Jump to content

Kipperkarten Studies


timtoldrum

Recommended Posts

timtoldrum

Having some extra free time, I have decided to look again at the Kipper-karten.

 

I have owned and utilised the Kipper-karten in the past but preferred the Leiding-karten. However, I did not connect with the cards at that time. Consequently, I am approaching this a total overhaul.

 

The first step was to determine the approach. I have read Toni Puhle's primer, but there was a disconnect in some sections. Consequently, I settled on Hildegard Leiding and Utu Dietrich as primary sources.

 

Three weeks in I'm quite impressed.  Thus far, I have focused on short lines.

 

One thing I have noted is that there seems a consensus to remove the Hauptperson 1 or 2 before the reading. I do not mind both laying and reading right to left (with Hauptperson 1). But does one always need to remove the significator? I always like to see if it appears in the reading. 

Edited by leroidetrèfle
Link to post
Share on other sites
Barleywine

I've been working with the Kipperkarten for around six months. I never saw a reason to remove those cards.

Link to post
Share on other sites
katrinka

I've seen mention of people doing that, but I don't think it's standard procedure - at least, I haven't really seen people doing it at German Kipper groups.
I don't do it myself, as I'm not convinced that there's a need to do so.

Link to post
Share on other sites
timtoldrum
2 hours ago, Barleywine said:

I've been working with the Kipperkarten for around six months. I never saw a reason to remove those cards.

Thank you, Barleywine. Out of interest, can I ask which source you have followed?  

2 hours ago, Flaxen said:

I’ve never seen the need to remove them either. 

Thank you Flaxen.  I'm grateful to hear your perspective.  

1 hour ago, katrinka said:

I've seen mention of people doing that, but I don't think it's standard procedure - at least, I haven't really seen people doing it at German Kipper groups.
I don't do it myself, as I'm not convinced that there's a need to do so.

Thank you, Katrinka. 

 

One of the motivations for posting is that one has seen German-sources and cartomantes do so.  However, there seldom seems to be an explanation as to why.  I can understand, from Hildegard Leiding's instructions, that cards' significations are affected by their position to HP1 or 2 (unter and über, et cetera).  But I am not too sure how that translates to the short lines, et cetera. 

29 minutes ago, Decan said:

I stayed at the initial stages with the Kipper but I'm pretty sure it must read very well when the method comes easily and becomes second nature!

 

Thanks, Decan.  I am just intrigued as to why one is supposed to remove the card.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
Barleywine
37 minutes ago, leroidetrèfle said:

Thank you, Barleywine. Out of interest, can I ask which source you have followed?

I don't read much German and I don't have Toni's book, so I puzzled my way through the German-language instruction cards that came with the deck and I use katrinka's meanings from her blog site. The cards do show intentionally placing the "PK" either in the center position of a layout (there are 9-card, 17-card, 25-card and 36-card versions) or above the middle column in a 15-card array. My feeling is that the story will still unroll even without the PK in the spread; I just read it a bit differently, as more situational than personal.

Edited by Barleywine
Link to post
Share on other sites
timtoldrum
36 minutes ago, Barleywine said:

I don't read much German and I don't have Toni's book, so I puzzled my way through the German-language instruction cards that came with the deck and I use katrinka's meanings from her blog site. The cards do show intentionally placing the "PK" either in the center position of a layout (there are 9-card, 17-card, 25-card and 36-card versions) or above the middle column in a 15-card array. My feeling is that the story will still unroll even without the PK in the spread; I just read it a bit differently, as more situational than personal.

Thank you, Barleywine.  I always trust your insights.

 

Sadly, one never completed German.  Hildegard Leiding did the original instructions I had (not sure if it is still the case in the standard edition).  I found those insights both sensible and clear.  As they were what I first digested, I decided to focus on her material.  Katrinka needs to write a book! 

Link to post
Share on other sites
katrinka

If Katrinka ever gets to retire, lol.

14 hours ago, leroidetrèfle said:

One of the motivations for posting is that one has seen German-sources and cartomantes do so.  However, there seldom seems to be an explanation as to why.  I can understand, from Hildegard Leiding's instructions, that cards' significations are affected by their position to HP1 or 2 (unter and über, et cetera).  But I am not too sure how that translates to the short lines, et cetera.

