• SUMMARY and CONCLUSION •
If you've made it this far, you've be exposed to a lot of ideas! And these are only the most important ideas to be found within the form of our model... and non-model. Before you move on, let’s review some of the major milestones covered so far.
Summary of Devices
So far we have created a model, a number line, and many relatable patterns. We began with a series of self-imposed laws:
The law of paradox = 0
The law of the infinite = 1
The law of opposites = 2
The law of sequence = 3
The law of coagulation, and = 4
The law of the finite = 5
With the resulting model, we covered concepts like:
Chaos and order
Figure/Ground
Chicken and egg
Violation and restoration
Transcendence
Recursion
A Mobius twist
Pretzel logic
Extremes and in-betweens,
And In spherical form, coagulation was compared to:
Salmon
A fountain
Crack of the bat
A clock spring
Particle/wave
Earth drying
Bed sheet wrinkling, and
The model itself was compared to:
Essence of Being
Philosopher’s Stone
Rosetta Stone
Rock in Cloud, and
Nut in Shell
With the help of the subsequent number line we covered concepts like:
Endless Ascent
Peristalsis
Critical Mass
Genetic Integrity
Scaling
Displacement
The Mobius Spiral
Wholistic vs. Analytical
Body and Spirit
Reciprocity
As a one dimensional representation, the number line was compared to:
An endless film loop
Railroad cars
Piano Octave
Opposites coming together, and
In comparing non-model to model, and equidistant numbers to their opposites, yin and yang differences were compared to:
Yin - Yang
Non-model - Model
R-Brain - L-Brain
Wholistic - Analytical
Perpetual - Transient
Chaos - Order
Amorphous - Crystalline
Eternal spirit - Transient body
Unconscious - Conscious
Intangible - Tangible
Passive - Active
Female - Male
Dormant - Moving
Receptive - Doing
Blended - Segmented
Symmetrical - Broken symmetry
Infinite - Finite
Non-manifest - Manifest
Negative charge - Positive charge
Modulation - Oscillation
Chords - Scales
By creating, observing and then dissecting our own logic, we have built a network of inter-connected ideas that will provide supreme clarity to our analysis of tarot cards. By developing a deck design based on these patterns, we will provide a system that transcends personal opinion. Because of this universally inspired design, this deck will also provide the potential for the symbolic representation of as full and complete a vocabulary as possible, allowing for the utmost detail in subsequent readings.
This is all I have so far. Originally I had written much more, about how to use these ideas to construct a deck. Some of those ideas are in the "More Ideas on Tarot" section of this site. I will add more as time permits. I may assemble those ideas into another book some day, or I may just add them individually. This is all I have the energy for right now. If you have found this study interesting at all, encouragement to continue would be appreciated. If you think this whole study was stupid and ridiculous, a big waste of time, and that I just don't get it, discouragement would be equally welcome.
Conclusion
Here is one last thought. People who have spent some time studying the known history of tarot may find this thought a bit ridiculous, but I believe it is still worth mentioning. I believe, and have proposed, that the patterns and ideas that I have presented in this study are basic, fundamental, primordial, archetypal and universal. Because of this, I have felt like more of an archeologist than an inventor. Which leads me to this one last thought...
What if all these supposedly universal patterns and ideas were well known and understood, way back when the first tarot deck ever made was being designed? What if the earliest surviving decks that we have, are an already corrupted version of an earlier design that was based on these basic, fundamental, primordial, archetypal, universal patterns and ideas? What if we could see that original design, what do you think it would look like?
All of the decks that I have drawn (and might draw in the future) are all based on the patterns and ideas presented in this study - and nothing but that. There are numerous essays on this web site where I point out interesting similarities between my decks (based on ideas presented here) and traditional tarot decks of the past (based on history, mystery and who-knows-what; a syncretic amalgam of disparate influences). I think the number of similarities is amazing. What does that mean... that these patterns are inescapable, even across centuries of time?
Whether dressed up as allegorical stories in a sacred religious text, or hidden in the characters and events of mythology, these patterns are the same. Archetypal Influence is not archetypal because of the frequency of occurrence. Archetypal influences are archetypal because of how well they describe these universal patterns. It just happens that the allegorical stories and mythological characters that accomplish that task the best, are the ones that get repeated the most throughout all cultures, and across all spans of time, and are then the most easily recognizable.
This study has taken a decidedly reductionist approach, choosing to focus more on the basic patterns and fundamental logic, and not the romantic mythologies of cultures that express them. But, what if now... you were to try and clothe these basic patterns by using an existing tarot deck from the past, do you think it would be easy or difficult? This study is not really that interested in assimilating other systems, or in having it assimilated into other systems. But what if we did? Would it be easy or difficult to illustrate the ideas presented here with images from an early deck? There are a couple of essays on this site that approach this idea. Let me know what you think. After that... ask yourself... how YOU would illustrate the ideas of this study. If you were to draw a deck of cards to illustrate the ideas you've been exposed to in this study, do you think it would come out looking anything like a traditional tarot deck? If it does, what does that say about the fundamental, archetypal potential of these patterns?
|
