I feel you. Since this deck is not a real tarot but also a playing card deck (for which is just a bit too big), I accept the flowers in the middle. Let's see now what the booklet has to say. Prepare yourself!

How can you possibly be any more shallow, insipid and cliche about this card? Come on. You could do better. The strength of tarot imho is that it acknowledges negative feelings. Yes, there is worry, yes, there is sorrow, yes, not all the world is honey and roses.

They could really have made a little bit more of an effort. Instead of another cute bouquet of flowers, add some thistles to it. And instead of postulating that "excessive worry" is "rarely warranted", shaming people who worry, tell it as it is. Yes, there are difficult times in life when you worry. Those thistles sting. There are flowers, yes, and lots of them. But sometimes, you get stung by the thistles, and it hurts. Acknowledge that hurt. It's part of life.

So again - the deck is fine, and it works for me (but right now, life is so chequered really any card fits). Jacqui Oakley has a lovely, bright style. I'll always see in my mind's eye [urlhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugh_Thomson]Hugh Thomson's[/url] illustrations (there's a Flickr album, too), and they're not contemporary, either - if Thomson can give us his visual interpretation decades after the books were written, so can Oakley.

Concerning the style - if Thomson gives us elegant, dainty Anne Elliot, Oakley gives us colourful, enthusiastic, rose-tinted Marianne Dashwood (pre-Willoughby). That's fine with me. I get the visual side of the deck. But I think it's a pity that the tarot underpinning is not strong enough, it's a pity they didn't make a complete deck, and it's a pity they didn't give us more than naff cliches in the booklet.

Btw, British illustrators RULE. Phiz - Tenniel - Thomson - Kate Greenaway - oh yes children's literature illustrators - just amazingly high standards. Oh think of Alan Lee..... Colman-Smith's art grows from a fertile ground saturated with fantastic art over decades, if not centuries.

Jacqui Oakley is Canadian, part of the Commonwealth and I really like her art. Her Instagram account shows how great she's balancing line and colour. And looking at her art - do you know something? I wish she hadn't been so tame. She could have easily gone a bit crazy. Against the grain of oh-so-dainty Austenuations. Yes, her talents were under-used in this project.

[Nemia]

It's Thursday already, and my week with this deck will soon be over. And today, this deck has forced me to take it seriously.

Six of Clubs as Tower - now let me think about it. Clubs is Fire, Tower is Fire, and they simply let the RWS meaning of the Six of Wands fall to the side, which is more than okay with me. The RWS dominance over tarot today is getting on my nerves - I think the two most annoying things to read on sites like Reddit are "will it REALLY bring bad luck when I buy my own tarot deck?" and "why doesn't this deck adhere to TRADITION?" when people mean with TRADITION RWS. Yeah, indeed, why doesn't these Noblet, Flornoy, Dodal guys adhere to tradition in numbering Strength and Justice????

So bravo for the creators of this deck. In playing card divination, so many different traditions exist that it confused me completely, but one thing I remember: there is a tradition that sees the red suits as benevolent, and the black suits as dangerous and negative. Nowadays, we project all the bad stuff onto the swords but I'm totally fine with clubs/wands taking on a bit, too.

So tarot-majors-minors-wise, this card is a good choice.

(Looking at the rest of the Clubs/Wands cards though, RWS meanings have taken over most of them: 8 of clubs movement, 10 of clubs hard work... okay...)

Now let's look at the card from the Austen angle.

This is one of the most convincing associations. Louisa's fall on the cobb at Lyme regis is not only a dramatic event, quite unique in Austen's oeuvre where many dramas are conducted quietly in drawing rooms or bedrooms, it is also one of the catastrophic events which move on the plot. Without this fall, there wouldn't have been a happy ending for the heroine, Anne.

2020 04 09 louisa.jpg (48.59 KiB) Viewed 2684 times

Captain Wentworth would have gone on to marry Louisa because he'd have felt that he owed her that after a merry flirtation - although his superficial infatuation with her, the strong, solid nut, had already faded away. Louisa and Captain Wentworth would have made an unhappy couple. She's much better off with Captain Benwick. Which of course leaves Wentworth free to marry Anne whom he loved all along.


