Secrets of the Waite-Smith Tarot: The True Story of the World's Most Popular Tarot (英語) ペーパーバック – 2015/4/8
Kindle 端末は必要ありません。無料 Kindle アプリのいずれかをダウンロードすると、スマートフォン、タブレットPCで Kindle 本をお読みいただけます。
Discover newly revealed secrets, hidden for a century, about the fascinating origins of the most widely used tarot system in the world. With never-before-seen material from Arthur Edward Waites own secret order, an exploration of the world that inspired Pamela Colman Smith, and a practical guide to interpreting the cards, Secrets of the Waite-Smith Tarot will breathe new life into your readings.
Drawing on Waites unpublished writings, historic photographs of Smith, and much more, Secrets of the Waite-Smith Tarot unlocks the symbols and correspondences of the cards. Explore the comparisons between the court cards and the stage characters that influenced Smith; learn about her intuitive understanding of the Tree of Life and how that wisdom is reflected in her minor arcana. From stunning artwork and sample spreads to influential colors and music, this groundbreaking book draws back the curtain to reveal the true legacies of Waite and Smith.
Astonishing revelations of Pixie Smiths contributions to the Tarot! Masterful, and not to be missed.Mary K. Greer, author of The Complete Book of Tarot Reversals
"Astonishing revelations of Pixie Smith's contributions to the Tarot! Masterful, and not to be missed."--Mary K. Greer, author of The Complete Book of Tarot Reversals商品の説明をすべて表示する
Among tarot books, it's unique (as far as I know) in its effort to describe a cultural history around a single work of art. It's a fascinating glimpse into the world of illustrator Pamela Colman Smith. And - no surprise given that the authors are veteran tarot teachers and leaders in the worldwide tarot community - it's a pretty good introduction to reading tarot, with generous helpings of starter keywords and spreads. ("The Kabbalah of the Minors" section is an unexpected and particularly helpful foray into the esoteric side of things.)
Katz and Goodwin write accessibly about the deck's publication history and reception, and they provide a great many thought-provoking images both from the period and from their own site visits. The bios of Smith and Waite are as complete as they could make them, with fairly well fleshed-out timelines (I'd have liked a triple, parallel timeline showing the bio material side by side along with significant developments in history and the arts, but that's a personal thing.)
'Secrets' shouldn't be mistaken for a scholarly work exactly. It's a speculative, imaginative, popular history, written for the trade. So anyone who's used to scholarly biography will look in vain for the kind of paper trail they're accustomed to seeing. Personally, this doesn't trouble me as greatly as it might; tarot being an interpretive business, after all. The authors make intuitive leaps, but they're honest about it when they do. I enjoyed the thorough treatment of symbolism in the majors; and although much more could be said about the subject, symbols belong to everybody and there is no wrong or right sort of discussion one can have about them.
My biggest problem - and it is a substantial one - is with the section on the Waite-Smith minors. Whereas the commentary on the majors is original material, the treatment of each minor card begins with a reprint of Waite's text from 'The Pictorial Key to the Tarot' - and that reprint is unattributed (or if it is attributed, it's very easy to miss). You wouldn't know that you're reading Waite unless you were already familiar with the 'Pictorial Key'. This is exacerbated by the fact that the authors then add to the material without any indication that we've switched voices. Is the 'Pictorial Key' out of copyright? Yes. Does that make it OK not to be clear about the authorship? No. This mystifies me, as I know the authors to be meticulous and aboveboard in their dealings with publishers generally.
As for the content of the minors section, it's uneven. Some cards, like the 9 of Pentacles, get the royal treatment - period imagery, details of persons and places, iconographic interpretation; others, like the 3 of Swords, get only Waite's text - a few lines from the 'Pictorial Key'. I can respect a decision not to extrapolate from scant evidence, but it makes the book feel unfinished and less usable as a basic tarot text (for those who want to use it that way). So much more could have gone into each minor - the Golden Dawn correspondences, Katz's and Goodwin's own read of the symbolism...it feels as if the book simply ran out of time. Indeed, the material presented on the accompanying website (www.waitesmithtarot.com) is often richer than what you find on the corresponding page in the book. And anyone who stumbled on the web material could well be forgiven for thinking the entire book contained material of equal depth.
I admire the authors - not only for their tireless pursuit of the art but for their tireless efforts to create an atmosphere of tolerance and respect in the tarot community - and, I confess, I would have found it much easier to write a purely positive review of the book. Despite my very real objections (and the lack of an index! - a personal peeve) I recognize 'Secrets' to be one-of-a-kind, full of spirit, and substantial in its way. The book represents an enormous amount of work, done merely for the love of it; and for that alone it deserves a profound salute. Yet it could have been even better.
