Lenormand Decks - What are deal makers or breakers for you personally?

[GreatDane]

I know we all have our preference in decks.  To me, what one likes, resonates is, is all that matters. 

 

SO, here are my make it or break it for a Lenormand:

 

NAMES - if you call the Scythe, SCISSORS, I'm not there.  Renaming, totally reimagining a traditional Lenormand card is a deal breaker for me.  Yes, I can get USED to it, but I want to look at card, out of the box, and go DOG, CLOVER, etc.     

 

IMAGES - Again, if you have Scissors for Scythe, um no.   If you have a Bird swooping in on a Mouse, no.      

 

PLAYING CARD IMAGES - I don't read playing cards, don't want to, and don't see the need for playing card IMAGES that take up a chunk of a generally already fairly small card.  I GET why those who read playing cards may find it handy, but while I am FINE with a small symbol on a corner of that card, don't want to see an image of the playing card.

 

MIXED STYLES - I like consistency, if you are doing in a certain style, I want that consistent throughout.  Seeing a old silhouette of a ring and then a photo of a dog, just doesn't do it for me.

 

WHAT I REALLY LIKE:

 

CLEAR IMAGES - I had the Mysterical Lenormand - could read with it just fine, but that's because I memorized the cards after the first flip through.  Also that a card doesn't have two or three Lenormand symbols in one card so I have to guess (a ship, with a moon, with a man on deck, no)

 

I also like WHIP/ BROOM - BOTH if possible.  Because in certain readings, they can be different things for me.  Yes, I can do one or the other, but prefer both. 

 

SO ANYTHING with a clear image, I have a couple of Chronata's decks, VERY easy reads, same with Seven Stars Lenormand decks I have.  

 

That's really it.  Just a CLEAR image in a consistent style throughout without playing card images (small symbols fine).

 

SO what do you like best or least in a Lenormand deck? 

 

[Guest]

Like you, I prefer consistency. If the majority of the cards are Biedermeier, seeing a Jacobean or Art Deco inclusion is just jarring.  The Blue Bird did that with its court-cards versus the cards’ iconography.  
 

However, the 6 of Spades/High Tower should always be from an earlier period. Traditionally, it is a tower-house and distinctly older than the other structures.  So, if it’s the Empire State Building or the Eiffel Tower... well no.  To me that changes the card’s meaning. 
 

For me, playing cards are a must. I use them a lot for refining information and other little details. You cannot look and see if the knave of clubs is looking at something with Kn♣️.

 

On the Hound card I want a dog.  Not a cat (even though I’m a cat-person).  As T.S. Eliot said: A dog’s a dog — A CAT’S A CAT.  I also prefer a working dog, as I’ve always associated it with employees and colleagues.  

Similarly, I prefer a single wading stork on the Stork card and a viper on the Serpent card. 
 

I also prefer an unopened letter on the 7 of Spades/Letter and vertical or horizontal key on the 8 of Diamonds/Key. As much as I have loved the Piatnik it’s Key card has always looked odd. 

Edited February 24, 2021 by Guest

[GreatDane]

Thank you for sharing your preferences, Andy.  

 

I know how much time, study, experience you have with Lenormand.  Major kudos.

 

I realized my comfort level and what I wanted from Lenormand and I am happy where I am with what I do, but you are a true scholar with the cards.

 

We do share what we do and don't want to see on a card 🙂. 

 

For me, Lenormand is so great, so different from tarot because it's so clear re images, or should be.  I loathe decks where you have to guess what a Lenormand card is, THAT'S the biggest deal breaker.  If others like having Lenormands they have to guess the image (I have seen Lenormands with MULTIPLE Lenormand images in one card), obviously we all have our preferences.    When I see a Lenormand that is more like an oracle or tarot hybrid, I just go the other way.  But we all like what we like.       

[Guest]

Hi @GreatDane

23 hours ago, GreatDane said:

 

For me, Lenormand is so great, so different from tarot because it's so clear re images, or should be.  I loathe decks where you have to guess what a Lenormand card is, THAT'S the biggest deal breaker.  If others like having Lenormands they have to guess the image (I have seen Lenormands with MULTIPLE Lenormand images in one card), obviously we all have our preferences.    When I see a Lenormand that is more like an oracle or tarot hybrid, I just go the other way.  But we all like what we like.       

That is how I felt about the Mystical Lenormand and some newer patterns. I once had a request for help in interpreting the “Magpie” card!

I appreciated it more after reading Regula’s book, but for me it is too detailed.

