Mary Hanson-Roberts

I’ve actually had this deck twice before. The first time was I guess a decade or so ago, or whatever, and I looked at it very cursorily, the way I did everything back then, and I find it momentarily puzzling—I considered myself ‘romantic’ at the time, and I loved ‘innocence’, and so the reaction that innocence just wasn’t doing it for me, with what I’ve in this decade decided to refer to as the Cutie Pie Tarot, was quick as lightning strange, but, I didn’t care about things show more for long, back then.

When I returned to the craft years later, I meditated over this deck carefully, as I do now, but I found both this deck and the Robin Wood one to be much less than satisfactory. (I found both decks to be similar, if different: like a nursery employee’s 8-5 face, versus her date night face, so to speak….). There’s just so much violence and hate in the world, violence directed against children, not least, if they are born in the wrong place, right: the place where the shots are fired and the bombs fall, right…. And so it just struck me as so, inappropriate, to offer these 24/7 Smiles decks, portraying the world as entirely normative and “everybody’s fine”, you know: to put it briefly. (It didn’t help that I was just awakening to serious political, as opposed to serious disembodied monkishness, thought…. I’m still awakening to several different things, some of which appear to militate against each other: different tribes of children, right….)

I mean: it seemed like it was rewarding the wrong behavior, right. Being a conciliatory Wiccan doesn’t make the colonialists of cross and sword less ~decided~ about the ~set idea~ that you’re filth, right: the non-entity-existential-threat, if far from the only example of THAT, right: maybe that’s the problem; they just can’t get themselves to ~like~, fucking, Any-One…. Right…. It sends the wrong signal, you know: the more you abuse me and my sister, right; the better we like it….

But now, whatever it was like in the 70s and 80s and 90s—all those modestly-old-fashioned tarot decks from that era, right, or whatever—it’s like, there ARE ‘rude’ tarot decks, today, right; I just got done with one of them, as I plan on studying this all, over again…. So yeah: maybe some people, they do think you’re angry, At Them, anytime you’re angry, you know: because the ancient dying man, is only another member of the goo-goo baby clan, right….

So, I don’t know. Maybe it won’t be worth it: but I don’t Know that, for sure, so, in that sense: it is, right….

…. Curious, if infuriating: it’s funny, just like I’ve always said, for a while now, that there is a sort of naivety which is essentially violent, right, and alienated: like, you think your kids are props for you to use to become the winner of the Best Mother Award, since that is the truth TV has preached for thousands of seasons, right…. It’s like, sometimes people need Jesus: but sometimes people also need the Devil—because it’s like, if you think that Planet Earth exists so that you can be Best Mother: I mean, maybe Jesus is alright with that, I don’t know—but the rest of us are hoping that the Devil can free us from that, right….

But yeah: and then there’s also an innocence, an openness, which is true and good—which is inclusive of its coming from someone who is neither “finished” with development, (lol), or even all that discerning with words: but your little Hermes Sister can make you feel seen, right…. And if she ever acted out, it would from a much more simpler and open place of immaturity, than many of the more symptomatic alcoholics about: although the term itself is a misnomer in many ways.

But yeah…. And sometimes, you don’t need sexual friendship: but you don’t want the alienated-aggression and over-conceptualization, and over-maleness and over-adultness, you so often get with men, right. [Control = maleness= mental illness, lol.]

Anyway: people would think me out of line, if they cared enough to; I don’t plan on really influencing the “public opinion” (someone has to do it, though the term was probably invented by 1920s fascists, right) of this time; my influence in this time, which I eventually hope to create, must be more hidden and foot-soldier-y, drudge-y and lawyer-y secretary-y person-like, you know.

But yeah: that’s a fascinating background to studying this deck again. Life really is like a movie, even though there’s obviously a psychotic way of looking at that idea, you know. I always think it remarkable what the Gods and Beings juxtapose, and bring together….

