There is a paradox at the heart of this book. Jodorowsky acknowledges that we are entirely ignorant of the origins and purpose of the Tarot. Yet he is certain that it is a “sacred work”, “by essence perfect” that has been “crafted with great precision.”
The only way to understand it, he says, is to see it as a whole. But in order to do that you first have to reconstruct it, symbol by symbol, from flawed remnants that have filtered down to us over the centuries.
The big problem with this approach is distinguishing what is important from what is irrelevant. How can you see it as a whole when the pieces are so broken? There is no single reliable source. There is not even a single Marseille Tarot.
He criticizes Paul Marteau for basing his Marseille Tarot on a copy of a copy and then altering it “as this made it possible for him to commercialize the deck and receive royalties from it as the author.” He then goes on to explain how he and Philippe Camoin created a new and different Marseille Tarot by changing many more of the symbols “into absolutely different ones”, before making the new deck available for purchase through Camoin’s website.
There is another paradox inherent in Jodorowsky’s attempt to make sense of this new creation of theirs. He discarded the teaching of all the past commentators on the Tarot. He says he will trust only the Tarot itself. But, as an obsessive collector of over 1,000 Tarots, he can’t resist the lure of all sorts of outside influences as he seeks to justify his own particular vision.
It’s a profoundly fascinating account of how a creative intellectual can arrive at what he sincerely believes to be the true meaning of the Tarot, while following exactly the same questionable eclectic method as everybody else, blending myths, mysticism and symbols from many different cultures and fusing them with his own psychic landscapes to create what is simultaneously a mirror of his soul and a key to the structure of the universe.
To be fair, Jodorowsky acknowledges that there is no impartial tarologist and that there is no true or secret meaning of any one card. But he does believe that there is a true and false way of working with the Tarot and that this must begin with an accurate picture of its whole: “To understand these myriad symbols, one needs to have seen the final symbol they all form together: a mandala.”
This is his cue to bring in the teachings of Carl Gustav Jung and to delve into the history of myths and symbols before launching himself on a protracted period of analysis, introspection and therapy, using Tarot cards as both a springboard and a safety net.
Combined with the internal processes is an intense scrutiny of what is actually on the cards. As co-author Marianne Costa puts it, “… the Tarot constitutes first and foremost an apprenticeship in seeing.”
That can be a problem if you want to follow their analysis and you don’t have their deck. I have four Marseille decks and none of them match the colours or symbols that Jodorowsky and Camoin have put there. There are a lot of similarities but that is not quite good enough because of the importance Jodorowsky attaches to even the smallest detail.
So, depending on what you want to get from this book, you can either buy Jodorowsky’s deck or take much of what he says with a pinch of salt. He threw away the Waite Tarot that one of his flesh and blood teachers had given him because Andre Bretton told him that its symbols are “lamentably obvious.” This is just snobbery. He is forever questing and, like every mystical elitist, he wants the answers to be hard to find.
In seeking to “charge” the Tarot, he has committed the same sins as everyone else. “Each new deck of cards contains the subjectivity of its authors, their vision of the world, their moral prejudices, their limited level of awareness...”
He is unfair to the Waite deck, which he was once “obsessed with”, accusing it of “negativity and bad taste.” The proofs he gives of this are the reversed meanings of a handful of cards. But he even remembers one of them wrong, describing five beggars frozen to the bone where Waite’s own description is more ambivalent: “two mendicants in a snow-storm pass a lighted casement.” This is the Five of Pentacles, which is open to negative or positive interpretation, and references other images in the same deck in ways just as complex and fascinating as Jodorowsky’s cross-references in the Marseille deck, a deck which he also found “hostile” initially.
On reading this book it is clear that whatever system, whatever oracle or occult tradition you choose, if you spend as much time with it as Jodorowsky has spent with the Marseille deck, its images, resonances and correspondences will become very personal to you, fused with your way of looking at the world.
In the end, the authors have tried to reject negativity and mundanity, giving each card “the most sublime definition possible.” In that sense this book mystifies the Tarot. In another sense, like Le Bateleur, it arrives at the truth through illusion, and, in Marianne Costa’s words is “faithful to the extreme plasticity of the Tarot, which is light and profound, linear and multidimensional, gamelike and complex. It refuses to be reduced to any one of the countless possibilities. It opens.”