The El Goliath Tarot

TarotPublished 2010sUnder £40

3 Sept

Written By Quinn

The El Goliath Tarot was first self-published in 2018 by an artist known as Goliath. This deck has overwhelmingly positive reviews, and I’ve seen many YouTube readers singing its praises as the best shadow deck ever. I have the new and improved second edition, bought sometime after 2022, although I genuinely don’t remember exactly when. It’s been sitting on the shelf waiting for a period of quiet. I wanted to work with the deck over a few weeks because I initially thought it would be a good one for some self-exploration. Life got in the way, and I just didn’t have the space to include it as part of my routine until recently. It is now off the shelf and sitting on my kitchen table, so I can take a good look at its contents. The packaging is very good. The box is sturdy and has a nice velvety insert. I have mixed feelings about the guidebook. It appears substantial, but the text is far too small, and the font choice makes it even harder to read. The cards are larger than average, and shuffling is a challenge. That being said, the overall quality is good. I’m unsure why some cards have a white border and others have a black one. Maybe the guidebook will shed some light on that issue.

The major arcana are named and numbered, making them easy to identify. Each card has an additional title. 0 The Fool is called The Eternal Vagabond. I can see more text underneath, but it is completely unreadable. Thinking it was potentially important, I used my phone to zoom in, and it turned out to be a copyright notice. That’s some pretentious bullshit, right there. From memory, US Games used to print theirs on the card image too. Most tarot and oracle decks do not do this. Not even the Carnival at the End of the World Tarot does this. In the guidebook, it lists the planet Uranus, the element of air, and the zodiac sign of Sagittarius. The first two I agree with, but if The Fool has a corresponding sign, it’s Aquarius. 1 The Magician, The Alchemical Master, is a shamanistic-looking big cat, and I appreciate that the artist kept the lemniscate symbol on the card. The guidebook interpretation doesn’t just reduce the card to manifesting, which is brilliant. The issue of communication has a decent-sized paragraph and is an aspect often overlooked in modern decks. I hoped to be entirely positive about this card, but the zodiac sign is wrong again. It’s listed as Capricorn, when it is very much Gemini.

The first few cards stick to the RWS format in a broad sense, but The Chariot only shows the tip of a horse's head. The bulk of the description in the guidebook mostly talks about the artist’s own experience with a horse and horses in general. Traditionally, it’s a card associated with the sign of Cancer, the element of water, and the moon. The guidebook lists Venus, Earth, and Taurus. The crystals suggested are hematite, opal, onyx, and citrine. I wouldn’t associate those crystals with the planets and signs given. Nor would I attribute them to Cancer, or the Moon.

I have to mention The Hermit, The Inner Master, because it’s an armadillo. It does have a hermitty feel to it, and the fact that it’s mostly rolled up into a ball is significant here. We do see the face of the armadillo, and this could be read as an indication that issues are being faced and not avoided. The Hermit usually speaks of a temporary withdrawal, though, whereas armadillos tend to be solitary unless they’re trying to mate. Even then, pairs don’t bond, and females raise the young alone. The guidebook mentions being a black sheep and being different. Traditionally, the hermit is about self-reflection and contemplation. I’m not sure why he has to write so much about the general interpretation without really digging into the underbelly. Each card has the tiniest bit for ‘reversed meaning’. As a so-called shadow deck, the book should be full of the downsides to each card and the stuff needed to actually get to the positive expression of the card. The reversed keywords for The Hermit begin to touch on the shadow, but there is no mention of analysis, prudence, or discernment. Why doesn’t the book address naval-gazing as a shadow of this card?

I am irritated by the Om symbol on the belly of the monkey in XII The Hanged Man, The Suspended Monkey. It’s the right way up to the viewer, but upside down on his belly, near the position for the solar plexus chakra. I know the Om is universal and all of that, but I tend to see it on the third-eye or crown chakra. The Hermit is something I associate with these areas. I know the artist could be suggesting that an alternate view will lead to enlightenment, but I question whether it was added as an afterthought, or midway through the process, and its position on the body and upright to the viewer was never a real consideration. Further, the zodiac is again different, and we’re told it’s Virgo when it’s generally Pisces. Interestingly, they’re opposite signs in the astrological wheel.