When interpreting the Tower for others, I always emphasize that Tower events usually look much better in retrospect. things and people you don't need fall away - things you cling to are taken by a higher power to free you for what you really need - you learn harsh and bitter insights which will save you later down the road.

Louisa Musgrove's fall is certainly the ideal culmination point of such a development. Relationships are tangled and attachments are hollow and actually wrong - and a catastrophic event puts them right.

But if you look at Persuasion the way I like to do it - treating Austen as unreliable narrator - then you must see that she treats the Musgrove girls with hardly-hidden resentment. A bit like Anne does, although Anne of course is too sure of her own superiority, behind that gentle facade, to really see those girls as threats. (Lady Russell puts those feelings into words: to think that a man who once loved Anne Elliot....) Henrietta is paired off with her cousin Hayter, not an attractive character - jealous, insecure, from a vulgar family. (The fact that Charles Musgrove declares him to be worthy is worthless since Charles himself is pretty vulgar). And Louisa with disloyal Captain Benwick who tried his luck with Anne before - he obviously can't wait to replace his dead fiancee Fanny.

Even the maternal love of Mrs Musgrove is put under suspicion when she sighs about her dead son whom actually nobody either loved or missed. So the Musgrove girls, those merry young fillies, are actually inhabiting a world of fragile emotional connections. They're lucky they lack the sensitivity to notice it. But don't they? Henrietta resings herself to follow in the footsteps of her poor Aunt Hayter, Louise has become sensitive and fearful like a chicken. Austen leaves them behind without looking back. They were only a foil for Anne.

All that doesn't change the significance of the fall, just the opposite. For the Musgrove girls, this fall is like a judgment. For Anne, it's the Ace of Cups, a new beginning for love, a return of youth.

A very good and satisfying choice.

What does that mean for my life? Oh dear, I hope nothing horrible will happen. It's ironical that I calm others down when such cards appear because I don't want to encourage self-fulfilling prophecies, but I'm a worrier and that card is always a bit unnerving.

Let's hope I'll get another one of the many-many-maybe-too-many nice cards from this deck.

The lwb? Oh spare me. It calls Louisa's fall "a disaster that alerts Captain Wentworth to the power of his persuasion". Which is nonsense, of course. Persuasion in the novel means the ability Anne has to listen to others, to be flexible, a quality that Wentworth himself doesn't have and learns to respect over the course of the novel.

Anne rejects bad advice (like her father's) but heeds good advice given in the spirit of love even if she recognizes it later as wrong (Lady Russell's advice). Wentworth despises her for that. It takes years and a silly infatuation with Louisa who lacks Anne's persuability, until Wentworth recognizes Anne's value. Wentworth doesn't suffer from "the power of his persuasion" but just from the opposite - he can't be persuaded that allowing to be persuaded can be good. He threw the chances of returning to Anne to the winds, something that caused much suffering.

But we knew already that the booklet is the weak point of the deck? You need no further persuasion, do you?

[Nemia]

Pictures will come later - but today, I drew the Ace of Spades. On the card, I could see a young man. Ooookay, I said to myself, now let's guess who that can be? I know which Austen gentleman I'd put on the card of intelligence, sharpness and honesty. I'd probably go for Mr. Tilney, imo an under-appreciated Austen hero. (I'd prefer Mr. Tilney a hundred times to grumpy Mr Darcy and never understood the hype about him! it's all down to Colin firth, and I can't understand the hype about him either! nice enough guy but nothing to swoon about! give me a man with a sense of humour instead!)

Another candidate? Hm, I can't think right now about anyone better than Mr. Tilney. Sir Thomas Bertram sees the truth only towards the end, all the men in MP (and most of the women) make wrong decisions. Well, Edmund gives Fanny writing materials when she's a girl, that might be an Ace of Swords scene.

Mr Knightley is a speaker of truth but he's a king, I think. His brother! Mr. John Knightley gets on Emma's nerves but never on mine. He is perceptive and kind (to Jane Fairfax - one of my favourite scenes that never found its way into an adaption is when John Knightley encourages Jane Fairfax and wishes her a happy future - I always love the "minor" figures more than the heroes and heroines) (that's why I can't stand discussions in places like IMD where every adaptation is discussed endlessly in terms of "how much time do H and h spend together?" "how romantic is that?" "are the actors attractive enough, and who would have been even more attractive?")

