First up, we've got the 'historical Tarot decks'. These date back mainly to the 18th and 19th centuries, and issue primarily from France eg the Marseilles decks, or Italy eg the Ancient Italian deck. Like the Waite-Smith Tarot, some of the symbolism and aesthetic has Christian connections. Unlike our 'classic Tarot', however, these are unsullied by the puritan/protestant influence. They come without the censor of richness and abundance getting out his chopping knife first. The figures are gaily
depicted, richly adorned, in colours that sometimes remind more of Veronese than of the gaunt, measured aesthetic of northern Europe. In truth, they seem to partake of the same spirit as that of the Italian Renaissance, the Greco-classical spirit mixed with that of Christianity. Give me the Ancient Italian over the Waite-Smith any day. The main drawback - and it is, for me, a critical one - with these older decks is that the 'pip' cards, ie those minor ones with numbers, are not fully illustrated, but simply come with stylised wands, cups, etc. This does mean that imagination has very little to work with, and interpretation of these minor arcana cards is very limited.Next comes what is, apparently, the second most popular Tarot after the Waite-Smith. It makes its entrance 100% untainted by Christian undertones, overtones, or anything else. This is hardly surprising since it is the brainchild of Aleister Crowley, brought into full physical manifestation thanks to the fantastic artwork and infinite patience of Lady Frieda Harris. This is the Thoth Tarot. Compared to the Waite-Smith and historical Tarots it is more abstract, more trippy, speaking more of internal realities than beings and happenings in the outer world. In my opinion, its logic is easier to follow, in the sense of being a comprehensive and comprehensible projection of the emanation aspects of the Kabbala. Crowley was openly scornful of the endeavours of A.E. Waite, and got very irritated with his 'there is a special mystery hidden here, which I know about but which I am not at liberty to share with you' habit. Either tell us what you know or shut up, complained Crowley. Otherwise it's just an insidious game of pseudo-mystical one-upmanship. "Here is your criticism, Arthur, straight from the shoulder. Any man that knows Truth and conceals it is a traitor to humanity; any man that doesn't know, and tries to conceal his ignorance by pretending to be a guardian of a secret, is a charlatan. Which is it?" (Crowley, Equinox, vol 1).
I, too, find this aspect of Waite's Tarot annoying, so am with Crowley on this one. The Great Beast made fun of Waite viciously, even publishing an obituary of the fellow while he was still alive. It was entitled 'Dead Waite'. I find this episode both very naughty and completely hilarious. I like the Thoth Tarot. It works well for me, and I find it relatively simple to use. It's one of my two main Tarot decks.
Then there's the rest. Loads of them. Hundreds, literally.
Things have changed remarkably over the forty years since I first became a long-haired, commune-dwelling, reader of Tarot. And, I would say, these changes have been, in general, for the better. The variety of Tarot decks available today is amazing. Some are profound, others frivolous. Some are dark, mysterious, scary even; others come full of light, smiley maybe, at worst sanitised. Anybody with an interest in Tarot nowadays can simply have a good look around ('Aeclectic Tarot' is an online resource with a broad overview) and find what appeals; what speaks to you, that is the most important thing. And only you can know.
Most of the more worthwhile modern Tarots are based loosely on the root systems of the Waite-Smith or Crowley's Thoth. Some, I feel, have actually outstripped their original inspirations. And this is no great surprise. A lot has happened since Arthur Waite and Pamela Colman Smith were beavering away on their landmark Tarot a century ago. We've had Jung, archetypes, the collective unconscious; synchronicity, transpersonal psychology, psychedelic gnosis; Tantra, Tibetan Buddhism, the release from prison of Eros, Dionysus, sensuality, the recognition of Shadow as a force within and without. Despite the mess of the political world, of the ongoing project of mind control, we're not in such a bad place after all.To be effective, Tarot requires a blend of intellect/knowledge and intuition to be brought to bear; the masculine and feminine principles working in harmony. A basic grounding in meanings, patterns, and systems is needed, really. At the same time, some of the more modern decks major on intuition: no confidence in your intuition and you will end up bewildered, probably throwing the cards in the bin. In a world still dominated by linear, mechanical notions of reality, this primacy of intuition as a tool for understanding, of making sense, has to be agood thing.
For myself, I have a special liking for some of the darker, fantasy, gothic even, decks. They seem to speak more directly to the archetypal, mythical aspects of being than do more naturalistic decks, or the cardboard cut-outs of Waite-Smith. They do not play safe, but venture towards the periphery of the psyche, where we may feel perturbed by its inhabitants, denizens of the night, teetering on the threshold. Shadow, eros, darkness, are encountered, viewed as portals to the sacred, even. This is a more total language of reality than that spoken by some other 'nice', 'safe' Tarots. That's me. Anybody properly interested in Tarot should follow their own bliss - or, rather, their own nose, their intuition, to discover where the treasure lies for them. Uniquely.
Images: Top: King of Wands(Clubs) from Ancient Tarot of Lombardy
Centre: King of Wands from Deviant Moon Tarot
Bottom: Grumpy ol' King of Wands from Waite-Smith Tarot