The goat on 15 The Devil, The Master of Lies looks like something you’d expect to see in an old 1970s film about witches and devil worshipping. For once, the astrology and crystal associations in the guidebook all look correct. Having glanced at the description in the guidebook, it appears that Goliath has leaned in heavily towards the Christian concept of the devil. Much of the text seems irrelevant to the card, and it all feels a bit loaded. I notice he has written far more for this card, and having checked the guidebook, I can see the only other two cards to get additional text were The Hierophant and The Death card. The Devil still wins, because it has nearly a full half page more. I find it interesting that he had so little to say about The Moon because that’s probably the number one card when it comes to shadow work. It does, after all, represent the shadow and the stuff hidden from consciousness.

The minor arcana suit names are the same as always, which is good. Because this is supposed to be a shadow deck, I expect to see some of the challenging aspects of the cards being brought into focus within the descriptions. The Two of Cups, The Intertwined Snakes, portrays a strong mirroring theme, which is appropriate to the traditional meaning of the card. One snake is light, and one is dark. Their tongues are tied, and they hold a lion-headed pendant in the middle. There is less text in the guidebook for the minor arcana cards, and there are no astrology or crystal associations. The guidebook description reads like any other guidebook. Even in the ‘reversed keywords’ paragraph, it is a small paragraph; it doesn’t give suggestions as to what shadows may be in play or how to work through them. Goliath mentions the card can have a somewhat sexual energy, but also says it can represent new business partners and new friendships. Which is it? Traditionally, the two is linked to Venus in Cancer, which is all about sentimentality, potential, and reciprocal feelings. It’s fuck all to do with sexual energy, and would need pairing with a card that actually does indicate that for it to be the case.

Looking through the cup cards and their descriptions, it all looks very regular to me. I don’t understand why there are dry land animals in the suit that represents water. The deck is supposed to be shamanic and natural, so why no adherence to the elements and what is natural within the element?

The swords are normally a favourite of mine. The Two of Swords, The Blind Seal, is an uncomfortable-looking image with two candles sticking out of the eyes of a seal. Interestingly, despite the claim he used animals and nature to make “the deck more abstract and shamanic in nature as it removes the physical human paradigms such as age, gender, race, etc”, he states that this seal is female. Why do we need to know the sex of this seal? How is it relevant? It’s not a genital shot, it’s the head and hands. How would we know if he hadn’t told us? There is the sliver of a new moon above its head, and traditionally, the astrology for this card is the Moon in Libra. The moon is often linked to feminine energy, but why does the seal have to be female? The description of the card in the guidebook is pretty negative. Generally, while the card can be about indecision and not seeing clearly, it also speaks of a need for balance and agreement between the heart and mind. I don’t understand why this card has such an intense description when other cards haven’t been given the same treatment. The Seven of Swords, The Thief in the Night, is another pretty negative card. The difference here is that we don’t have any reference to the sex of the snake, nor emphasis through the text on the word ‘she’. And, it’s a shit card to begin with, so there’s not much effort needed to lay out the negatives. That being said, it’s a card that can indicate strategy and forward planning. Neither of which is negative.

