Why "78 Degrees of Wisdom" by Rachel Pollack is NOT a book I recommend.

แชร์
ฝัง
  • เผยแพร่เมื่อ 26 ธ.ค. 2024

ความคิดเห็น •

  • @ElenaLabra-rh9oo
    @ElenaLabra-rh9oo ปีที่แล้ว +33

    Agreed. I am a newbie on tarot and because this book was recommended so much I bought it and found it so confusing and heavy that I lost interest. Since then I have found a much user friendly tarot books which go directly into meanings and symbols. Thank you for not making me look dumb.

    • @teatarot4557
      @teatarot4557  ปีที่แล้ว +1

      You're welcome. Glad you found some good books🙂

    • @ElenaLabra-rh9oo
      @ElenaLabra-rh9oo ปีที่แล้ว

      @@teatarot4557 Are there any good books you recommend? I would appreciate your suggestions. Thank you.

    • @teatarot4557
      @teatarot4557  ปีที่แล้ว

      @@ElenaLabra-rh9oo Yes, if you check out the text underneath this video there is a link to my video "Six and a half best tarot books". Enjoy🙂

    • @ElenaLabra-rh9oo
      @ElenaLabra-rh9oo ปีที่แล้ว

      @@teatarot4557 Thank you. I will definitely check them if I can find them.

    • @jade7163
      @jade7163 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      Then you're not interested in going deep with Tarot. And that's fine. But the book takes the inherently deep symbolism and meaning of Tarot itself to a fuller extent. It's a superior book on the subject for that reason.

  • @jengoh3826
    @jengoh3826 ปีที่แล้ว +19

    This is not just a good review, its also comedic. I don't know why its funny, but I kept laughing throughout this video. In fact, I watched this review four times already. Am I the only person who thinks this excellent review was delivered in the most humorous manner?

  • @jade7163
    @jade7163 ปีที่แล้ว +18

    What's interesting is that anyone who's actually read this book will understand that, while she goes deep with an inherently deep subject (why are you drawn to Tarot if all you want is simple pictures?), what makes this book the icon it rightly is is her ability to not only make the subject accessible and down to earth, fitting any variety of personal needs and uses, but she herself has a very playful and open, light approach to the topic. She is the least pretentious person with it. You'll see this in her other tarot book as well, A Walk Through the Forest of Souls, where she states plainly that it is just as necessary to be flexible, playful, and ever-changing with our understanding of Tarot. A lot of what I'm seeing here is people almost regarding her and her work as buzz kills for daring to take this subject as the deep exploration it is. Maybe a lot of you need to really examine why you're even drawn to Tarot in the first place.

    • @teatarot4557
      @teatarot4557  ปีที่แล้ว +6

      Thank you for your two interesting comments. Pollack’s book raises fundamental questions about tarot, and so I’m not at all surprised that some people strongly disagree with my take on it. With regard to going deep into tarot, let me put it like this. It does seem that Decker and Dummett’s work (A History of the Occult Tarot, 2013) has greatly discredited the Golden Dawn’s legacy - the whole project of claiming that tarot is inherently related to other esoteric disciplines such as Kabbalah and astrology. We can ignore their research or we can regretfully accept it. Pollack’s book is all about the RWS, and the RWS came out of the Golden Dawn. One could invest time trying to follow her labyrinthine demonstrations of how it all magically fits together - how the major arcana is divided up into seven groups of three cards for example, and what this might signify - or one could move on to a more modern approach, which certainly some leading tarotists, such as Marcus Katz, seem to have done. The reason I made this video is that I feel Pollack’s position is outdated, and that a modern, perhaps young reader would do better to read more contemporary authors. Ironically, I suspect that Pollack was less forward-looking in her thinking than Pamela Colman-Smith, who I recognise as the real founder of modern tarot-reading. But that’s perhaps another story.

    • @sylmaron5859
      @sylmaron5859 ปีที่แล้ว +4

      I agree. It's still the first book I would recommend. I learned so much from it.

  • @kateatkinson624
    @kateatkinson624 ปีที่แล้ว +7

    Well said. I started the book but didn’t get far, and cant see myself ‘trying’ to finish it.🤷🏻‍♀️

  • @carolynbm
    @carolynbm ปีที่แล้ว +11

    Yes, brain frying! Agree with everything you discussed. Btw I got the Sheridan Douglas tarot after you shared it in one of your videos. I had never heard of this tarot before and I ❤ love the colors and art style. Great video 😊

  • @alexmartin8171
    @alexmartin8171 ปีที่แล้ว +12

    For me, it is the best book on Tarot I have ever read.