I don't know. I suspect it might be because she's writing an instructive text and she's simplifying matters. The common conventions around 1 and 2 really don't always translate that well to short lines, but you know how people are: "But you said..."; "But what if...", etc. Maybe it's just easier to explain without the significator.

I generally use some of the little rules - like cards at the significator's back tending to take on a more sinister shade of meaning. But it's still best to keep in mind that hinter may not be that important when there's no visible unter or über. 😉

The best bit of advice I ever got on this deck was probably "You have to find what works." That german pragmatism, lol. If it's clear and it's accurate, keep it. If not, forget it - no matter who said it.
But you know this already. 😉

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

If Katrinka ever gets to retire, lol.

I don't know. I suspect it might be because she's writing an instructive text and she's simplifying matters. The common conventions around 1 and 2 really don't always translate that well to short lines, but you know how people are: "But you said..."; "But what if...", etc. Maybe it's just easier to explain without the significator.

I generally use some of the little rules - like cards at the significator's back tending to take on a more sinister shade of meaning. But it's still best to keep in mind that hinter may not be that important when there's no visible unter or über. 😉

The best bit of advice I ever got on this deck was probably "You have to find what works." That german pragmatism, lol. If it's clear and it's accurate, keep it. If not, forget it - no matter who said it.
But you know this already. 😉

Thank you. That is sound advice.

 

I can understand what Toni Puhle advocates, more so than what I have seen, as the PK1/2 becomes the first card in the horizon. I like that for daily draws. I suspect what I’ve seen is just a virtue of necessity. 
 

I’ve started to look at Malkiel’s master-cards. Did he ever explain why these were master-cards? I can understand some, but not all. 

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

I’ve started to look at Malkiel’s master-cards. Did he ever explain why these were master-cards? I can understand some, but not all. 

He never did. I asked, and got no explanation beyond "This is just the way my family did it".

It works well for that spread, but I agree, I wouldn't consider them master-cards in the more general sense. He doesn't either, obviously, or there would be no need for the pin holes. 😁 They would be committed to memory, since they would always be master-cards. I don't get the feeling he's pulling our collective legs or made it up from whole cloth. I do think it's a legitimate old spread, and it's effective. But like a lot of things that people pass on orally, something may have been altered a bit.
If you come across anything similar, let me know, please. It's been bugging me for about 8 years now!

Link to post
Share on other sites
timtoldrum
Posted (edited)

No; you can tell he is being sincere. Malkiel also is too sincere and direct. And I loved the pins — but will stick to colour markings. 

 

Truth in Story did a video with the spread, and includes a reference to another reader. However, even then, it’s not too clear what you are using them as.


It looks more like trump cards/like when you’re counting out the wish or aces. I do love the spread. 
 

I’m enjoying looking at these cards. I’ve set up there journal — tabbed, et cetera. So I’ve committed now. 

Edited by leroidetrèfle
Link to post
Share on other sites
katrinka
39 minutes ago, leroidetrèfle said:

No; you can tell he is being sincere. Malkiel also is too sincere and direct. 

Yes. If you're going to be that real on the internet, you need a pretty thick skin. Otherwise, some evasiveness is in order.
I always liked that about him, though. You know exactly where you stand with people like him, you don't have to watch your back. :)

39 minutes ago, leroidetrèfle said:

And I loved the pins — but will stick to colour markings. 

Yes...I put some Sharpie ink on a tissue and made a little soft-focus wash on the relevant titles. It actually doesn't look too bad.

39 minutes ago, leroidetrèfle said:

Truth in Story did a video with the spread, and includes a reference to another reader. However, even then, it’s not too clear what you are using them as.

She calls them "trumps", but I have no idea who she got that from. Some of them are pretty life-altering (Funeral, Marriage...), but His Thoughts? There's no suits in this deck, much less Majors.

It's here, if anyone is following along and wants to see it. I've set the video to start at the spread explanation, the first 40 minutes is just a review of the Mystiches (and not as much fun as Malkiel's legendary review of that same deck, lol.)
 

39 minutes ago, leroidetrèfle said:

It looks more like trump cards/like when you’re counting out the wish or aces. I do love the spread. 

Yes! Or those old Patience spreads...IIRC, there's one in the Livre du Destin LWB that's counted out in a similar manner.