The El Goliath Tarot has seventeen extra cards, and I wanted to know whether they are necessary or not. It makes an already difficult-to-manage deck into an impossible-to-shuffle situation, and the sheer number of them suggests they need closer inspection. El Caution, The Heedful Mouse could’ve easily been used within The Fool if the deck was actually created to do shadow work. It offers nothing new or different. El Ojibew Catcher, The Shadow Dream Catcher, is basically the dark side of the moon card, and again, it could’ve been dealt with under the actual Moon card if it were a real shadow deck. El Expansion, The Shedding Snake, is another layer of the Death card. In a deck like this, there shouldn’t have been any need for ‘another layer’ of the Death card. El Heart, The Heart of Goliath, would’ve been appropriate on the inside of the box or as a token gesture. El Karmic Release is a combination of The World and the Page of Cups. El Nature, The Wild Seed, feels like it would’ve been happy enough in the Pentacles as the Ace, and likewise with El Sacred Fire, The Re-birthing Bonfire could’ve been the Ace of Wands. El Karmic Soul Tribe is pretty much the hidden side of the Six of Cups. But, El Hidden Inner Strength, The Shadow Cat is useful. It does have some aspects of The High Priestess, but only if it were blended with the Strength card. El Masks, The Hidden Wolf, could be integrated into the suit of Swords. The Seven paired with one of the court cards would work just fine. El Shadow self, The Dark Swamp — I thought the entire purpose of the deck was to address the so-called shadow self, so why is there an actual card? Does this mean you have nothing to work on unless this card comes up? El Shaman, The Medicine Man, is a combination of The Hierophant and The Moon, with a dash of High Priestess thrown in for good measure. El Star Seed, The Demiurge, really? If I didn’t know this was new age masquerading as self-help, I sure do now. El Sage, The Purity, is a card that talks about cleansing and healing. It’s not essential, but it’s not exactly redundant either. And finally, there is a Yes card and a No card, which can be useful if you don’t have a coin to hand.

The El Goliath Tarot is giving me Somnia Tarot vibes; I really wanted to love this deck, but I just don’t. I love the concept of a shadow deck, but the execution fails miserably.

The artist claims to have created the deck in response to the saturation of the market with light decks. Having spent some time wondering which decks Goliath was referring to when he said the market was saturated, I have to wonder if one of them was the Good Tarot. It wasn’t published until 2017, but Collette Baron Reid’s Oracles were definitely popular by then, and her oracles had a lot of attention. Paulina Cassidy is someone who has a ton of decks available, and her art is whimsical. I think her work sits nicely in its own niche, and I’m happy to own half a dozen of them. Kim Krans was another popular deck creator in the years before the El Goliath, and from memory, she self-published in the early days. I wouldn’t say her decks were particularly light-filled, but she did use colour.

So, yes, there were likely plenty of light tarot and oracle decks available. A problem I have with Goliath’s statement is that even prior to 2018, there were some pretty good decks available that worked really well for deep-diving. I worked with The Deviant Moon (2008) tarot for the best part of a decade and would say that it was more original in its execution. Another deck I can think of is The Dark Grimoire Tarot (also 2008), which drew on the work of H.P. Lovecraft. Rooting through my cupboards, another deck that jumps out is The Haindl Tarot (1990). All three decks are very different, although none have a focus on nature and animals. But these are just three. If I had more time, I could probably find twenty more.

Tarot goes through phases like any other art genre. Goliath appears to have noticed what was popular at the time and reacted against the short-term trend. This is obviously fine and very normal. My main criticism of the deck is that it doesn’t stand out as a deck that is particularly amenable to shadow work. The El Goliath is a standard tarot when ignoring the fact that the cards are monochrome, which leads me to my next point.

Many of the El Goliath cards are pretty ‘light’ despite being dark in appearance. While some images use darker symbols such as skulls and bones, there’s little in the artwork that guides the reader to the shadow aspects of the card meanings. The Two of Swords is one obvious exception, and The Devil is another.

If this deck is an aide to shadow work, I need to ask how exactly? If the artwork doesn’t do any heavy lifting, then it falls to the guidebook. The paragraph for reversed keywords suggests this guidebook is not balanced in favour of the shadow side. And in any case, if you’re going to say a whole deck is for use to help work through the shadow, the information should be in the basic card description. If a deck is suitable for everyday readings, what’s the point in marketing it as something different? Is he really suggesting that only one or two cards mean there is work to be done — I’m thinking of The Devil card specifically. Shadow work suggests an integration of what is hidden. To reiterate, I tfind the meanings in the guidebook to be standard and superficial rather than looking at it from a psycho-spiritual self-development perspective.

I am not blown away by this deck despite the presence of an armadillo among the many cards. The artwork is detailed enough, but it’s not a style I generally engage with. I completely understand the need for design features, but the font used on the cards and in the book detracts from the overall enjoyment, as it creates frustration. The astrology and crystal associations are generally not in line with conventional correlations, and I find this problematic because, at times, it creates confusion in the overall interpretation. Overall, the deck falls short of my expectations, and I have other decks that are far more effective for working with my inner life.