Another good choice might have been Captain Harville. His and Anne's open conversation finally clears the air between her and Captain Wentworth.

So now - hold on tight! Who is this deck's choice for the Ace of Spades? It's Charles Hayter. Charles Hayter? Oh yeah, that guy poor Henrietta Musgrove will marry, her cousin, eaten by jealousy, who wins her back by keeping his distance for a while. We learn next to nothing about Charles Hayter. He doesn't say openly what he thinks, he shows his resentment indirectly, he is not piercingly intelligent or anything else I'd ask for in a character that represents the Ace of Swords to us.

The lwb is again a total disappointment. I'll add the picture later.

Wow, the author has certainly let the artist down. this is very unsatisfying, both from a tarot and an Austen point of view. Charles Hayter. Are you kidding me?

[Rachelcat]

Wow, I REALLY didn't see that coming! I was with you, Mr. Tilney. I would never have thought of Charles Hayter. Maybe the swords/spades for the sharpness of jealousy? But the ace? I would be confused, but all this seems to be on par for the deck . . . Thanks for all the peeks into its strangeness!

[Nemia]

Yes, isn't that strange?

And the strangness doesn't end with the choice of Charles Hayter as Ace of Spades/Swords/Air/Intellect....

Prepare for the explanation!

This is completely wrong. Austen approves of Charles Hayter, after his trantrum (which reflects and sits judgement over Captain Wentworth's irresponsible behaviour in flirting with both Musgrove girls at once while not actually meaning anything with it) he is allowed to get his gentle Henrietta. Austen also approves of Henrietta, she is not being punished, except for being made fun of her hysterical reaction to Louisa's fun. But she is unblemished, and so is Charles Hayter. they're just not very interesting. They're below Anne's level. Not only socially but as simple people (the aristocratic Dalrymples are as well).

Charles Hayter does NOT try to better himself in the world. Jane Austen, I'm sorry to burst anyone's bubble, is NOT one of the modern people who believe in bettering oneself. She's a conservative, a rural Tory, and she believes in doing one's best in the station one was born to. Hayter is the son of respectable farmers. His mother and Mrs. Musgrove are sisters. Like the Miss Wards, one marries up a bit, the other a bit down (Lady Bertram, Mrs Price). Mary Musgrove's arrogance towards the Hayters in unjustified and ridiculous but it's a fact that all the Hayters except for Charles are beneath the level of the Musgroves. Mary should help Henrietta and Charles to lift them up further instead of putting him down.

And Charles Hayter is only "above" his siblings because he's the eldest son and will inherit everything. This primogeniture thing is really unfair but Austen doesn't really challenge it - it's simply part of her life. If she resents depending on her brothers, she doesn't show it and doesn't take the way out (marriage).

But I see nowhere an indication of ambition on Charles Hayter's part. He's a bit slow. When Anne's nephew climbs on her back, it's Captain Wentworth who comes to Anne's help, Hayter doesn't look good in that scene or any other. We don't see him at work so how can they tell whether he's focused or not?

No no no, he's not an Ace of Spades. He is neither sharp nor quick nor honest. And this is really a lazy choice. I'm going the go through the deck now and find cards I can argue with!

But hey - I still like the art. And who can tell me not to call this card Mr. Tilney and enjoy his witty charm? I'm a Tilney fan, I like him and his sister Eleanor!

Let's see now who appears in the deck and who doesn't.

[Rachelcat]

I think they're saying he's trying to rise above his station because he's studying to be a minister. Charles Musgrove notes that he is ok as a husband for Henrietta because he's an educated gentleman, not just a farmer. But he also makes clear that he's acceptable because he will inherit land, too.

So the educated part ties in ok with spades. But that is much more tangential to any story line than other more worthy characters. and it doesn't say anything about jealousy or pride, which is more of what he's important for.

I look forward to your other character researches!

[Nemia]

But it's not like today's theology studies, that's the point. It's not a question of education, they don't study for years. There's a living available for them, they go to Oxford anyway, and they don't study specific theological studies. He's not studying to be a minister like people do today. He's just getting the basic education that allows him to get a living.