39 minutes ago, leroidetrèfle said:

I’m enjoying looking at these cards. I’ve set up there journal — tabbed, et cetera. So I’ve committed now. 

Wonderful! Looking forward to your insights.

Link to post
Share on other sites
bastetly

I'm not currently working w the Kippers but I'm interested so am following along.

 

And yes katrinka, please don't shed your mortal coil before bestowing a book on cartomancy for the rest of us that may still be around.   However you being a Texan perhaps your life has made you too tough to ever "give up, give out, give in?"  haha   Quote fm what movie??   

So do think about it when thou dost retire, or sooner dear.  

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

Yes. If you're going to be that real on the internet, you need a pretty thick skin. Otherwise, some evasiveness is in order.
I always liked that about him, though. You know exactly where you stand with people like him, you don't have to watch your back. 🙂

Yes...I put some Sharpie ink on a tissue and made a little soft-focus wash on the relevant titles. It actually doesn't look too bad.

She calls them "trumps", but I have no idea who she got that from. Some of them are pretty life-altering (Funeral, Marriage...), but His Thoughts? There's no suits in this deck, much less Majors.

It's here, if anyone is following along and wants to see it. I've set the video to start at the spread explanation, the first 40 minutes is just a review of the Mystiches (and not as much fun as Malkiel's legendary review of that same deck, lol.)
 

Yes! Or those old Patience spreads...IIRC, there's one in the Livre du Destin LWB that's counted out in a similar manner.

Wonderful! Looking forward to your insights.

Malkiel and I never agreed on everything, but I’ve always admired his conviction and intellectual integrity. And you’re right, it’s like the Patience games.
 

Thus far I’ve put small dots to mark them — using my old deck. I’ve not marked the stop-cards; I’m still not too sure of their usage. They remind me somewhat of certain games, even Moksha Patam. As the cards are scenic rather than emblems it might be that these are used for flow or pace. I don’t know.

 

And as Bastetly says, sooner rather than later please. 

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

Malkiel and I never agreed on everything, but I’ve always admired his conviction and intellectual integrity.

Yes. And who wants to agree with anybody on every single thing? It would be like talking to yourself.
Some things are Important and Non-Negotiable, true. But those are usually ethical issues, not how you read the Bear or Lillies. 😉

Quote

Thus far I’ve put small dots to mark them — using my old deck. I’ve not marked the stop-cards; I’m still not too sure of their usage. They remind me somewhat of certain games, even Moksha Patam. As the cards are scenic rather than emblems it might be that these are used for flow or pace. I don’t know.

There's a huge overemphasis on those here. Sure, it can make sense for Funeral to completely stop a storyline. But Letter? Really? How many letters do that in life?

And the thing is, I've never seen German readers do that. Sometimes cards are read as connectors, cause and effect, etc., but nobody talks about "stop cards". None of the German readers I asked when I first encountered the term had even heard of "stop cards". Here's an old Kipper group on facebook. I'm linking to it here because all anybody has to do to read the posts is to click a 'translate' button - it's easy for anyone to see what's there. It's fairly good for a facebook group, it belonged to Susanne Zitzl at one time. I can't recall ever seeing mention of "stop cards" there, or at any other German group, website, or blog. https://www.facebook.com/groups/162246830482453/?ref=bookmarks

 

Edited by katrinka
Link to post
Share on other sites
timtoldrum
Posted (edited)
8 hours ago, katrinka said:

 

There's a huge overemphasis on those here. Sure, it can make sense for Funeral to completely stop a storyline. But Letter? Really? How many letters do that in life?

And the thing is, I've never seen German readers do that. Sometimes cards are read as connectors, cause and effect, etc., but nobody talks about "stop cards". None of the German readers I asked when I first encountered the term had even heard of "stop cards". Here's an old Kipper group on facebook. I'm linking to it here because all anybody has to do to read the posts is to click a 'translate' button - it's easy for anyone to see what's there. It's fairly good for a facebook group, it belonged to Susanne Zitzl at one time. I can't recall ever seeing mention of "stop cards" there, or at any other German group, website, or blog. https://www.facebook.com/groups/162246830482453/?ref=bookmarks

 


You’ve hit the nail on the head. Certain stop-cards, such as the Pleasant Letter, seem (to me as a beginner) to be unequal or not necessarily as easy to understand. 
 

