Jump to content

Are spreads optional?


Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, DanielJUK said:

For example, love readings with problems are not so great for just putting cards down, you get a lot of insight with formal positions.

 

That depends on your question and how much information you're looking for, IMHO. "Has he been faithful?" and a quick unstructured line of 3 cards will razor right into what you're trying to find out. You can keep doing these little spreads for the additional questions that arise: "Was it with so-and-so?" "Is he still seeing her?" "Are there any others?" etc. When I worked the lines I did tons of these, and the questions came rapid fire since the clients were being charged by the minute.  A larger spread would have been too slow.  Laying them out, reading them, picking them up and laying them again when the caller changed their track - all of that is time consuming. My tagline was "Answers FAST - easy on the wallet!" 😁

But larger, named position spreads are nice occasionally, when time is not a factor. I like Chanah's old Couples Spread:

https://web.archive.org/web/20140130010844/https://36cards.wordpress.com/2008/05/19/traditional-lenormand-couples-spread/

 

 

 

Edited by katrinka
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd say so.  I usually do a daily draw of one card, which is obviously not a spread.  I also fairly regularly do what's called a "no spread" which is just a general three card reading where there is no defined meaning for each card drawn and they're all just meant to be read together to paint a bigger picture.  While it is considered a type of spread, it's not really IMHO.  I might shake up the methodology from taking three cards off the top of the pile I chose, to turning over the top card of each of the three piles I cut the deck into, but it is still drawing three cards with no defined parameters.  

 

Spreads are something I'll do if I have something I really want to read into.  I also occasionally like to experiment with new ones for fun.  But, they're not something I do every time I whip out my deck.  

Edited by AlbaTross
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, katrinka said:

A Line of Three is a spread. 😐

I suppose it is technically considered one.  I don't really think of it as such but I won't argue that point as I am a relative beginner and I'm not really the type to get too hung up on semantics.  It might also be worth drawing a line in the sand to indicate what is and isn't a spread and what criteria is involved.  In the case of drawing three cards, there's no real defined position of the cards.  Maybe there's more to them that I'm missing but I sure as heck don't think of such a reading as being the same as say, a past, present, future spread, or a three card relationship spread (yourself, your partner, the relationship).  

Link to post
Share on other sites

A spread is a group of cards that you read, très simple. Even the Lost Man is still a spread, although a lot of us just fan the deck for that one and the cards might never touch the table. I wouldn't call it semantics, it's the actual definition of the word. I've been reading cards since Nixon was in office, and prior to this thread I've never known anyone to say that spreads without named positions are not spreads.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, katrinka said:

A spread is a group of cards that you read, très simple. Even the Lost Man is still a spread, although a lot of us just fan the deck for that one and the cards might never touch the table. I wouldn't call it semantics, it's the actual definition of the word. I've been reading cards since Nixon was in office, and prior to this thread I've never known anyone to say that spreads without named positions are not spreads.

This - very much. I could even argue that a single card can be a spread. Especially if you deliberately read it more than once... Like upright for the visible side of this situation, and then reversed for pitfalls...

Link to post
Share on other sites

As has been said already, everytime you pull cards you spread them out to read, therefore, you are using a "spread". Defined spread positions and whether you need them to read the cards really seem to be the issue here. In my humble opinion you don't need to define what each card position is to be able to read them. You just need to know how to connect them all together into a narrative. Admittedly that can be harder the more cards you use but it's by no means impossible. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/13/2020 at 2:15 PM, katrinka said:

That was stunningly good!

 

Yeah, but my next political reading absolutely sucked....

 

16 hours ago, katrinka said:

I can't speak for devin, but there's context to consider. It's a political reading, after all. Those people don't play nice. 😉

 

In this case, there actually ended up being all sorts of accusations of vote shifting/lending to eliminate rivals, etc. Also, I tried for a while to add a more positive angle to the Magician but the card refused to budge in reading situations.... so I gave up!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, if the experts think I’m reading spreads, then that must be true.  I guess I do spreads daily then.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, AlbaTross said:

Well, if the experts think I’m reading spreads, then that must be true.  I guess I do spreads daily then.  

 

Good. A spread a day keeps the tarot elves at play.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
On 9/11/2020 at 1:21 PM, katrinka said:

Cards laid out without named positions are still spreads. Lines of 3, 5, or 7, the 3x3, pyramids, tableaus...all of these are spreads and they're not new. AFAIK, they predate spreads with named positions by many, many years. 

 

The interpretation is influenced by context: the question and the near-lying cards. 


Absolutely. For some reason we seem to differentiate between lines and carrés and crosses and stars. However a spread of cards is just that: cards spread.

 

I choose the spread that is going to give me the information I want to know. The 3 x 3/en carré is a good example. For most readings, you can simply read it as 8 trios, without any positional context (past, influences, &c). But if someone is concerned with an existing situation then the past can be necessary and helpful. We can sometimes read columns as what helps and where to forebear à la dexter and sinister, too.  It’s the context that determines the utilisation of spreads. 
 

The issue with position based context is when spreads — such as the Celtic Cross or the Twelve Houses — become a series of one card readings, this is what covers you, &c. There is often no synthesis and relating of cards.  For example, with the CC cards 6, 3 and 10 can all be read together last. You can start with 1, 2 and 7 and 8. With the twelve houses read the second and eighth houses for finances. But that is just how I see. 
 

Just experiment and pay attention to your cards.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.