So, this whole “tarot card group nyt” thing. It’s been bugging me for a bit, actually. Someone mentioned it, or I think they did, in passing, you know how these things go. Sounded kinda interesting, like maybe the New York Times was doing something cool with tarot cards, like a discussion group or a special feature. I’m always up for seeing how mainstream folks are playing with this stuff.
My First Steps Down the Rabbit Hole
First thing I did, naturally, was head over to the NYT website. Typed “tarot card group” right into their search bar. Figured if it was a thing, it’d pop right up. Well, that wasn’t exactly a goldmine. Got a few articles, mostly cultural pieces, you know, “tarot is trendy again,” that sort of stuff. But no actual “group.” No forum, no dedicated section. Hmm.
Okay, plan B. Good old Google. Typed in “tarot card group nyt.” Got a wider net of results, for sure. More articles, some blog posts from other people wondering about NYT and esoteric stuff, a few mentions of their games section. But nothing concrete about an official “tarot card group” hosted or run by them.
Digging a Bit Deeper (or Just Getting More Confused)
I started thinking, maybe “group” isn’t the right word. You know the NYT Games section is huge, right? Wordle, Spelling Bee, the Crossword, Connections… I spend way too much time on Connections, honestly. So I thought, maybe it’s a new game? Or an old one I somehow missed? That seemed plausible.
So, I spent a solid chunk of time just clicking around the NYT Games. Used their internal search too. Tried “tarot,” “cards,” “divination,” “fortune.” Nada. Zip. Zilch. It was starting to feel like a wild goose chase. I was clicking on anything that looked remotely like it could be a hidden section or a new trial game. My mouse got a real workout.
- Searched NYT site: Check.
- Googled extensively: Check.
- Scoured NYT Games: Double check.
Then a thought hit me: what if it’s not a literal group? What if it’s more like a “collection” or a “series”? Like, a series of articles that, taken together, form a sort of “group” perspective on tarot? Or maybe they featured a specific “group” of cards in some visual essay? My brain was really stretching at this point.
What I Actually Found (and Did)
I did end up re-reading some of those NYT articles about tarot’s history and its modern comeback. They’re fine, you know, well-written, what you’d expect from the NYT. One talked about how people use tarot for self-reflection, not just fortune-telling. That got me thinking.
So, here’s where my “practice” really took a turn. I figured, if the NYT isn’t giving me a tarot group, I’ll just make my own little NYT-themed tarot moment. I actually have a couple of tarot decks lying around – doesn’t everyone these days, or is it just me? I grabbed one, shuffled it, and decided to do a quick pull, specifically thinking about this whole confusing search for the “tarot card group nyt.”
And you know what? The cards were pretty spot on. Lots of swords, which to me often means mental stuff, searching, sometimes confusion. Figures, right? It felt like the cards were saying, “Yeah, you’re looking for something that isn’t quite there, or isn’t what you think it is.”
So, What’s the Deal with “tarot card group nyt”?
Honestly, at the end of all this, I’m pretty sure there isn’t an official “tarot card group nyt” in the way I first imagined. Maybe it was a misunderstanding. Maybe someone was talking about a local group that reads the NYT and also does tarot. Who knows? People say weird stuff.
My whole “practice” ended up being more about the process of looking, the frustration of not finding, and then sort of improvising my own little tarot reflection based on the theme. It wasn’t what I set out to do, but hey, that’s how it goes sometimes. You go looking for one thing and find something else, or nothing at all, and that becomes the experience. So yeah, that was my adventure with the elusive “tarot card group nyt.” Mostly a whole lot of searching and a bit of self-amusement with my own cards. Not quite the digital tarot salon I’d half-expected from the NYT, that’s for sure.
