I think that the symbols of the Tarot undeniably transmit esoteric information concealed within the guise of a gambling and fortune-telling game. The question boils down to the consideration of who put them there and why? We only know with certainty who is responsible, that is, the artists and engravers - master craftsman and their apprentices - who created the oldest packs. It was from the symbolism included in those original designs that the heritage of the Tarot took on a life of its own. We also know that virtually all traditional craft guilds were associated with initiation rites that transmitted the knowledge of the craft and its moral and spiritual significance. For all traditional artisans, the work of a craft whatever it may be - everything from architecture to metalurgy to weaving - had a spiritual and cosmological significance that transformed it into an act of prayer and worship which also contains an alchemical dimension whereby the transformation and perfection of the physical material through art simultaneously transformed and perfected the soul of the artist. Now that the heritage of traditional crafts has largely been supplanted by soulless automation, we can safely say that the Tarot is now relegated to the domain of folklore. People reproduce and recreate the established images without the requisite mastery to produce something of comparable depth and vitality and generally also without real knowledge of the meaning of or significant connection to the universal content of the symbols.
I think that the main problem of the occultists is that, ironically, they reduce the profundity of the symbols to a sterile and dogmatic interpretation based upon an identified system (the Western Qabalah) that they consider definitive. Heinrich Zimmer's criticism of the scholarly interpreters of myth diagnoses the problem very well when he writes that,
"The moment we abandon the dilettante attitude toward the images of folklore and myth and begin to feel certain about their proper interpretation (as professional comprehenders, handling the tool of an infallible method), we deprive ourselves of the quickening contact, the demonic and inspiring assault that is the effect of their intrinsic virtue. We forfeit our proper humility and open-mindedness before the unknown, and refuse to be instructed - refuse to be shown what has never quite been told to us or anybody else. And we attempt, instead, to classify the contents of the dark message under heads and categories already known. This prevents the emergence of any new meaning or fresh understanding."
Crowley is doubly problematic because he reformulated the symbolism in service of his private revelations of Thelema. The artist was skilled and imaginative but the directions were horribly flawed.
It may very well be that there is no final or definitive interpretation or explanation of the mystery of the Tarot, but that's okay, and it may actually be a big part of the whole "point."