  • @vandinomyte
    @vandinomyte ปีที่แล้ว +2

    "Oh, there's the moon. I'm going to experience some hallucinations today!" had me cackling. Thank you for reinforcing that tarot should be simple and straightforward in our day to day lives. I lost my copy of 78 Degrees, stolen in a cross country move. Can't say I'll be replacing it after feeling so frustrated and lost with its approach to tarot readings. Will be checking out your other reviews for something more practical.

  • @ChibbiYumi
    @ChibbiYumi ปีที่แล้ว +4

    I had this book on my wish list for a long time but hadn’t purchased it. It wasn’t until recently that I had seen some negative reviews about it. I read the one star review on Amazon about it, that was enough to take this book off my list.

  • @terriw6116
    @terriw6116 ปีที่แล้ว +5

    The numerology is what turned me off because it felt forced, like you can do whatever to a number to make it fit what you want.
    I think this is definitely an interesting book, but the issue comes in with the ridiculous belief that it's a factual interpretation, rather than just one person's perspective. Especially the way it's thrown at beginners lol

    • @teatarot4557
      @teatarot4557  ปีที่แล้ว +1

      I agree. It could put a beginner off.

  • @SunSpiritManifestation1111
    @SunSpiritManifestation1111 4 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Thank you! You have saved me time and energy reading this book haha and I absolutely agree with you on being intuitive and free-minded when reading tarot, yea each card has a short definition which to me serves more as a loose boundary of potential interpretation, but there are readers who does give very accurate readings just by looking at the images without even knowing the definitions in the guidebooks. Personally I think reading tarot is a heavily creative process, otherwise all readers will give the exact readings according to a tightly disciplined system that's not allowing any imagination or free flow channelling.

    • @teatarot4557
      @teatarot4557  4 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      @@SunSpiritManifestation1111 I agree, tarot is a very open thing and there are no rights and wrongs.

  • @leecevictoria481
    @leecevictoria481 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    Yeah, it sat on my shelf for years and years after many failed attempts to understand it. 😢

  • @januspatermagnus
    @januspatermagnus ปีที่แล้ว +10

    I certainly have my disagreements with Rachel Pollack, but if you read RWS decks, I honestly don't see a better introduction. There are bigger books (like Holistic Tarot or T. Susan Chang's gigantic book, I forgot the name) but they don't contain more information than 78 Degrees of Wisdom, just more verbiage. Everything you dislike about that book is basically a feature of the Golden Dawn system that produced the Waite-Smith deck. Your critique of GD system of correspondences is valid and I certainly agree with it but ultimately it's not relevant since they all knew that already, hence the word "correspondence" and not "representation" or "equivalence", etc. I don't like esoteric tarot so I read pip decks and Marseille, but I think it's reductive to take a deck so rich with esoteric symbolism and then ignore all of it it. Does it take effort to learn? Sure. But so what? At the same time, judging by your channel, you don't really care about fortunetelling or esoterica but more of a self-help pop-psychology kind of tarot, so this book just seems... inappropriate for your reading style. It doesn't make it bad, just not for you.

    • @teatarot4557
      @teatarot4557  ปีที่แล้ว +6

      Thank you for your thoughtful comment. Well I am interested in fortune-telling, if by that you mean divination, and I am certainly interested in esoterica.
      I am not the greatest expert on the Golden Dawn, but as far as I can tell it was not a club that spoke with one voice. Furthermore it appears that A E Waite and Pamela Smith didn’t entirely speak with one voice either. So I think there is a lot of grey area around the RWS. What I find exasperating about Pollack’s book is that she treats it as a perfect system and a kind of gospel.
      As for self-help, I don’t particularly like the word, but it’s a concept that developed since Golden Dawn days, and it does express something about the modern mind - the idea that we are not “ignorant”, and that we can be our own teachers. And I do subscribe to that. I like the RWS and I enjoy its esoteric symbolism, but I also take a view. I think that as individuals we can use the bits of the esoterica that we like but we don’t have to take it all on board and attempt to digest it.

