Eden Gray (1901–1999)

About the book: It’s kinda in between (at 1970) the humorously antiquated language of an Eliphas Levi, like a museum curator in a children’s book, you know, all 1855, and whatever today qualifies for scorn on grounds of being a possibly popular 2023 thing, the grass all on the wrong side of the fence, right, like a character from a technophobic side plot in a bad novel, right. It’s like an old movie or something; it’s grandmotherly in a vague sort of way, even if she is in the top 2% of cool, tolerant, relatable grandmas. (Even most blue blood Christian hardcore lib Dem elders are vaguely turned off by da okkult. Mommy, is not edukated. Is not nice.) But it’s definitely not something written today. I guess it’s more like today than the Victorian days, but it is more liked a cleaned-up, de-cluttered Eliphas Levi than a baroque contemporary, really. But it’s certainly readable.

Kinda about the book/about Tarot: I learned all the basic meanings of the cards a long time ago, but you need to read more than one or two books to get competent at it in my experience; you need to read enough to be able to think creatively about it, which is a lot harder to do with only bare-bones minimalist glosses in your mind for the cards. One of the things I liked about this book was the detailed description of the literal images, and not ~just~ more abstract treatments, you know, as looking closely at the cards can inspire a specialized meaning for that specific instance of your reading. (I read that somewhere else too, but it’s kinda an obviously influential idea here, really.) Like, as I draft this, I just did a reading an hour ago, and one of the cards was the Hermit reversed—and so it’s like: the light is shining down on me, right. That’s why I thought that there was light.

😺

…. I hesitate to call it a ‘witchy’ book, because it’s so old-fashioned (not just ancient: old-fashioned), although I suppose maybe it is, in the sense that it’s the old-fashioned village psychic type, first coming into the light of the documented past, where before there were only those old men, those fancy old occultists….

…. Incidentally, the book is reflective of the time it was written, the late ‘60s/early ‘70s (1970)—an almost familiar period. For example, the clients—the hippie; the intellectual; the housewife—are typical of the period. Also, while she’s not really a witch—perhaps ‘witchy’ by a sort of extension, around the edges, ie witch-y, you know—but she is a believer in the coming of the Aquarian Age, but does not seem to know what this would signify, even as much as we do now, believing that it would still follow what I guess you could call the ‘One Savior Model’, even if there were just one savior and billions of dependent sinners, the one savior would basically have the only life worth having, and institute a world where only one mode of life was permissible. Some have tried to foist this on people in the sectarian religions, but it has never worked, because it cannot. There is perhaps one other old-fashion-alism, if you will, in the book, but people would react too strongly, too emotionally, if I pointed it out. (And not just the left of my party, you know.) I guess you could say she was a woman of good will, who came from a time and section or whatever, possessing a certain amount of good will, but also still very, very early in time into the regeneration of the world.

I feel like I learned a certain amount about Tarot and numerology, the Kabbalah, and astrology, but also that each of those topics deserves at least one complete, separate book, of course. I also liked the Tree of Life (Kabbalah) spread, and even the general card meanings refresher. It was a good witch-y classic-era-psychic general tarot guide, you know.… (altro)

Tarot cards have intrigued me every since I've seen a deck. They're so pretty and mysterious and so different, yet so closely related in look to our familiar playing cards, and so many of the decks are rich in symbolism. I started collecting decks, and even reading them for friends for fun, even though I'm a thorough-going rationalist and don't believe they can be tools of divination. This was my first tarot book and the one that taught me to do readings (which I did during lunch in my Catholic School until one of the nuns told me not to do that again since tarot cards are "tools of Satan.")

The introduction unfortunately perpetuates the myth that the cards are associated with the gypsies--they're not--the cards were known in Europe for almost a century before Gypsies entered the population in any numbers. That said, it explains the purported meanings in ways that make them easy to remember, and I liked it offered more than the standard Celtic Cross Spread. There's also two three-card spreads, a six card "Hungarian Method," and a "Horoscope" and "Solar Chart" Method.… (altro)

Handy guide to the 'Rider Waite Tarot Deck'. Each card from the pack (both `Major & Minor Arcana') is illustrated on a full page in black outline, opposite its description, divinatory meaning and reversed meaning.
Used this like a flash card system, to build up my general familiarity with each image and 'classic' meaning. I prefer to take literal definitions of cards, with a pinch of salt, relying mainly on a mixture of intuition and synchronicity to guide my readings.

For a good non-dogmatic introduction to tarot and other methods of divination see 'Positive Magic' by Marion Weinstein.… (altro)