Importance of a "spread."

[Eric13]

I'm just wondering how important it is, or is not to some readers of using an actual spread they may find on the web, or from a book either off the shelf or one that comes with a book in a tarot deck. If you feel that is the one to use, or if there is a magic pill so to speak by finding a spread somewhere to get it right for a particular reason.
I'm also wondering from readers who may not use any preconceived spread and just use one they invented for themselves, or simply lay down a line, or a few rows of cards in a square lets say. 

So I am curious about both points of view.

I myself have evolved into using, depending on the question/issue to using a simple three card spread, reading it left to right, and one I just made myself I call a cross, as in something like the Red Cross has. I used on here a couple of nights ago for my full moon reading. I vary the size of it also. Usually between seven and five cards.

I just find it easier to read correctly, learn the cards with much more depth and detail by using my own spread instead of using a preconceived one by being distracted the placement of each based on someone else's invention. Thats just me.

How about you?

[gregory]

I invent my own 99% of the time. Quite often a single card. The only times I don't is if I'm in a group which has a set spread. It's very rare that any existing spread fits my question... As you say - someone else's invention - not one that resonates with me !

[Eric13]

What you said about the group is good also. I will go along with that also. Makes sense. Thanks for the response. 

[katrinka]

I almost never use spreads with named positions. I prefer lines, boxes, and tableaus. (And yes, those are spreads.)
When I do use something with named positions, I prefer the old traditional ones. I don't buy books of spreads, and I usually skip the "spreads" section in other books. I don't need that. People have this mistaken idea that they need a different spread for every situation. They'd be better served studying the cards themselves in depth rather than looking for 1000 fancy spreads.

[Raggydoll]

I don't use pre-made spreads unless I am participating in an exchange or a reading circle. I have always invented my own, and its entirely based on what the reading is about and on how complex the topic is. As gregory said, one card is plenty, but there are some times when I wish to create spreads to tackle multiple aspects. Back when I started reading cards, I struggled to find books on tarot, and so I didn't have a selection of ready made spreads. That´s why I started making them up myself, or just placing cards in a line. Then when I discovered the AT forum, I did play around with all the spreads there and had lots of fun. But with time I fell back on the habit of creating my own spreads since it saved me time and made it so much easier to have each reading be tailored to the situation at hand. I don't think there is anything wrong with using pre-made spreads. Whatever works and whatever a person likes! 

[DarkMoge]

I invent spreads almost all the time. Clear understanding of what the positions and connections between them represent is very important for me. And well, spreads invented by someone else might not even have the level of depth that I want and if it does have, it is likely not explained. Its easier to just apply own knowledge and use familiar patterns of pairs, triplets, quadruplets, lines, mirrors, circles, etc, and overlap them on top of each other. Giving position names with which I am familiar with, if I was trying to invent a position that I have not used before, I would be asking myself for a while "what if I get card x in that position" until I would feel comfortable using it in a spread.

[Eric13]

I agree with all thats been said. All excellent. It much more beneficial to read from your own spread and should be realized that a reader doesn't have to follow what may be in those "LWB's".

[selena]

I’ve found that it is best to have a small pool of spreads that can be applied or easily adapted to specific circumstances and needs.
 

Reading on call lines or for seekers who will choose not to disclose anything just made bespoke spreads redundant. 

For this reason, I have six or so “main” spreads and four more specialist ones. These are a mixture of non-positional (lines and boxes which can be increased or decreased in size) and positional (such as the pentagram and the heptagram).

[katrinka]

55 minutes ago, selena said:

I’ve found that it is best to have a small pool of spreads that can be applied or easily adapted to specific circumstances and needs.
 

Reading on call lines or for seekers who will choose not to disclose anything just made bespoke spreads redundant. 

For this reason, I have six or so “main” spreads and four more specialist ones. These are a mixture of non-positional (lines and boxes which can be increased or decreased in size) and positional (such as the pentagram and the heptagram).

 

Exactly this. When I was on Keen, I never knew how long a caller was going to stay on. I might start with a triplet and end up with cards all over the table. "Expandable" was key! You just don't get that kind of flexibility with bespoke spreads.

Edited October 23, 2021 by katrinka

[WizardintheWoods]

For me less is better.  Having.a few spreads which I know well and have multifunctional use is my ticket. I use lines, boxes and tableau’s for the most part and stay almost totally away from spreads with “pre-defined” card position meanings. There is a rare exception, Celtic Cross, but that is what my Gram taught me the basics of Tarot from and she viewed and taught it in a more fluid way they I see those who outline it today.  

[gregory]

Hm. Celtic Cross was what turned me off pre-existing spreads for YEARS. Not to mention the enormous number of variants which always confuse when someone posts "I did a CC and this is what I got" - well, which cards represented what ??? One always has to ask. Always !

[katrinka]

17 hours ago, gregory said:

Hm. Celtic Cross was what turned me off pre-existing spreads for YEARS. Not to mention the enormous number of variants which always confuse when someone posts "I did a CC and this is what I got" - well, which cards represented what ??? One always has to ask. Always !