  • @RupertRochester
    @RupertRochester ปีที่แล้ว +2

    I've tried to read this book and found the same difficulties.

  • @bryangraham7926
    @bryangraham7926 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    i really would like to hear your views on the sola busca tarot

    • @teatarot4557
      @teatarot4557  ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Ah - that's an interesting subject! I would need to do a bit of research first🙂

  • @nourishthenewyou3251
    @nourishthenewyou3251 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    It is definitely not a great book to assist with learning. I made that mistake by buying it myself after hearing it was like the tarot Bible of all time. I read about 40 pages and found it way too deep and confusing. I turned to other books instead.
    I bought my first tarot book by Alfred Douglas in the 1970s as a young teen. That’s infinitely better.
    I actually reread Pollack’s book last year and was surprised that I finished it. I have to agree with pretty much everything you point out. And yes those ‘problems’ I found a tad tiresome and irritating.
    Great video 💫

    • @teatarot4557
      @teatarot4557  ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Thanks! I learnt with the Alfred Douglas book too. It#s an easier read, isn't it?

  • @lenefredriksen
    @lenefredriksen 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

    If I get through this book it is thanks to you and me feeling like ive gotten my frustrations out through you😂 The book is so «lofty», I find that the little pieces of wisdom that actually brings me deeper into each card is so diluted in «stuff». It is quite an effort to filter it out😵‍💫 thank you!

    • @teatarot4557
      @teatarot4557  2 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Lofty - exactly!

  • @Magikblooms
    @Magikblooms ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Oh my god. Well, being the adventurous Gemini I am, I did read Rachel’s book and loved it, but, ignored your message to skip this video😂 and well, my mind is completely blown here.. this has been super enlightening, and honestly freeing in many ways. Oh my, have I got some soaking up of the info I just received here, to do!🙏 Thank you for this share, and for your honest insight!!

    • @teatarot4557
      @teatarot4557  ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Thanks for being adventurous! 🙂

    • @Magikblooms
      @Magikblooms ปีที่แล้ว

      Absolutely! Thank you for guiding us on this journey here.. I keep an open mind, and very much appreciate this deeper look and asking of very, important questions!

  • @jengoh3826
    @jengoh3826 ปีที่แล้ว +4

    I completely agree with you. I have tried to learn tarot quite a number of times from these books that you reviewed. These books really do a big disservice to aspiring tarot newbies. The problems with them is that they are so out there with their esoteric ideas. When I just want to know if she loves me, don’t pull a star card and begin telling me about the Kabbalah. I need tarot lessons that are more down to earth. These books are anything but.

    • @laurabondurant5096
      @laurabondurant5096 11 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Check out Tom Benjamin & his on earth series if you haven’t already.

    • @piquedametarot
      @piquedametarot หลายเดือนก่อน

      Also Vincent Pitisci here on youtube and/or his books.

  • @hannahberg3251
    @hannahberg3251 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Where were all these "classic" books when I was learning tarot? In 1983, I spent months tracking down a tarot deck and for the next five years, the only tarot book I could find was AE Waite's Pictorial Key! I agree with your review of 78 Degrees. When I encountered it twenty years later, I was unimpressed by it and Forest of Souls, but I really MUST find one of Huson's books.

  • @indrinita
    @indrinita ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Keeping it real! I do think it doesn't do anything to demystify tarot and make it accessible, but I kind of think Pollack has a certain snobby pretentiousness about tarot that she at least unconsciously wants to gatekeep it. I nonetheless do find some value in it, however it absolutely can't be used as a standalone guide to tarot. I tend to prefer to recommend Juliet Sharman-Burke's "The Complete Book of Tarot" to beginners. It's a pity it can be so hard to find these days.

    • @teatarot4557
      @teatarot4557  ปีที่แล้ว

      Thanks for the tip! I shall have a look at that one. And yes, I think Pollack is a bit of a gatekeeper. Good word! 🙂

  • @danimano183
    @danimano183 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

    You're amazing! Thank for the insights.

  • @Quentin-z6b
    @Quentin-z6b 11 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Thanks for your honest review, I agree we need a more positive take on ancient wisdom

  • @Nicole-zr1me
    @Nicole-zr1me 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Glad I watched this. I’m new to tarot. I love it because it is a way to connect to spirituality on your own, and in your own way as you described. I have noticed that there are decks and books who do like to push beliefs on others, and I don’t like it. Excellent video.