The world of tarot publishing is erratic through no fault of its own, mainstream publishing and the academy having given the divinatory arts a pretty wide berth. This is a pity, because findings like these really could greatly enrich the wider world's conversation about art and literary history (to say nothing of the Western mystical tradition) were they less marginalized. And tarot publications themselves would benefit from enjoying the most rigorous process of refinement the industry has to offer. For now, those of us who love tarot must simply get along as best we can, offering whatever we have to offer in whatever form we do - supporting each other with both the kind of encouragement that sounds like praise, and, once in a while, the other kind.
A couple of examples:
On page 40 they write “Pamela had both her own personal experience and knowledge of the theatre and also through Irving, Gillette, Terry, and…” Terry we know from earlier in the chapter, but Irving and Gillette? I knew who Gillette was only because of the time period in question and because Gillette Castle is not far from where I grew up. Not until page 50 do they introduce Gillette and explain who he was and his relationship to Smith. Irving is also finally introduced on the same page.
On page 126 they write “Whilst it is apparent that the famous tomb in the church served as a model for the 6 of Swords…” It’s pretty clear they meant the 4 of Swords, since on page 106 they write “The local church of St. Thomas the Martyr contains a famous tomb underneath a stained glass window, the model for the 4 of Swords.” Furthermore, there is a picture of the actual tomb on page 310 in the section about the 4 of Swords (the six is the boat being poled away from the viewer).
While the book is not an academic tome, the scholar in me cringes at Katz’s and Goodwin’s inconsistent methods of documenting their sources–something that is important even if it isn’t meant to be a formal, academic study of the deck and its creators. In some places they use end notes and in others parentheticals. In at least one place there’s no citation at all! On pages 93-95 are two of Crowley’s reviews of the deck. The first is clearly attributed, but the second is not, even though they state that these are from reviews (plural) not from a single review. In the sections that describe the cards there is no documentation as to which pieces come from Waite’s work, both published and unpublished. They do say on page 113 “Where quotes are given in this chapter without further reference, they are from their appropriate card descriptions in *The Pictorial Key to the Tarot*. Waite’s description is usually given as the first paragraph underneath the card image…” Usually does not equal always, and that makes it difficult for the average reader to sort through whose words are whose.
In terms of layout there are numerous places with unnecessary white space or where pictures and diagrams are not anywhere near the text that refers to them. In some places it’s more of a difficulty than others. In Chapter Seven, “The Kabbalah of the Minors” they introduce the Tree of Life on page 321 with two tables of correspondences on page 322. Yet the diagram of the tree is on page 339 in the middle of the section on the Tree of Cups.
Moving on to some of the annoyances.
The lack of an index makes it difficult to find anything, which significantly reduces the book’s usefulness as a reference.
In their Foreword Katz and Goodwin write, “We refer to Pamela Colman Smith throughout as Pamela, for the sake of abbreviation, however, we could not bring ourselves to refer to A.E. Waite as “‘Arthur,’ so adopted the surname usage of Waite.” Yet they do refer to him as Arthur a couple of times. Whatever they thought, it has an unintended consequence of appearing to treat Smith with less respect than Waite.
Although they have their reasons for putting a “How to Read the Tarot” chapter at the beginning of the book, it feels out of place when the book is supposed to be ABOUT the Waite-Smith deck. That they “think Pamela painted the cards based on a similar set of keywords and concepts…” (p. 11) is important to what they’re trying to accomplish, it seems to me that all the material about reading the cards should be in the chapters about reading in the latter portion of the book.
All sloppiness and annoyances aside, a lot of what Katz and Goodwin have to say, in spite of the book’s subtitle (“The True Story of the World’s Most Popular Tarot”) and especially where Smith’s work on the deck is concerned, is pure conjecture. That doesn’t necessarily detract from what they’re attempting to do. Their theoretical framework does provide a fresh lens for looking at the Waite-Smith deck. But it’s still theory.
One of my issues with this book is the way that a lot of opinions are presented as absolute facts. Take, for instance, the hand gesture of the guy in the Ten of Swords. This book says it's the Papal blessing gesture, never addressing the common idea that it's a mudra, probably Prithvi (though some say Surya). Certainly Western occultism was experiencing a lot of Eastern influence at the time, and with the pinkie finger bent, but not tucked in, it's ambiguous. *subtracts a star*
There's some inconsistent logic, too. They speculate that Pamela's career may have suffered because of her irreverent humor, but when they mention Crowley's satirical jabs at Waite, you get the feeling that they expect us to be outraged, since his career was apparently unharmed by this. *subtracts another star*
The reading "how-to" parts are pure pop-mystical dribble. If you're new to this and you want to learn to do RWS readings (without having to join a group, do a paid workshop, buy a course, etc. and end up even more confused), I'd recommend Sasha Fenton, Eden Gray, Leo Louis Martello, Waite himself - there's plenty out there. *subtracts a third star*
It does get one star for the factoids, and one for the pictures. Just read it with the caveat that the parts that spark your interest merit further research. This book is far from the final word.