Yeah. On the rare occasions I use it, I use the old PKT version: "This covers you, this crosses you, this crowns you, this is beneath you, this is behind you, this is before you..." It used to be in all the LWB's, you'd think it would be pretty standard. Now people are laying the cards clockwise (sometimes) and calling the Beneath card "the subconscious" (sometimes - and I learned that one as the foundation or basis of the matter, not the subconscious). A minor tweak or two is one thing, but these altered CC's really need their own names or something. It's not the same spread at all.
 

Edited October 24, 2021 by katrinka

[DanielJUK]

I do 3 cards with no positions for myself all the time. However I strongly recommend occasionally trying formal spreads, especially large ones (not just the celtic cross which I think has fallen out of fashion these days). They really have a place! I think spreads with defined positions are great when you are confused. I find this when people want love readings a lot. Sometimes you just don't understand it or don't know what you want, use formal positions and it brings such clarity!

 

Shake up your regular reading routine, add some formal spreads, make up your own spreads and go free hand with no formal positions if you do use positions because it's good to add different methods to your normal practice! I try and do a positioned spread at least once a month now.

[selena]

1 hour ago, katrinka said:

Yeah. On the rare occasions I use it, I use the old PKT version: "This covers you, this crosses you, this crowns you, this is beneath you, this is behind you, this is before you..." It used to be in all the LWB's, you'd think it would be pretty standard. Now people are laying the cards clockwise (sometimes) and calling the Beneath card "the subconscious" (sometimes - and I learned one as the foundation or basis of the matter, not the subconscious). A minor tweak or two is one thing, but these altered CC's really need their own names or something. It's not the same spread at all.

 

1 hour ago, gregory said:

Hm. Celtic Cross was what turned me off pre-existing spreads for YEARS. Not to mention the enormous number of variants which always confuse when someone posts "I did a CC and this is what I got" - well, which cards represented what ??? One always has to ask. Always !

The Celtic Cross is in my pool.  Like Katrinka I use the version given by Waite; however, it was the Mythic Tarot that introduced me to it (it came with a reading cloth). At the time, I found it clumsy and disjointed. It is all over the place. I think a lot of the redesigns are because of that – it is a mess. I did experiment with another version included in Sasha Fenton’s Tarot in Action. But it was no better.

 

In one of her books, Juliet Sharman-Burke did not read it in sequential order. For me, that was a light bulb moment.  Eventually, I found my own way of going through the cards and it has given me good results 

It made me realise that a spread is only as a good as the reader’s ability to navigate it. You have to be able to pull it all together.

[katrinka]

1 hour ago, selena said:

At the time, I found it clumsy and disjointed. It is all over the place. I think a lot of the redesigns are because of that – it is a mess.

Yes. When read as per the instructions, it's extremely disjointed. Ten little islands unto themselves.
 

1 hour ago, selena said:

In one of her books, Juliet Sharman-Burke did not read it in sequential order. For me, that was a light bulb moment.  Eventually, I found my own way of going through the cards and it has given me good results 

THIS. If you go card by card in order, there's no interaction between the cards. But there are little groups that can be combined if you don't read it sequentially.
I still lay the cards the same way, though. I might put the staff on the left sometimes, but it's still the old CC.

Edited October 23, 2021 by katrinka
typo

[selena]

14 hours ago, katrinka said:

THIS. If you go card by card in order, there's no interaction between the cards. But there are little groups that can be combined if you don't read it sequentially.
I still lay the cards the same way, though. I might put the staff on the left sometimes, but it's still the old CC.

Yes. I still use Waite’s ordering (covers, crosses, crowns, and so on). But I do not read it 1, 2, 3… I start with cards one and two and then go to cards five and four for the past.  After that, I read cards seven, eight and nine as these focus on the present. Cards six, three and ten are read last.

 

For me, it just flows better.  That is what matters in any spread. That is flows. 

Edited October 24, 2021 by selena

[Eric13]

This is great to have many different opinions. And something that can be learned from. And I also feel its important to connect cards and see the a spread as a whole instead of individually seeing one card to represent something. But thats just me. Anyone who feels differently can always speak up as well. 

[gregory]

Every last one of us sees it differently.

 

"We are all individuals...."

[selena]

3 hours ago, gregory said:

Every last one of us sees it differently.

 

"We are all individuals...."

It is what makes this place so valuable. Seeing the different views, and discussing different opinions, stops complacency and keeps us learning.

[Jewel]

I do use a lot of spreads with named positions, but many times I tweak them.  I also sometimes use lines of cards with no named positions.  I just really depends on my question.  For purposes of deck reviews, if they come with a companion book with spreads I will try out the spreads to include my thoughts about them in the review.

 

When I do use spreads with positions I first look at the spread as a whole (numbers, court cards, elemental correspondences) then read the card by card using the influences I see in the spread on how it affects that.  Then I do a summary of the reading which ties it all together.

[Eric13]

And thats something thats important also, as @Jewel said, the card's actual number is a factor.