It is extremely difficult to  study, as there is a dearth of information. To be fair to Toni Puhle, there is more than an adequate amount of information in her book. However, there is nothing to contrast it with. That ability to compare and contrast sources is essential for students, as it identifies the similarities and differences and enables one to understand nuances. 
 

It’s interesting that there appears to be little information in German. I have tried several times to search (under various terms that I can think of), and asked a few German readers I know through Lenormand platforms. But nothing.

 

 I understand Toni runs courses; however, as I’ve focused on Leiding-Heinz, et cetera, I don’t think it would benefit me. I tracking their appearance. 

 

Edited by leroidetrèfle
Link to post
Share on other sites
katrinka
4 hours ago, leroidetrèfle said:

It is extremely difficult to  study, as there is a dearth of information. To be fair to Toni Puhle, there is more than an adequate amount of information in her book. However, there is nothing to contrast it with. That ability to compare and contrast sources is essential for students, as it identifies the similarities and differences and enables one to understand nuances. 

In english, yes, there's almost nothing: hers and Musruck's, that I'm aware of. And it's my understanding that Musruck's book is introductory, just meanings and a few spreads. Nothing that can't be found free online.

5 hours ago, leroidetrèfle said:

It’s interesting that there appears to be little information in German. I have tried several times to search (under various terms that I can think of), and asked a few German readers I know through Lenormand platforms. But nothing.

It does seem like they sketch a broad path, and then leave you to your own devices.
Authors seem to come and go. Kerstin Kolb's book is already OOP, and that's one that still gets recommended. I'm seeing new authors, names I don't recognise.

Waldfee, as always, is helpful, but doesn't go into any great depth, either.

 

5 hours ago, leroidetrèfle said:

I understand Toni runs courses; however, as I’ve focused on Leiding-Heinz, et cetera, I don’t think it would benefit me. I tracking their appearance. 

Yes. Her system is idiosyncratic. But Leiding, especially, seems to be attuned to the common understanding of the method.
 

Link to post
Share on other sites
timtoldrum
On 4/20/2020 at 5:38 PM, katrinka said:

In english, yes, there's almost nothing: hers and Musruck's, that I'm aware of. And it's my understanding that Musruck's book is introductory, just meanings and a few spreads. Nothing that can't be found free online.

It does seem like they sketch a broad path, and then leave you to your own devices.
Authors seem to come and go. Kerstin Kolb's book is already OOP, and that's one that still gets recommended. I'm seeing new authors, names I don't recognise.

Waldfee, as always, is helpful, but doesn't go into any great depth, either.

 

Yes. Her system is idiosyncratic. But Leiding, especially, seems to be attuned to the common understanding of the method.
 

I did not know Alexandre had written a title on the Kippers.  

 

Thus far, I have been unable to ascertain German examples of the stop-cards.  On re-reading the explanation, one wondered if Toni has elaborated on something that was/is more a folkloric convention than elaborate technique.  

 

The book I keep seeing recommended is the Susanne Zitzl text.   I have ordered it but will keep it for some time in the future.

 

I've purchased a year pass for Waldfee, as Utu is excellent and also approachable.  The random combination exercises on the site have been quite useful.  

 

What I found interesting is that amount of cards Utu rates as positive.  I think only five were rated negative, and six or seven were neutral.  The two main persons are both rated positive, which confuses me.  Ordinarily, one finds person-cards as neutral.  

 

I am focusing on attempting to get closer acquainted with the cards' essence.  I've also had to determine the cards' titles I will use.    

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

Thus far, I have been unable to ascertain German examples of the stop-cards.  On re-reading the explanation, one wondered if Toni has elaborated on something that was/is more a folkloric convention than elaborate technique. 

I'm almost 100% sure that's what happened.

When I was trying her method, I listed the cards in their categories in the back of my copy of her book for quick reference. (I don't know why she didn't include something like that.)
There are 7 Start cards, 4 Movement cards, 6 Cause & Effect cards, 4 Connector cards, and 15 Stop cards. A lot of the Stop cards don't add up. The Living Room, for instance, usually means something is close, it will happen soon. "Will happen" doesn't equate "end" or "over with".  Oddly, the Stop cards don't include the Funeral (though I can also see the Funeral as Cause & Effect.) The Stop category is a bit of a catch-all, maybe for cards she couldn't fit in the other categories? A good many of them defy logic.