    • @teatarot4557
      @teatarot4557  5 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@Nicole-zr1me Glad it was helpful. Good luck with your tarot „journey“!

  • @darkfaetarot
    @darkfaetarot ปีที่แล้ว +1

    I would love to do a VR hahahahah. I abandoned the book at Strength(?)... Interesting thoughts. Thank you

    • @teatarot4557
      @teatarot4557  ปีที่แล้ว

      I'd love to see your VR:-) x

  • @isabel-bluesapphire
    @isabel-bluesapphire ปีที่แล้ว +1

    This was really useful. I bought the book when it was on offer and have not read it in the last 2/3 years and consider myself a beginner. I can't get into it atall as I want something simple and perhaps something I can use like a workbook. Do you have any other recommendations instead?

    • @teatarot4557
      @teatarot4557  ปีที่แล้ว

      Yes, I have this: th-cam.com/video/WFbKLqEz_Qs/w-d-xo.html

  • @sylviegzlsprz
    @sylviegzlsprz ปีที่แล้ว +5

    Not made for everyone for sure, especially if you are not willing to make the effort and expect everything simplified and ready to swallow.

  • @blondefire79
    @blondefire79 ปีที่แล้ว +8

    I'm not a fan of Pollack's books. I never understood the cult-like following.

  • @NYCHFAN
    @NYCHFAN ปีที่แล้ว +4

    I haven't read this book, but from what you say here, I agree. Tarot originally was a deck of playing cards from Europe. My mother had cards read from regular playing cards when she was young in Spain. I love rws as the pictures help me remember the meanings, but I love the simplicity of pip decks, too. No reason to make tarot so complicated. My favorite rws guide book is Ultimate Guide to the Rider Waite Tarot by Johannes Fiebig & Evelyn Burger. I can keep my reading as basic or as layered and deep as I want with that book. I also find knowing number & suit meanings to interpret lets my intuition really make the meanings come alive. The quotes from the book you read reveal a person who definitely went through the 1960's 70's. 😊
    I love your review of this book - truthful & humorous. 😊

  • @hear-and-know
    @hear-and-know 8 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    Good points, I felt many of these in another book of hers (Haindl Tarot, the major arcana - still haven't read the second). I haven't read 78 degrees.
    She leaks off a lot of her worldview into the interpretations I think. A lot of talk about phallic power being invasive, dominating (in a bad, oppressive sense) etc.
    Before I read her book on the Haindl tarot, I saw the Emperor card (of the haindl deck) and only positive attributes came to mind: vulnerability (he is naked), discipline, power, Will, determination, being supported by nature (he is backed by Yggdrasil). After I read her descriptions about the emperor, that image got tainted a bit. Now, where there was just "confidence", I see "arrogance". Of course, the elements have their counterparts, an excess of fire can easily get out of control and burn indiscriminately, but I digress.
    I don't know the author enough to comment, but I wonder if she had problems with masculinity or masculine energy. A lot of woman-praising in the book, a lot of problematizing anything reminiscent of masculine energy. I'm halfway through the Haindl tarot book, and I still haven't read one negative point about feminine energy (like excess passivity, empathy leading to guillibility, inaction, entitled waiting, vampirism, lunacy, moody swings etc.)

    • @teatarot4557
      @teatarot4557  8 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

      I didn't know this when I made my video, but Pollack was a trans woman, much loved and respected for having lived a pioneering life and making her choices when the world was less trans friendly. I guess this might shed some light on the book, which I think occupies an extremely anti-male position. Beneath the surface it is angry and political. I get messages from people saying it put them off tarot for years.

  • @lavinahouchen9317
    @lavinahouchen9317 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    You're not wrong.

  • @janegoodall2520
    @janegoodall2520 15 วันที่ผ่านมา

    Some useful perspectives here, and the tone of the delivery is convincing, but the overall effect is a hatchet job. There are very few works I think warrant a hatchet job, in any field, and this certainly isn't one of them.

    • @janegoodall2520
      @janegoodall2520 15 วันที่ผ่านมา

      ps. Regarding the last page of the book, I'm with her.