I don’t know: there’s no way to tell everything…. Any ‘final’ realization would not be in words: which is why it is curious indeed that Mediterranean Man created a diagram of God and then made it into a series of pictures, right?

…. I think my comments for this deck will be brief, since it is kinda a simple deck, even among RWS-derived cards, IMO, but, yeah; it’s fine.

The first line:

The Fool (0)—Opts to play up the charm and play down the danger~ but it’s probably a safe bet that Cutie Pie is a “good” deck to channel Fool energy, right.
The Magician (1)—Very masculine and romantic.
The High Priestess (2)—Very toned down and Christian: ready to meet your mom, or maybe to get an advanced degree (arguing for some suitably “safe” opinions, like, maybe the Dems really COULD find a moderate candidate that unicorns and moderate Republicans would flock to…. I’m sorry, lol).
The Empress (3)—Very “safe” mom energy, but without seeming cold or rigid, although you’d expect that problem in real life, not in “centrist” media, right. The funny thing about “safe” pro-social moms is that they tend to have a strong streak of pro-social anger and legalism and rule-mania that virtually everyone always expects from them, virtually at any time, possibly: except for when they’re on TV, right. (Or in church? Maybe?). I don’t know what you do with that in a project like this, though.
The Emperor (4)—Like Julius Caesar or something; very much the expected thing.
The Hierophant (5)—If you’re going for a church-y thing in a Cutie Pie project, you need to throw some Church Kids (TM) in there, for sure. Church people have a funny relationship with children, and poor people, for that matter. They really love them, sometimes: they make excellent props, right…. Ah, but that’s cynical, hahaha.
The Lovers (6)—Very cute, right. Especially the angel girl is cute, although they’re both a bit cutesy, and especially the partner girl, and both way too blonde—I guess they’re Christians, right: we know, as honest folk, that medieval lore is correct, and not the doctrines of ancient times…. [Blonde= Christian; dark hair= Devil worshipper, right?—although men: SHOULD men be Christians? Women and children, and priests, should be Christians: men should be the king’s men, right?….]. The partner girl looks like someone who’ll get shot in a movie and die with blood in her mouth, right: Too Pure for This Earth, (TM), and not ready to defend herself…. And of course the guy is generic: can’t put too much pressure on delicate little males, and expect them to get ready; right…. And no snake, right: just angels, in the Christian Country of Goodness, (TM), lol.
The Chariot (7)—Curious: the Tao symbol; the white and dark blue of purple sphinxes, because Black Is Impolite, (TM), the cities behind the guy, who, as a Success, is Hyper-masc-y, lol….

~(offended girl from the two-girls meme) You’re a jackass! (slaps me)
~shrugs; but I don’t truly feel troubled, or bothered, exactly, anymore: it’s fine…. This is just some weird stuff, you know; nothing stranger to me, than ‘morality’ and normality and everything…. It’s just bizarre: if kinda entertaining….

…. The second line:

Strength (8)—This is actually a pretty cool card. It implies a romantic vibe, blending into mother-son: whereas most Strength cards are implicitly sexual—I mean, it’s obviously happening in fairytale-land or dream-land, or whatever, and the lion would obviously be a human being: and while he was in lion form, they obviously wouldn’t…. But yeah, a LITTLE weird, how it’s normally shown; this is actually a good card.
The Hermit (9)—The two intersecting triangles is such an interesting symbol. Is he a rabbi? Is he alchemical? Is he an alchemical rabbi, (from medieval Persia, or somewhere, perhaps)? For a card that does lean toward the minimalistic, it is curious how there are interesting variations.
Wheel of Fortune (10)—Relatively classic/close to the vest, sort of play.
Justice (11)—Pretty much the same, (close to the vest): except somehow she makes her seem like somebody’s mom~ like she’s telling you you can’t have cookies, but that she’s sorry, right.
The Hanged Man (12)—Those aren’t holly berries growing on the greenery, are they: is it a winter vibe? I should learn more about plants. I read through one tree-guidebook, but all summer came and went, and I used it very little…. Anyway….
Death (13)—If memory serves, I think this was indeed one of my favorite cards, the first time I (seriously) studied this deck, however many months ago. It is indeed a good card. Women, (and sometimes children—especially if you consider the ‘inner child’: I like to think about how the old dying man is a child, right), and not just men/kings, experience death, right…. Biology over propaganda: lest your symbolism become lies, and convenient slights of hand, as though ye were all naught but so-called film directors…. ~(Old Merlin cackle)….
Temperance (14)—Cute-girl angels instead of Mysterious-Androgynous angels is not something so bad, at all. I actually rather prefer it, some, (well, most) of the time, to be honest.

