Bottom of the deck

[Alistair]

Hi guys, curious to hear if/how you consider and involve the bottom of the deck when dealing a spread.  Recently, after dealing my spreads I have taken to revealing the card at the bottom of the deck for supplementary underlying energy for the situation.  Sometimes I will quickly pass through the bottom 3-5 cards and tell myself a quick little summarized narrative to gather additional insight to consider.

Interested to hear other approaches to this, and why you guys think it's important.

[Barleywine]

I generally ignore the bottom of the deck because I think the cards that need to be seen will come to the top. But I have created a couple of spreads that employ a "hidden motif" drawn from the cards at the bottom in addition to those pulled from the top for the more outward scenario.

[MysticMonkey]

I've sometimes looked at the bottom of the deck but I don't really like doing it because it feels like I'm just clutching at straws or waiting for some other new info to appear when the answer is already in front of me if I pay attention.  It's a bit like getting into the habit of drawing more and more clarifying cards for no good reason.  If the spread calls for paying attention to the bottom card or if I've decided in advance that it signifies the underlying energy as your do then I would consider it part of the reading but if not I feel like I'm just distracting myself from the actual message. 

[geoxena]

On 4/8/2020 at 9:06 PM, Alistair said:

Interested to hear other approaches to this, and why you guys think it's important.

Personally, I don't "deal" tarot cards.  I tend to spread the shuffled deck across the table, pass my hand over the fanned out cards,  and pull cards when it feels right.  It's how I learned when I was a teenager many many moons ago and, for some reason, I've never liked cutting the deck to choose cards.  But lately I've also tried keeping the deck in a stack and thumbing down the edge of it, stopping to pull cards when it feels right.  Either way, I don't ascribe any significance to the bottom cards just because they're on the bottom (?!).

[Rodney]

Some folks use the card on the bottom of the deck as the Shadow or Base card for additional info about the reading. I generally don't even look at that card. When I first got the Vargo Gothic Tarot, I did a Deck Interview spread with it and the card on the bottom of the deck made itself known to me. Basically, it fell from the bottom of the deck face up. It was the 5 Swords, which I took to mean that if I knew what was good for me, I'd consult the bottom of the deck when using the Gothic.

[Barleywine]

Here's a spread that uses the bottom of the deck to populate one of two possible "directions of flow" for the cards in a reading. It's probably my most fully-realized use of the "bottom-of-the-deck" approach.

[Rodney]

@Barleywine you create some of the most interesting and intriguing spreads!

[Flaxen]

3 hours ago, Barleywine said:

Here's a spread that uses the bottom of the deck to populate one of two possible "directions of flow" for the cards in a reading. It's probably my most fully-realized use of the "bottom-of-the-deck" approach.

I really like this spread. It looks really useful and insightful. 

[QueenOfSpades]

I use the deck bottom as a summary of the spread that I just put out. 

[katrinka]

I think that the bottom card can be used, if you're consistent with how it's interpreted: "unseen forces", "surprise card", etc.
But that said, I don't use it. It isn't needed.
And there's a certain not-on-the-level aspect to it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bottom_dealing
 

"But I should have known
That all the cards were comin'
From the bottom of the pack
And if I'd known what she was dealing out
I'd have dealt it back!"

 

 

 

LOL. But seriously - the bottom of the deck is famous for being a cheat method, and I prefer to leave it alone.

[gregory]

I think we all deal/shuffle/draw in the way that suits our method/style. I have never used a bottom card. I cannot see it as being any different in essence from a card drawn from elsewhere in the deck. A card is a card is a card.

 

I believe that the Tarot Powers On High will take account of this when giving me the cards I get. Seriously.

[Guest]

I tend to read it as a "shadow" card. In other words, it ties into whatever reading I'm doing as factoring in as an unseen factor that is affecting the situation in the reading or something within myself or the Seeker that needs to be acknowledged before proceeding. This has been effective for me.

I don't agree that it's a "cheat" method, but it isn't for everyone. It's a matter of preference on whether you want to incorporate it, but I would recommend remaining consistent with it, whether across the board or with a specific deck.

[katrinka]

15 minutes ago, Anesiadora said:

I don't agree that it's a "cheat" method

In gaming it is, that's a documented fact.
https://entertainment.howstuffworks.com/poker11.htm

In reading, it isn't intended that way.
I just prefer not to use it, as it seems a bit tainted to me. YMMV.

[Barleywine]

My long-standing opinion is that anything "tacked on" to a straightforward draw is of dubious value in that it is almost always unnecessary and may cause more confusion than it resolves. That includes base or shadow cards, clarifiers, jumpers and other "extras." About as far as I usually go is the occasional use of the quintessence because it is rooted in the cards already pulled. But I'm getting a little soft in my old age and sometimes build extra "conditional" cards into my spreads; however, they are always part of the overall plan and not arbitrary. They may or may not be used depending on the criteria and method (the stated "conditions") for selecting which cards to read.

Edited June 22, 2020 by Barleywine