Mirroring and Pairing 3-cards

[joy]

Hey fellow Lenormand Readers

If you have a line of 3-cards: 1 - 2 - 3

Do you mirror

1-2

2-3

1-3

 

Or

1-2

2-3

3-1

 

Or do you do it different?

[WizardintheWoods]

I pair it up as 1&2, 2&3 and 1&3. The second card describes/modifies the 1st. I am sure there are other ways but that’s how I handle it. Also I use 2 as the hinge card or focus card-as it touches the other 2 it has the greatest effect. 

Edited January 18, 2022 by WizardintheWoods

[WizardintheWoods]

I am not sure I “verbalized” the hinge card correctly. If you take it in terms of a line of 5 or 7 the middle card still has that effect, it is the focus card - I think of it as the “center of attention” sort and that helped me learn its effects. 

[katrinka]

I'm not sure why anyone would alter the card order. If 1-2-3 is on the table, I'm not going to change 1-3 to 3-1.

[frankie]

For lines of three, I tend to read the cards without mirroring so basically in a line 1 - 2 - 3, I'd read them first like a sentence (what Andy terms as narration, I believe), then for added details I'd pair them as follows:

 

1 - 2

2 - 3

 

This is the technique I've used consistently with lines of five as well, and I only recently added mirroring as my third step (again with lines of five only); I've found it helpful to gain additional details, but these are details. Often I get my answers just by reading the cards first by narrating them, then pairing them, sometimes I only need to do one. These two techniques are sufficient for my needs when drawing a line of three, and if I want more info, I'll go with a longer line, and that's when I've found mirroring helpful, although not essential to getting my answer.

 

So for a line of five:

1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5

 

1 -2

2 - 3

3 - 4

4 - 5

 

1 - 5

2 - 4

 

The process is often more fluid than this, but as a new reader, I tend to prioritize getting at least one of the first two techniques down so I have a basic answer to my question. Also, to echo what katrinka says above, I never mess with the card order.

 

Hope some of this helps/makes sense!

 

[katrinka]

10 minutes ago, frankie said:

For lines of three, I tend to read the cards without mirroring so basically in a line 1 - 2 - 3, I'd read them first like a sentence (what Andy terms as narration, I believe), then for added details I'd pair them as follows:

 

1 - 2

2 - 3

 

Yes. with 1-2-3, 1+3 can be mirrored. But reading 1-2 and 2-3 is not mirroring, it's just reading the cards.
So, with a line of 5:

1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5
 1 - 5 and 2 - 4 can be mirrored, but not 1 - 2, etc. like you said here:

 

14 minutes ago, frankie said:

1 -2

2 - 3

3 - 4

4 - 5

 

1 - 5

2 - 4

 

 

[joy]

Thank you all fully understand what you meant @WizardintheWoods.

 

And yes what you said @frankie makes sense!

 

15 minutes ago, katrinka said:

 

Yes. with 1-2-3, 1+3 can be mirrored. But reading 1-2 and 2-3 is not mirroring, it's just reading the cards.
So, with a line of 5:

1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5
 1 - 5 and 2 - 4 can be mirrored, but not 1 - 2, etc. like you said here:
 

 

Thanks @katrinka so what is the difference really between 'pairing' and 'mirroring'? The way to read the two cards would remain the same or no?

[katrinka]

Mirrored cards have other cards in between them. They reflect each other.
That's the other term for it, "reflection." It's in the Treppner course, IIRC.

[joy]

Ok thanks @katrinkathat is what I thought.

[frankie]

26 minutes ago, katrinka said:

with 1-2-3, 1+3 can be mirrored

Good to know!

 

2 hours ago, katrinka said:

But reading 1-2 and 2-3 is not mirroring, it's just reading the cards.

This has been an important distinction for me to learn, like knowing the difference between the basics of reading and the techniques that help elaborate on interpretations. For me, it's been easier to just focus on the former and slowly build up to the latter.

 

2 hours ago, joy said:

And yes what you said @frankie makes sense!

Great. 😉

[pacificwaters]

I am so glad you started this thread @joy. 

 

Here's my experience. I have been doing 1-2-3 spreads, and have been reading 1-2, 2-3 and 3-1 considering the cards as being in a circle (theoretically). Until now I have always felt that the first card has been the pointer to the direction of the reading. I am sorry if I would disagree with some, but this is purely what I have been banking upon.

 

So coming back to the 1-3 v/s 3-1debate. The 3-1 has surprisingly worked for me. But I also know that the meaning of 1-3and 3-1 would be widely different. 

 

Now I am just curious.. In Tarot, there is no right and wrong. How is it in Lenormand, since it is more objective than Tarot?

Edited January 19, 2022 by pacificwaters

[katrinka]

9 minutes ago, pacificwaters said:

Now I am just curious.. In Tarot, there is no right and wrong. How is it in Lenormand, since it is more objective than Tarot?

 

"No right or wrong" is something that's only come into vogue in recent decades. Until the 70's or so, Tarot was read cartomantically, like Lenormand, playing cards, Sibilla, and everything else.
The simple explanation is that "no right or wrong" sells. Look at all the publications that promise to teach Tarot in a month, a week, or a day. The catch is that it doesn't work well.