…. The third line:

The Devil (15)—Sometimes I really roll my eyes at cards like the Devil getting the Nervous Church Mom Treatment, you know: it’s not like it’s going to work, the fanatically, violently polite people are still going to eat you, right; and in the meantime, your map of reality gets a little stupid, right…. But yeah: now I can look at this, ‘Devil as a baseball mascot’ type of take, and smile, at least…. And I think that was indeed the metaphor that came to mind last time, even if that was hardly my attitude, a sanguine smile, right…. Baseball mascots could be the Devil, most of them, right; that’s why the goddamn Yankees don’t have one: they’re too busy being perfect and…. The Yankees: and grimly chronicling the endless epic of their successes, and…. Just fucking doing this Gilded Age Americana, ~amusements in the park~, BS, right…. Anyway….

The Tower (16)—A similar image, if only showing one ‘victim’, if you like, rather than two…. I should watch some more children’s sci-fi adventures, as time goes on, right. People have this notion that because kids are cute, they never have negative experiences: it’s like, I don’t even know what that’s supposed to be based on, it’s just the psychology of a mass psychosis, you know: even if you watch children’s media—which most parents, of course, don’t take very seriously: but then, there’s very little that the average person REALLY takes seriously, (and quite a few ‘successful’ people are essentially the same, though they’re treated differently), but it’s like: children don’t view their helplessness as normative, and they don’t view themselves as asleep in a sheltered port, you know…. But yeah: there is something satisfying in imagining great green goblins eating children, or whatever; monsters devouring children. In a way, that’s the human experience, right…. I don’t know: there are so many layers, right: is a human a child, or a great green goblin, you know….

The Star (17)—This is a nice card. I guess it’s actually just as well that she’s wearing a hair-bra or whatever; it’s not like the Edwardian/Smith image is an alluring pin-up, because it isn’t; it’s just an idea. This is also a pretty good idea/interpretation. “The Wonder of it All”, right…. Optimism and intelligence, merged into a single whole, right: Wonder….

The Moon (18)—I never think the Moon card looks scary enough. The Goddess of the Dark Feminine is Scary Bitch, right. She’s got more style than Blair Waldorf, for crying out loud…. But, it’s fine. It’s the Cutie Pie Tarot. What can you expect.

The Sun (19)—The Sun is just a nice card. It’s happiness, or something big like that, right.

Judgment (20)—Pretty close to the vest: the Garden of England at the End of Time, like you’d expect from the classic pattern, right. Note there’s only one family, and not other families in the background, because it’s the 80s now, and global hyper-capitalist empire is freeing you from the toxic human patterns of the past, by, letting you spend more time by yourself! 👌

The World (21)—For this card I will just talk about the idea. (I thought about this card today, while I was scratching my scalp.) It’s like, the World is kinda like the Empress, the Mother, and the Empress’s Path is like the bar that holds up the world above the Abyss below the Third Sephiroth, right…. And the World Itself is just Everything; the Mother…. And it’s not that She is thinking or moving, or anything but the Existing that comes before all that, In Everything, right…. And it’s true that Arthur Edward said that the World wasn’t one of the cards that is part of the ‘legend of the soul’, right: and I do like that he gave, whatever that is, to us—it is a sort of saying, right…. But AEW didn’t think too much of the World, it seems to me, and he also wasn’t all that enamored with the life he was living, or the life (and thoughts, etc) of his fellows, and all the rest, you know….

So: there you go.

…. A Court of Wands & Cups—

As an aside, I can’t describe the feeling—not that I was the next thing to killing myself or voting Republican or becoming a terrorist: but I still can’t wrap my mind around it—of calculating Mary Hanson-Roberts’ Destiny Number, and finding it to be a Nine, right….

I can’t even find a metaphor for that, right. How many different kinds of Destiny Number Nines are there, right?…. Can I at least see her birth chart? (Internet) “No.” (me) (mutters curses, says mean things)

Anyway.

Oh, and I think I’ll consider the Kings & Queens together, just because—not that I don’t want to be considered attractive when I become the most ancient of men, and not that I don’t find younger women to be powerful and lovely, but…. But some of these kings & queens are, SO, mis-matched; it’s like…. 😮‍💨

Ok.

Courtly Wands:
King/Queen of Wands: I guess even separate, I dislike the idea of a Queen of Wands who’s like seven years old, right: maybe a Queen of Cups, a girl-among-girls, right; a girl of the girl tribe…. But what kind of world has a seven year old Queen of Wands, right? Maybe if I were somebody’s grandmother I’d feel differently, or whatever, but it’s like…. Although, I don’t know, it’s weird how virtually all parents are about young children. Sometimes I wonder if my brother and sister-and-law have an unwritten rule about me having an unsupervised conversation with my nephew. My brother and sister-in-law are very diffident and distant, themselves. I mean, my brother is friendly and funny, with me, himself, with a lot of people: but he has this alarm that goes off, when things get too non-ordinary, and then he just shuts down. My sister-in-law almost seems to have this unwritten rule that we shouldn’t communicate except when necessary, to the extent necessary. And yeah, my young nephew, it’s like, forget about interacting, it’s like, all their attention when it’s the nephew plus other people, is to discipline him out of embarrassing them. I can’t even imagine how it would be for a similar mindset, the polite mindset, with a girl-child, and “outsiders”, right. And then actual fucking strangers in public, fucking forget about it: but they almost always dress their young daughters so that they seem very cute, and—I literally am not saying I want to hurt anyone or go to jail, either one—but usually in a non-sexual, childish way, they look very attractive, right…. But it’s like…. What, exactly, is the goal, if the goal is never to interact in public, to the extent possible….

I realize that there’s a lot I don’t understand about say, a Taurus or Cancerian, for example, mindset: but it makes no sense to me, right….

But yeah: the Queen especially is a very interesting card, from a certain point of view, even though I don’t ‘understand’ it, right. The King seems like she couldn’t choose between old & beardy vs romantic-noble-beauty, and just went for ‘all of the above’, which is pretty weird, but: I don’t know….

[And then, there are bureaucrats that just truly, do not care, not even about their rules which wouldn’t stop you from doing the ‘bad thing’ if you hadn’t already decided not to do it, but like: I mean, they care about their own things, with each other—their own socializing, and non-rule politeness, right: with each other. But yeah, they show up to work, to do the things for not getting fired, and they’re polite to each other: you’re just furniture. Although the funny thing is, Christmas Propaganda, (TM), aside: it is NOT hard to imagine them being people’s relative/family member, you know?…. I can’t put it cleaner than that, right….]

Knight of Wands—is this Fire of Fire? I don’t know; obviously Hanson-Roberts is much more suit plus gender/age, and elemental correspondences, hardly at all, but…. Are we going for chivalry? Romantic knighthood? He seems…. Distant. Like the romantic thing is for men to be romantic, BUT, the romantic thing is for Men to Be Men, (TM), so, men should be distant…. I’m kinda withdrawn myself, but, I’d hate to think I was shunning the Sun, to make a point, right….

Page of Wands—This is just a good card. Score one for Mary; I agree.

King/Queen of Cups—Similar issues to the King/Queen of Wands, but noticeably less extreme. The King of Cups does look kinda smug: but, maybe that’s a valid interpretation of his character. I guess he is dreamy too, in a beardy way, lol…. The Queen is an entirely workable interpretation.

Knight of Cups—This is also a pretty good card. Looks like Hermes landed a role in some chest-thumping-yet-sappy Wagner music drama, which is an interesting idea.

Page of Cups—Mary HR just does a good job with Pages, I think. This is a fun card.

…. A Court of Swords & Pentacles

King/Queen of Swords—At least they’re not inappropriate together. The woman certainly is respectable, and has a certain majesty, if not necessarily power, exactly. The man, like all of Mary’s kings, has a certain generic aspect to him, like her excess of fearful deference and crippling inability to risk saying “the wrong thing” renders her unable to actually open up and say anything about him, really, you know.

Knight of Swords—This card is fine.

Page of Swords—This is my least favorite of the MHR Pages. He seems tight/stiff, and a little frightened: whereas I think of the Page of Swords as being the kid who just doesn’t care, and, regardless of whether he decides to fight you or not—just doesn’t have time for this, so to speak.

King/Queen of Pentacles—These actually seem like good cards. I wonder where the Earth placements were, on her birth chart. I wonder if that was the energy she operated from—Earth energy. I can’t say I understand it. I have a number of Earth placements, but my Big Three (Sun/Moon/Rising) are all Air & Fire; sometimes I wonder which Part of Things I understand less: Water by its being basically absent on my chart, or Earth for its inharmonious, conflicted presences…. I suppose we all come to understand things in the end: perhaps, anyway; I wonder how I shall come to understand.

Knight of Pentacles—A good interpretation…. You know, ‘bull’ is ‘tyr’ in Danish, (ie it’s like Tuesday-god, Tyr; Tuesday being tirsdag in Danish)—I wonder about that, although I don’t have the in-depth knowledge either of Tyr as a personality, or Taureans (the sign of the bull) as a type, to put the puzzle pieces together, so to speak….

Page of Pentacles—I wonder why Pentacles’ Child is the Sad Child, so to speak. But another fine MHR Page, at any rate. Beyond cute.

…. The small Wands:
Ace—Romantic. A flowering wand with castle in the distance. Either a love letter, or…. A plan to build a castle.
Two—She wants to be Fire-Chokmah’s girl, right?
Three—There must be a mixed-gender deck that shows this card with a girl for the Fire-Binah, (receiving the prince of flowering wands), but it’s not this one, right.
Four—Cute.
Five—Boom!
Six—Yeah, ok…. Fuck; she has terrible taste in men, you know? I’m not trying to be like that random Top40 whine-croon-gossiping about her taking another man home: I’m saying…. Girl, is ugly a thing with you? 😝
Seven—I guess I should watch Game of Thrones, or something.
Eight—Romantic.
Nine—Looks like he should be part of some medieval gang/mafia, which is cool. Sometimes MHR couldn’t trip herself up, lol.
Ten—That is one weird looking old man, but…. Okay!

…. The small Cups:
Ace—Impressive.
Two—Cute.
Three—Really fun.
Four—“Sad Ugly Man In Evergreen Forest, with Fairy Cup(s)”, lol
Five—For a real trad romantic, someone in pain MUST be a man, right. It’s a Very!, unbending schema.
Six—It’s like, they’re so cute, they ugly. I can’t describe it.
Seven—The first time around, I disliked the idea that the Dream of Aphrodite of Cups, is epitomized by Merlin White Beard, right, (schema: profound thing = male…. Super-male), but now…. I don’t know. I’m just, not sure, one way, or the other.
Eight—Another card I extremely disliked the first time around, (this is exactly how you feel walking away from emotion: you feel like a wizard in the garden of childhood joy!), but now, I don’t know; I can deal with it. I’m still not feeling it’s a ‘great success’, right.
Nine—Always some dumpy-looking man who’s extremely happy, at the end of the trad romance rainbow. Can’t be any other goddamn thing, in any other way: full stop.
Ten—I guess that Mary HR would indeed draw this card. It’s fine; I accept.

The small Swords:
Ace—Yup.
Two—I wonder, Why red?: It doesn’t seem ‘correct’…. Not that there is one and only one ‘correct’ interpretation of a “tarot card”, (tarot card being), and I remember when the stilted Victorisnesque occultists sniffing at things being ‘incorrect’ confused and subtly irked me…. But yeah: why red. Seems off.
Three—Ok.
Four—Marble is dramatic, lol. Always.
Five—I don’t like the ‘base’ of the popular cards, the Smith image, here, and I don’t like this variation any better. It seems too identified with the one-who-causes-bitterness; the one-who-attacks-and-destroys, the causer-of-bad-feelings; probably, for Smith, some British soldier, right?
Six—Ok, sure. Going on a trip to Avalon, looking for sexy knowledge, with a sexy boy. Okay, that’s fine!
Seven—Again, the underlying Smith image is faulty, and it isn’t remedied here. “We don’t talk about Aphrodite, children….”
Eight—VERY pessimistic. The girl isn’t just filled with a Hermes-y reluctance to fight: she’s positively helpless! Like a sort of de-sexed version of the vanilla porn girl, content creator, which is in turn, aside from dress, basically identical to the “dream girl”, ironically, of the chauvie man who hates sex, right…. He wants a girl to be hot, and to be attracted to him, and then he wants to humiliate and reject and shame her, right…. Why guys want to humiliate and shame and make girls powerless, I don’t know…. Not in touch with sexuality, basically…. And yeah: Mary HR internalizes SO MUCH of what trad romance patriarchs tell her, right?
Nine—Not a bad interpretation…. Although, I have to say: she is good at technical-simple-art-drawing, (which, I have to say, the PCS images always seem deficient in, to me), and Mary HR is good at making things More Dramatic…. But she seems to me, very rarely, if ever, to have had an actual, honest to God, VISUAL IDEA, right….
Ten—This is amusing to me. There’s just something funny about fictional children suffering: so true to life, so impolite; so fun. (Hermes) The children are suffering; they’re sad….! They’re dead! (falls down)

Courtly Pentacles:
Ace—A sweet card: romantic. “The Lilies of the Field”. Which was a pretty good movie, for the Hokey Era, right…. If not quite as good as its reputation: Man, those fucking ~~German nuns~~, comparing ~~Sidney Poitiers~~, to, ~~Hitler~~, right…. It’s like, Ah, yes, the Sidney Poitiers-Hitler Connection, the investigative journalistic ~~tour de force~~, brought to you by…. ~Right? ‘Big reputation, big reputation (big reputation, yeah….)’…. But yeah: the world is a beautiful place—although unfortunately, it is ruined by the ugliness of the world, LOL. 😂
Two—This is really cute. A beautiful feeling of change….
Three—For once, I can sorta deal with Mary Hanson-Roberts and one of her Male Strong Romantic Hero, guys, right….
Four—A good interpretation.
Five—Actually also executed rather well.
Six—Goes very well, with the theme….
Seven—An improvement over the Smith image.
Eight—Very much an image of my god Mercury. Well done.
Nine—Very good job. That she is talking with the bird, underlines it being an image of woman’s (independence and) intelligence, as well as beauty and wealth.
Ten—Always with the fucking patriarchy-is-deeply-entrenched-and-we-love-it, vibes, on the Ten of Pentacles, right…. (sighs)

~But yeah, I guess Pentacles is actually Mary’s best/least-delusive suit…. Hmm…. How interesting…. 😸🎃 show less

This is my all-time favorite tarot deck. I've been reading with these cards for well more than a decade now. The illustrations are beautiful!

Sometimes these cards can be kinda nice, but overall I've found that I don't really develop a good feel with them.

(7/10)