The Hayters probably send only their eldest son to Oxford, probably only gave a good education to him, hel'll get a living somewhere and become a Mr. Collins (while Mr Collins will inherit one day Longbourn and thus rise in the ranks without an effort). He will inherit his family's farm and land, not too much, and if one of his sisters won't find a husband, he'll be responsible for her. (Great fun for Henrietta, too, depending how bitter such a sister might be considering that her brother gets everything and she nothing...)

Becoming a clergyman was nothing like the modern idea of social mobility through academic studies. You still depended on your social superiors to patronize you like Lady Catherine de Bourgh. Clergymen like Mr Norris or Mr Grant did the bare minimum for their flock. Nobody really controlled it.

I think whoever wrote that booklet didn't know very much about clergymen in the Anglican church in the early 19th century.


https://austenauthors.net/on-the-charac ... clergymen/

https://www.jasnachicago.org/clergy-jane-austens-time

[Nemia]

Today is my last day with the Jane Austen Tarot, and prepare for more grumpiness! I'm usually a person who totally goes along with her tarot decks. I'm easy to inflame with enthusiasm and love, and I can't remember ever having this feeling of being.... well, ripped off by a tarot deck. But this time, I am, and I'll tell you why.

But let's start with today's card.

It's the King of Clubs, re-named the Magician - and it is Jane Austen herself.

Now when I saw that, I said to myself: that is a nice and clever way to combine the Magician with honouring Jane Austen, although for the life of me I can't see the author as Magician, and why King of Clubs - well, I would pick a number of court cards for Jane Austen, Queen of Swords probably, but not the Kind of Wands/Clubs. And as major, I'd give her Justice, or the Hermit, or even the World, but certainly not our good old trickster. The text from the lwb of course is another dud and doesn't give any insight.

But I continued to talk to myself and said: this card reminds you of the fact that this deck refers to Jane Austen whom you love, and have loved since you were twelve years old, long before the popular movies and series made everyone love her. And it's possible to connect Jane Austen and the tarot.

I looked at my complete week and I had to say again: it looks really beautiful.

And then I went on to look up who wrote the text, and what else Jacqui Oakley had produced.

The text is by Emma Brodie, and I don't want to say anymore about her - but she hasn't written anything notable about Jane Austen that Google should know about. The second author was unknown even to Google.

And Jacqui Oakley had, as I knew of course, produced an adult coloring book with Jane Austen motifs before.

Just have a look.

And that's the deck:

Looks a bit alike, doesn't it?


Now let's look inside - I took all the pictures from the Internet.

That's the novels Jane Austen makes fun of in Northanger Abbey.

How silly! What kind of success? Catherine Morland was not a college student....

A nice flower pattern.

Let's slap on some idiotic text and make it a tarot card!

Pretty jewelry in the Regency style. I can't remember where Jane Austen talks about jewels except to laugh about those who pride themselves on their finery like Mrs Allen or Mrs Elton, but okay...

And here we have another silly cliche.



You get the principle, don't you? Nearly all the pictures from the coloring book have been lifted as they were, stuck on a playing card whether they fit the tarot meaning or not (they must have worked with a list of pretty shallow keywords), and re-marketed as tarot.


The worst offender is this card:

Neither author nor artist ever read a Jane Austen book. They watched the series and the movies. And they never read a tarot book in their lives, either. They simply took a list of keywords from the Internet and arranged this somehow together.

How do I feel about this deck now? I feel supremely stupid for one thing because I was willing to take this deck seriously. After all, Jane Austen's universe is rich and layered, and I know it's possible to make an interesting, thought provoking tarot deck from it (and if I hadn't disliked the art, I would have bought it years ago when it was still available).

It's a pretty dunce, like I said before, but the un-pretty dunce is the person who buys this.

Will I try to get rid of it? No, I won't because it's still a nice playing card deck. They should have left the tarot part away and produced a smaller deck of playing cards in the Regency style. That would have been lovely. Piatnik have such decks and I love them.

But I won't read with them because nothing good can come of a deck that was so obviously made for easy consumption.

I will write a review about it later and it will be the first devastating NO in my career as tarot reviewer!