 

I like what I call landscaped Lenormands. If you look at the Dondorf, Brepols, Wust or Blaue Eule cards that are linked often share details, e.g. the Boat, the Anchor and the Fishes. But they are still clear. 
 

There is a lot of folklore to the cards.  I use the Lenormand for natural magic aid, somatic work  and metaphysical readings over the tarot.
 

It can be used for lots of different things. But you need a deck that works for you - so it’s good that you know what you like. 🙂 
 

 

[GreatDane]

Amen to that, Andy!  Yes, you are so much more involved with the cards in different ways, and I tip my hat to you!  

 

You are much more involved, you're the scholar, and I'm more like the Dear Abby giving advice on a three card 🙂 

 

But we do share wanting to know what the heck the card is supposed to be.  Lenormand, over tarot, over oracles, is straightforward in you need an ANCHOR in there, where tarot, and especially oracles, have a lot more leeway.   I like to be able to look at a Lenormand image and go DOG, BOOK, not a child sitting by a dog reading a book with a set of keys in her hand 🙂  

 

GREAT you're here and I hope you post more, Andy.  I enjoyed reading your threads on AT.

 

GD 

[katrinka]

These are my dealbreakers:

Titles. The House card shouldn't need to have "HOUSE" emblazoned on it. It should be immediately obvious that it's a house.

A broom. At some point, somebody must have seen the birchrod bundle and mistaken it for a whisk broom. But it isn't used for cleaning, it's used for punishment. It's a card of strife, not clearing a space.

I agree with Andy about the Tower and the playing card insets, and that the dog should be a working breed that helps put food on the table. And I also prefer the Key horizontal or vertical. I can tolerate verses if I can't read them, but I'd rather have playing card insets. I use the suits and I like to see them and not worry that I'm misremembering which inset goes on a particular card. The people who scrap the insets are often the ones who end up putting those silly titles on the cards!

I agree with Great Dane about mixed styles. They're jarring and they make the deck look scavenged.

 

A bicycle on the Rider card, people where they don't belong (like a woman wearing the Fox or Snake) those kinds of thing are definitely dealbreakers. So are toy versions of things - I think one deck shows the Ship in a bowl. It kills the whole card meaning.

I can tolerate a little wonkiness, though I don't prefer it. I wouldn't junk an otherwise-good deck over something like red Lilies, even though it's an aberration. One deck I like, the Schmid, has tropical fish and a polar bear - but it would be a MUCH better deck if they hadn't done that. I've seen some really silly things in the last ten years or so, too numerous to mention. Just keep it the way it's supposed to be with a clear image, a number, and a playing card image.
 

Edited February 26, 2021 by katrinka

[Guest]

16 hours ago, katrinka said:

Titles. The House card shouldn't need to have "HOUSE" emblazoned on it. It should be immediately obvious that it's a house.

Yes. If the cards are numbered and well-rendered there is no need for titles. 

 

16 hours ago, katrinka said:

I can tolerate verses if I can't read them, but I'd rather have playing card insets. I use the suits and I like to see them and not worry that I'm misremembering which inset goes on a particular card. The people who scrap the insets are often the ones who end up putting those silly titles on the cards!

It is strange, but I no longer notice the verses on the Brepols. But I do prefer cards without them. Several years ago, I enquired whether Carta Mundi would issue a non-verse edition. The answer was negative; its verses were very influential.  But the non-verse reproduction is available from the Game of Hope. 
 

16 hours ago, katrinka said:

One deck I like, the Schmid, has tropical fish and a polar bear - but it would be a MUCH better deck if they hadn't done that. I've seen some really silly things in the last ten years or so, too numerous to mention. Just keep it the way it's supposed to be with a clear image, a number, and a playing card image.

I love the Schmid. But I agree. It is worth remembering that a husband would gift his wife goldfish on their first anniversary, to symbolise wealth and prosperity and fruitful union. That was still common during the nineteenth century, in Central Europe. Freshwater and tropical fish were also expensive. But it should be a school of a fishes in the sea to represent variety/many, and so on. 

 

The polar bear is odd. It also changes the brunette associations. That is one thing I note new artists fail to understand — certain folklore, such as the Serpent’s hazel eyes and the Anchor’s beaches, &c, come from the designs and colours. 

Edited February 26, 2021 by Guest

[Guest]

For anyone wondering, here is an original copy of the Schmid Lenormand. It’s beautiful and facsimiles are available. 

[GreatDane]

VERY nice, Timtoldrum!