But what if the Noblet's table leg is put in the place where Flornoy thought he saw a thick blue line running down the Bateleur's leg? (I don't see it in the original; but that's beside the point.)
mmfilesi wrote:Hi friends!
Well ... I think Pen is right. Our cardmarker is incompetent ... or a brilliant genius that anticipated Pablo Picasso and Georges Braque .
Please look this joints impossible, these perspectives misplaced (I chose cards without thinking)
I think, we need consider this in the analysis of this deck. Simply, its not a good artist.
Looking at the drawing of all three, it seems that perspective was something the artists were not overly concerned about. There’s a certain showmanship and verve to the drawings - much like the Bateleur himself. If the cards were wider and we could see all of a four-legged table (in the spirit of the drawing), how many of us would accept it at face value? I wonder…
His table has three legs. It is conceivable that the fourth leg is located outside the card. It is by going beyond the stage of possibilities and moving into the reality of action and choice that The Magician gives concrete expression to his situation. But we can also see that the 3 is the figure of the mind, and light blue is the color of spiritual receptivity (for more on the colors, see p. 95)...
Su mesa tiene tres patas. Se puede pensar que la cuarta pata esta fuera de la carta: superando la fase de las possibilidades y entrando en la realidad de la accion, de la eleccion, es como el Mago concretara sa situation. Per tambien se puede ver que el tres es el numero del espirito, y el color azul, el de la receptividad espiritual (ver pags. 117 y ss.)...
The Bateleur/The Magician: Beginning and Choosing. This figure contains the whole in potential: it is like the original point from which a universe emerges (see p. 59). For The Magician all is possible. He has a series of elements on the table in front of him that he can use as he pleases, and a pouch that is easily imagined to be inexhaustible, like a horn of plenty. From his table this figure acts toward the cosmos and toward spiritual life.
El Mago: Empezar y elegir. El Mago lleva el numero 1. Este numero contiene la totlidad en potenticia, es como el punto original de donde surge un universo (ver pag. 80). Para el Mago toto es posible: tiene en su mesa una serie de elementos que puede emplear a su antojo y una bolsa que podriamos imaginar inagotable, como un cuerno de la abunancia. Ese personaje actua desde su mesa hacia el cosmos, hacia la vida espiritual.
Ever since the Timaeus the 'fourth' has signified 'realization,' i.e. entry into an essentially different condition, that of worldly materiality, which, it is authoritatively stated, is ruled by the prince of this world--for matter is the diametrical opposite of Spirit, and in that sense also to another spiritual being, the Devil.
Another detail that adds to my interpretation is the apparent instability of the table. It does not actually have three legs, it just looks that way, because the table leg and the Bateleur's leg are the same color. But the look of three legs, along with the bumpy ground, and on the Noblet the stream running underneath, create an atmosphere of instability. I think it is the instability of the world of illusion. The stream suggests that the table, and the Bateleur himself, is a bridge between the two worlds, the flux of becoming and the repose of being.
Added 4/28/10: A detail that colors my interpretation is a lack of clarity about how many legs the table has. At first glance, everything looks normal. But then we notice that we can only see three table-legs: the fourth is the leg of the Bateleur himself. With only three legs, positioned as they are in the picture, the table would seem to be unstable. But perhaps the fourth leg of the table is behind his leg, and we just can't see it, any of it (as Debra emphasizes). Or maybe the one we can't see is in front, on the part of the table that extends beyond the border of the picture (as Pen shows in his posts after this one). Or maybe we are mistaken in where the legs are positioned, and three legs are just fine (another suggestion of Debra's): the laws of perspective don't always apply in the world of the tarot.
So Is the table stable or unstable? We can't see beyond the frame or behind the Bateleur; we can't quite get our bearings. We don't know. Our world is like that, too. On the one hand, the sun rises predictably every morning. On the other hand, the new day brings new, unforeseen dangers. Is the world stable or unstable? It all depends on the interpretation, on how we are seeing it. Our world, in Platonic terms, is a mixture of being and non-being: the stable objects of knowledge (and their unknowable source) on the one hand, and the unstable objects of true and false belief on the other (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analogy_of ... vided_line). Only the world of being is wholly stable--or, in Christian non-philosophical language, the Hereafter, in which the Saints live even in this life, and to which the Bateleur may be wanting to lure us with his tricks. The stream of water put in by Noblet suggests that the table, and the Bateleur himself, is a bridge between the two worlds, the flux of becoming and the repose of being.
Jodorowky (The Way of Tarot, p. 127) notes that the Magician is the card of "beginning", where "all is possible," and of "choosing," a leap from the mind or spirit into materiality:It is a leap from the stasis of using his will to keep a three-legged table from falling, into choosing something that completes it, a leg for each corner. Such is the instability of the Trinity: it needs the material world to complete it, the fourness that traditionally, in the 15th-17th centuries, meant the whole: four winds, four directions, four qualities (hot, cold, dry, moist), four elements, four gospels. In this way we have the Bateleur as demiurgos, Greek for "artisan," fashioner of this very concrete and particularized world in which illusion and reality blend into one.It is conceivable that the fourth leg is located outside the card. It is by going beyond the stage of possibilities and moving into the reality of action and choice that The Magician gives concrete expression to his situation.
mikeh wrote:These are pretty weird tables. The depictions on the cards are vaguely like real tables; the ones you drew are like nothing I've ever seen.
I still think you guys are playing with me ("messing with me" would be more precise). Definitely. That's what I get for using the T-word. And the A-word ("archetype").
mikeh wrote:With only three legs, positioned as they are in the picture, the table would seem to be unstable. But perhaps the fourth leg of the table is behind his leg, and we just can't see it, any of it (as Debra and Pen argue in their posts following this one).
From your rewrite:
With only three legs, positioned as they are in the picture, the table would seem to be unstable. But perhaps the fourth leg of the table is behind his leg, and we just can't see it, any of it (as Debra and Pen argue in their posts following this one).
Mike, so you still think that if there were a fourth leg on the Magician's table, that that's where it could be? That was the single idea that all my posts and work in Photoshop aimed to disprove. I think maybe I need a break...
With only three legs, positioned as they are in the picture, the table would seem to be unstable. But perhaps the fourth leg of the table is behind his leg, and we just can't see it (any of it, as Debra seems to emphasize in her posts following this one).
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest