Obviously It's Not *My* Cup of Tea, But. . .

[qos]

For all you magically-inclined Jane Austen fans: The Jane Austen Tarot


According to the product blurb: This well-researched deck seamlessly links the literary works of Jane Austen—characters, conversation, themes—with Tarot symbolism—a provocative convergence flavored with profound meaning.

The Tarot of Jane Austen is the result of an exhaustive research, concerning the links between literature and the symbolic world of the Tarot. Characters, dialogues and customs converge to create a meaning that is at the same time erudite, intuitive and profound.

Comments

[sharpchick.livejournal.com]

So I wonder if that's the Lovers card pictured on the box? Blech. . .

I'm a little disappointed in Lo Scarabeo this time. Riccardo doesn't usually pander to pop-culture-what's-the-hit-of-the-season kind of stuff. . .

[labelleizzy.livejournal.com]

Oy.

I'll pass, thanks, amusing though it be.

[oakmouse]

I can't see The Fool clearly, but it looks like the dress she's wearing is a good 15 years out of period --- and the wrong way, chronologically, to be Lizzy Bennet. (Those sleeves appear from what I can see of them to be more Victorian that early Regency.) Not to mention a hat only Lydia would have found suitable! And I don't fancy wimpy, die-away little Fanny Price as the lion-tamer either. *g* I'll have to take a look at it for real, but probably it's a no.

[wordweaverlynn.livejournal.com]

The Pride & Prejudice imagery is taken from the Greer Garson film version. The costume designer wanted more opulence, so they reused Gone with the Wind costumes for background characters, and did new out-of-period costumes for the main characters.

It's an abomination unto Nuggan.

[oakmouse]

Oh, is THAT where it came from. I haven't seen that movie version since I was maybe 12 at the most, and I'd forgotten. I was looking at those sleeves and going, 1830s at the earliest? Er, no?

An abomination indeed!