Tarot and Racism

Traditional tarot decks tends to have white European characters depicted on their cards. Only recently have decks appeared which attempt to depict scenes with a more diverse set of personages. This is a welcome trend since we live in a diverse society.

Against this backdrop I was quite surprised to come across a review of my book Tarot Plain and Simple (Llewellyn, 1996), which suggested that it had a racist bias. The review is reproduced below:

Raina 1.0 out of 5 stars Prejudiced Language From The Get Go. Reviewed in the United States on December 29, 2019
Verified Purchase “When the author is trying to ‘make associations’ with the cards to people in the beginning, he connects dark skin and dark hair in a way that is stereotypical and alludes to those features as negative and haunting. However he attributes white skin to “light” and “pureness”. I can’t remember exactly what he said, but it was enough for me to close this book and return it. This is such a problem with new age folks! Biddy Tarot’s book is a lot better, and although she isn’t perfect, she regularly has Black readers on her Youtube Channel and featured on her Instagram.”

My first thought upon reading Raina’s review was that he or she must have confused another book with mine. Nowhere in my text do I state that dark skin and dark hair are “negative and haunting.” In fact, the only mention of dark skin and dark hair occurs in the associations to the suit of Coins or Pentacles, which some tarot texts use to describe a person with dark hair or a dark complexion. No value judgements are made or implied. It simply has to do with physical description. The same holds true for light skin, which some readers feel is associated with the suit of Wands or Swords. It is a matter of physical description without any implied or stated value judgment. There is a mention in the book that some tarot artists use the color black to imply danger or foreboding, as in “black magic” and fear of the dark, but this is intended as a comment on artistic style and not as a racist derision.

What disturbed me was that Raina was making a fairly serious accusation of racism without evidence and without quoting verbatim comments that he or she felt had a racist tone. Raina even states “I can’t remember exactly what he [the author] said” and then adds a stereotypical bias of his or her own, “this is such a problem with new age folks!” It seems that Raina either didn’t read my book or didn’t understand what I had written, and also had an axe to grind about “new age folks” and therefore saw racism everywhere when in reality none existed.

I don’t know why amazon.com allows such unsubstantiated and libelous attacks to be published in its reviews. The book has been in print for the past 25 years, and there has never been a review which suggested it had a racist tone. If Raina had quoted verbatim passages to substantiate the accusations of racism, that would be another story and the review would be worthy of publication. But to attack an author without evidence or because the reviewer misread or did not understand the text should not be allowed. Because I regarded Raina’s review as libelous, I clicked the “Report Abuse” icon to let amazon.com know my opinion.