    • @teatarot4557
      @teatarot4557  14 วันที่ผ่านมา +1

      @@janegoodall2520 Thank you for your feedback. When I started my channel I worked on the principle that if I didn’t have something positive to say I wouldn’t say anything, and I tried to only review decks and books that I liked. But in the case of this book I felt someone had to point out the negativity of the book itself. It has achieved a position of dominance in the field, but unfortunately puts many people off tarot with its endless complications and obfuscations. My channel has 2k subscribers, so compared to the might of, for example, Waterstones Books, I feel that I am far from being a hatchet.

    • @janegoodall2520
      @janegoodall2520 14 วันที่ผ่านมา

      @@teatarot4557 Yes, I get this. I've had much frustration with how guru status is accorded to certain people in certain areas of knowledge and gets reinforced in a feedback loop without anyone questioning it. The impulse to comment was partly from a conversation with a woman hugely knowledgable about tarot (she sells rare packs) who recommended Pollack. I have a long standing interest in Tarot but very much as an outsider and found Pollack engaging and a writer who inspires trust - not easy in this area.

    • @teatarot4557
      @teatarot4557  14 วันที่ผ่านมา

      @ Yes, I agree, engaging writers are rare.

  • @JPeeee
    @JPeeee ปีที่แล้ว

    Ok.. So I opened the book, I bought it a couple of months ago, and theres really a lot of the words "problems" and "problem" written on text, I mean, a lot of times. Even in the meaning of positive cards. 🤔

    • @teatarot4557
      @teatarot4557  ปีที่แล้ว

      That's right. I think it's from reading stuff like Foucault! Turning things not problems is seen as a virtue.

  • @tarotsimbolosdesanacion4589
    @tarotsimbolosdesanacion4589 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Actually the first time i red that book I was not using and did not know that tarot reversals were used at all. I was happy with my upright reading. Doing super well. Untill I read that book and started integrating reversed cards which brought at that time more confussion than any other thing. So instead of being a blessing for me it was a real curse. Now 20 years later I use both systems when ever I like. But at that time the book did not really helped me at all. Regards from chile south america.

    • @teatarot4557
      @teatarot4557  6 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Thanks for your sharing. Super-interesting. Hi from Berlin!

  • @Jo_-_-t.a
    @Jo_-_-t.a ปีที่แล้ว +4

    Its a great discussion piece once you have developed your own relationship with Tarot.
    And if you want to get esoteric with your tarot, there are other less dry books on it.
    The book is so 'this is Tarot' . When it is just an approach. Lol.
    Each of the archetypes are just that. Archetypes. Ffs.
    This book helped to cement my dislike of Pixie's art for a very long time. Bleh.
    "Up a gum tree" lol.

  • @dayofthejackyl
    @dayofthejackyl ปีที่แล้ว

    what is the term you use at about 8:45? "this idea that these three rows of seven is going to bring us enlightenment is slightly..." upper country?

  • @Sberry1111
    @Sberry1111 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

    I really liked this book, even when I was a new tarot reader.. The reason was that it really went into the base esoteric meanings behind the cards and it helped me come to a deeper understanding of the values behind some of the cards. As a tarot reader I find the best value in the cards is having those core realizations and becoming more self-aware is a key purpose of these cards... I would agree that if you want to rely soley on this book it wont help you that much, but as a background in simple esoteric studies behind the base meaning of the tarot and bringing it back to a Qabalistic root this book really helps a lot.

  • @courtneywheaton7046
    @courtneywheaton7046 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    Couldn’t agree more. I have always disliked this book and the narrow Kabbalah focus that got shoe horned into the tarot. They make this way too complicated and it is overwhelming to newbies.

  • @IndigoC333
    @IndigoC333 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Great review! This was one of the first tarot books that I read. I took bits here and there that sounded interesting/useful, but I certainly didn’t make a study of it! Probably the key take-away for me was to really LOOK at the card imagery - when I started, I was ‘symbol blind’. There was a lot in this book that I felt was a bit off and (thankfully) I was already aware of the some of the history of tarot. I have picked up a few of your book recommendations from a previous video - always keen to hear more if you have any!

  • @pauljameslewis8778
    @pauljameslewis8778 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Thanks so much for this. Good to see someone finally dispelling all the so called sacred myths of the tarot.

