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.

Found this book many years ago at a used book store in NYC. A great guide to the world of Tarot. Fascinating and interesting if you want to learn about Tarot or brush up your knowledge. A good read for anyone interested in the magical world of Tarot. ( )

Found this to be much like Eden Grey's other book 'Tarot Revealed', both are useful in building up a general knowledge of 'classical' tarot definitions, especially when using the 'Rider Waite Deck' featured.

However this can become limiting if taken too literally. I prefer to take these kinds of definitions with a pinch of salt, relying more on a mixture of intuition, synchronicity, and personal symbolism to guide my readings. A good introduction to this other non-dogmatic way of working with the Tarot, [along with other methods of divination] can be found in 'Positive Magic' by Marion Weinstein. ( )

This is one of several books I read back when I was learning to read tarot. I don't remember many of the specifics, but I do think of it as being a good book. ( )