AUTHOR’S NOTE: Not long ago I joined a couple of online deck-collecting groups, and in short order my eyes were assaulted by swarms of substandard tarot decks that I would never buy in a million years (not nearly 500 of course, I was just trying to get your attention; let’s round it off to 100). Some of the least competent and least thoughtful tarot artwork I’ve ever seen burned through my brain without leaving a trace. It reminded me of the Bruce Springsteen song about the “television wasteland:” 57 Channels (and Nothing On).

I’ve known for some time that the self-publishing phenomenon has spawned a glut of inferior new tarot decks, but I wasn’t aware of the sheer magnitude of the infestation until I joined these groups. Now it seems that AI deck-creation is going to push the numbers into the stratosphere by taking over the combined “ready-made art” role of collage, photography and CGI techniques (with apologies to Ciro Marchetti, who does computer-generated graphics with tremendous creative flair).

Although no longer practicing, I’m a trained graphic designer and recognize good commercial artwork when I see it . . . and I’m not seeing much that impresses me lately. Granted, many of the collectors don’t intend to use these decks for divination, just to own them for a while and hopefully resell them at a sizeable profit sometime down the road. But these cards are an insult to any serious tarot reader and fan of tarot history (not to mention the professional artist). The worst of them are not just mediocre, they’re abominable.

I once posted a critique about this kind of tossed-off deck titled “Where’s the Beef?” but I was much too forgiving in light of the current crop of atrocities. Even those that display decent draftsmanship and color correctness are so deficient in the customary symbolism as to be laughable . . . if they even attempt anything remotely esoteric. Call it “tarot” if you want but, when you dumb down the metaphysical heart of the system, what you have left is an entirely personal statement. There is certainly a niche for that sort of thing, but don’t try to convince the world that you’ve created a tarot deck when it is completely unrecognizable as such. “Cute” and “charming” may be good enough for the average “pop-tarot” consumer, but they do nothing for the dedicated student and practitioner.

For the most part, these aren’t professional-grade offerings, they’re high-school art-project stuff (well, to be fair, a few of them hint at art-school credentials). They’re promoted as tarot decks simply for the name recognition, and are being sold under that assumption rather than as the oracle decks they so obviously are. They may exhibit the proper number of cards, suits and divisions but they lack historical authenticity. Far be it from me to champion the Waite-Smith tarot as the ideal benchmark for deck creators, but at least it carried forward much of the spirit of its 15th-Century progenitors, and that appears to be the link that is being severed in the current era of cobbled-together tarot art.

When it comes to choosing new decks for my collection, I vote with my wallet, and the purse-strings have been drawn tight for a few years now as I bemoan the lack of compelling candidates. I’ve largely switched to buying Lenormand decks because, while the population is considerably smaller, their execution is usually far superior in its artistic quality and consistency. I have slightly fewer than a dozen Lenormand decks and read with nearly all of them from time-to-time, while I own over 80 tarot decks and use only half-a-dozen with any regularity. Those facts alone speak volumes.

But I would be remiss if I didn’t mention my recent discovery of the superb decks by Insight Editions of San Rafael, CA. I currently have two – the Lord of the Rings Tarot and the Tarot del Toro, both illustrated by Tomas Hijo – and I’m interested in at least two more by the same artist. These cards are beefy and not for the slight-of-hand (pun intended). The artwork boasts exquisite woodcut designs and the pair work together seamlessly in two-deck readings. (The only thing that might discourage some buyers is that they are “pip” decks – apparently standard for this publisher – with non-scenic minor cards.) You can quote me in saying that there is still hope for the industry based on these fine examples.