    • @teatarot4557
      @teatarot4557  ปีที่แล้ว

      You're welcome🙂 To be frank I think a lot of the sacred myths have been dispelled, but the publishing industry doesn't care!

  • @MisshaMoin
    @MisshaMoin 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Couldnt agree more. Fools journey myth and numerology did not resonate with me whatsoever.

  • @ms.black.tourmaline
    @ms.black.tourmaline ปีที่แล้ว

    Thanks for this, I was gonna buy the boom but no more

  • @toddh377
    @toddh377 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Agree a lot with the review. Never really understood why this book was so highly rated. The astrological attributes have always been in flux with tarot. Archetypes aren't easily pinned down. Thank you for putting the vlog together. Needed said

    • @teatarot4557
      @teatarot4557  ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Thanks.

    • @ren_kitsune
      @ren_kitsune ปีที่แล้ว +2

      I'm not sure if you knew, but Pollack was Jewish, so it does make sense she kept trying to find the Hebrew alphabet on the cards...
      But yeah. Too much pot smoked, if I may. I also have a beef with her writing nothing about any possible queer interpretations of the cards, although she was trans herself; instead sge focused on other elements which are kinda forced to overlay, and it's evident easily so if you're open minded

    • @teatarot4557
      @teatarot4557  ปีที่แล้ว

      @@ren_kitsune Interesting point!

  • @lucifer-ic9th
    @lucifer-ic9th 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

    I tried reading it and found it to be very uninspiring

  • @BohemianRose1
    @BohemianRose1 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    It is definitely a piece of its original time. I think we've advanced past it. I agree. As a new ish tarot reader (abt 4 years) I could not get through this book. It was written before I was born, and I am NOT young (ahem 50+), so I do not think it has aged particularly well. It is interesting as s piece of tarot history, a where we have been sort of thing, but if it was the first book I picked up to learn Tarot (Kitchen Table Tarot was my first), then I never would have gotten even to my first reading. It makes tarot feel inaccessible, but again, it is a product of the 1970s when EVERYTHING was esoteric and philosophic and new, and un understandable. The age of Beat, of political upheaval, and change. Im curious to read her new book. Im curious what YOU think of her new, and last, book.

    • @teatarot4557
      @teatarot4557  ปีที่แล้ว

      Thanks for your feedback. I will check out her new book when I am next in Watkins. But I'm not a fan!

  • @TheCatBank
    @TheCatBank 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

    I think you just sold me this book lol

    • @teatarot4557
      @teatarot4557  5 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@TheCatBank 👍

  • @martinwilliams9866
    @martinwilliams9866 ปีที่แล้ว

    Sounds to me she's been influenced by Mouni Sadhu &/or Papus.

  • @RoseHoneyRitual
    @RoseHoneyRitual ปีที่แล้ว

    YES

  • @JPeeee
    @JPeeee ปีที่แล้ว +2

    Agree with your opinion about the book. ps.This video editing... All those frame cuts, gives the feeling of having epileptic seizures. I had some dificulty watching the video till the end. I dont get the point of doing that to the video. 🤷🏻‍♂️ Just my opinion.

    • @teatarot4557
      @teatarot4557  ปีที่แล้ว

      Noted!

    • @JPeeee
      @JPeeee ปีที่แล้ว

      ​@@teatarot4557Theres a special reason why you edit the video that way? Im just curious, no offense.

    • @teatarot4557
      @teatarot4557  ปีที่แล้ว +2

      @@JPeeee Well I come from pop music (and pop videos), so I suppose I just feel those rhythms in my blood. And some of my viewers do like that style of presentation. But I'm going to check the video and see if I overdid it this time🙂

  • @justinmichaeltarot
    @justinmichaeltarot 11 หลายเดือนก่อน

    The fool always sits aside from the 21 cards. The fool was a pass card in the game. It was a wild card. Not only Rachel separated the cards into 3 groups. Many others have too. You should read Forest of Souls. I’d be curious for hear your thoughts. For me 78 degrees was about storytelling

    • @teatarot4557
      @teatarot4557  11 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Thanks for your message. I think what drove my review of Rachel's book was a feeling that overall it is not clearly presented. I find it opaque and at times chaotic. I quite like the numerological possibilities of tarot, and looking for patterns and structures and so forth, but alas, not in this case. But I appreciate that for some people the book makes perfect sense!
      Is that Forect of Souls by Lori M Lee?
      Your channel looks splendid. Subscribed!

    • @basicallyno1722
      @basicallyno1722 11 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Forest of Souls is ALSO by Rachel Pollack and it does seem like people are into that boom a bit more than 78 degrees. I’m definitely interested in your ideas about it.

    • @teatarot4557
      @teatarot4557  11 หลายเดือนก่อน

      I'll have a look at it when I'm next in Watkins🙂@@basicallyno1722

    • @justinmichaeltarot
      @justinmichaeltarot 11 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@teatarot4557 thank you. Forrest of Souls was another book by Rachel. It is my favorite of hers. It’s more about reading the cards visually. The new release is called a Walk through the Forest of Souls

    • @justinmichaeltarot
      @justinmichaeltarot 11 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@teatarot4557 I always wanted to visit Watkins 😀 That place is legendary. Forest of Souls isn’t just about reading the cards visually. It’s also using the cards to answer deep spiritual questions and many other things..
      78 degrees was the first tarot book that made me feel like card reading was for me. Her love is definitely for the Rider pack. I think it’s helpful to remember that when it was written in 1980 there weren’t many other tarot books outside of the initiatory realm. Eden Grey was the popular author back then. But also the choice of tarot decks wasn’t as vast as it is today.
      Rachel’s main message was that you should develop a personal relationship with the cards and discover who they are for yourself. That’s what I took from it. I find in my own practice that as long as your established relationship with the cards is meaningful and genuine, a language will develop between you and the cards and there will be communication. The details only matter for the individual. That’s my personal opinion.

  • @dayofthejackyl
    @dayofthejackyl ปีที่แล้ว

    The numerology was one of the most frustrating things about this book for me. The section on the Death card was particularly disappointing. For example, "No matter the picture, all Tarot cards bear the number 13." What does that mean?? No, they don't! They just don't. There's a lot of ham-fisted interpretations about the number thirteen that follow that quote. Another thing she says is "13 is a higher form of 3" and I think she does this multiple times with various numbers. A higher form of a number? What is a higher form of a number? And why is it a higher form? Because we added 10? Is 257 a higher form of 247 because we added 10 to it? I'm interested in numerology but that rambling and conjecture is extremely off-putting.
    PS! I edited this comment to add that I really love the editing in your videos lol. Can't please everyone!

    • @teatarot4557
      @teatarot4557  ปีที่แล้ว

      I might have overdone the jump-cuts for this one:-)
      Yes I think Pollack is awful on numerology. Antony Louis is much better in "Tarot Beyond the Basics".

  • @dirkliebegott9906
    @dirkliebegott9906 ปีที่แล้ว

    Promo SM 👉

  • @DuaneOsborn-d8w
    @DuaneOsborn-d8w 4 หลายเดือนก่อน

    A Cynical Stupid book full of contradictions & misdemeanors . Sadly a book of our times. Read it as a reference on how not to relate To the beauty of truth.

  • @Iseeyourefake
    @Iseeyourefake ปีที่แล้ว

    Wow! So sad that after an author dies someone jumps to talk shit about their book. Maybe one day you will understand its depth and nuance.

    • @teatarot4557
      @teatarot4557  ปีที่แล้ว +6

      Thank you for your comment.
      My husband gave me the book for Christmas last year. I read it without researching the author, about whom I knew nothing, and I then decided to review it without researching the author. I did google her after I had made my video, but I changed nothing. My review has nothing to do with Rachael Pollack's being alive or dead.
      When a cultural figure dies, their life-work is reviewed, usually in the best possible light, as is only right and proper. Nevertheless, it should be OK to dissent if one disagrees with the work or dislikes it. In this respect I stand by my review, which I feel is timely.

  • @sem6x3ag
    @sem6x3ag 11 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Man you really hate this book. Second video about this. People read cards differently in 1980 than today, and even the meaning of cards have changed. This book is great for those who do not read tarot for divination and read more for spiritual or self-developement.

    • @teatarot4557
      @teatarot4557  10 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Yes, you're right, the book did annoy me.

  • @missbutterfly7936
    @missbutterfly7936 4 หลายเดือนก่อน

    So interesting opinion. It has nurished to me. Can you give your opinion about Alejandro Jodoroswky and his view aboout marseille tarot, please? Thank you.