The Start cards are people cards, but the deck includes people cards other than the ones listed as Start cards. What if the Official is a person in your reading? Or if you want to know if the False Person or the Thief is going to get caught?

It's all a bit rigid for me. The truly folkloric stuff is more flexible, it's been refined over the years. This does have all the earmarks of something invented by one person who was inspired by folkloric conventions and then went their own way. This is OK and might even work for some. But I'd have preferred a more honest presentation than "The true Bavarian method" and "All of you are doing it wrong."

Quote

The book I keep seeing recommended is the Susanne Zitzl text.   I have ordered it but will keep it for some time in the future.

Yes, she's quite popular. She dug up a good amount of history, too.
It looks like she's out of the Kipper game now. She's handed her facebook groups over to other people and her youtube videos are gone.

Quote

I've purchased a year pass for Waldfee, as Utu is excellent and also approachable.  The random combination exercises on the site have been quite useful.  

 

What I found interesting is that amount of cards Utu rates as positive.  I think only five were rated negative, and six or seven were neutral.  The two main persons are both rated positive, which confuses me.  Ordinarily, one finds person-cards as neutral.  

Germans are not immune to new age rose-colored glasses, lol. The site IS named after a forest fairy.
But it's still an excellent resource.

Quote

I am focusing on attempting to get closer acquainted with the cards' essence.  I've also had to determine the cards' titles I will use.    

Yes, the titles in english change from one source to the next. I tried to stick fairly close to the translations, but a lot of them sound a bit awkward.

Edited by katrinka
Link to post
Share on other sites
timtoldrum
Posted (edited)
On 4/22/2020 at 7:00 PM, katrinka said:

I'm almost 100% sure that's what happened.

When I was trying her method, I listed the cards in their categories in the back of my copy of her book for quick reference. (I don't know why she didn't include something like that.)


There are 7 Start cards, 4 Movement cards, 6 Cause & Effect cards, 4 Connector cards, and 15 Stop cards. A lot of the Stop cards don't add up. The Living Room, for instance, usually means something is close, it will happen soon. "Will happen" doesn't equate "end" or "over with".  Oddly, the Stop cards don't include the Funeral (though I can also see the Funeral as Cause & Effect.) The Stop category is a bit of a catch-all, maybe for cards she couldn't fit in the other categories? A good many of them defy logic.

The Start cards are people cards, but the deck includes people cards other than the ones listed as Start cards. What if the Official is a person in your reading? Or if you want to know if the False Person or the Thief is going to get caught?

It's all a bit rigid for me. The truly folkloric stuff is more flexible, it's been refined over the years. This does have all the earmarks of something invented by one person who was inspired by folkloric conventions and then went their own way. This is OK and might even work for some. But I'd have preferred a more honest presentation than "The true Bavarian method" and "All of you are doing it wrong."

 

 

Lol. I had to write the different cards down, too. Even with my lenses in, I could not make out the cards in the grouped illustrations. However, I cannot say too much as I am guilty of similar transgressions in Thirty Six Cards. 

 

Mainly, the stop-cards (to me at this point) seem to be cards that offer no further pictorial indicators for further elaboration. There are similar techniques in cartomancy — closing lines, the Aces, chaining, the Coffin and the Garden, et cetera.  

 

I did wonder how one is supposed to track the False Person, et cetera. It will be one card to monitor I think. 

 

Of course, one does not know the primary sources consulted by Toni. It's the same with GoH "method." I've never found the information to indicate the game was played as divinatory oracle vis-à-vis gyan chaupar. The fortune-telling reference is as an aside that the cards can be used as playing cards. That said, it's clear whoever created them, knew the cartomantic suit conventions — which again indicates more of sibilla in terms of fortune-telling.

 

(On a side note, I did read with interest that Toni is credited with first explaining the association between virtue and happiness in the early modern period to clarify  the Lily). 
 

Quote

 

Yes, she's quite popular. She dug up a good amount of history, too.


It looks like she's out of the Kipper game now. She's handed her facebook groups over to other people and her youtube videos are gone.

 


Yes. I remember her articles on the flipped images. 
 

Leiding is good — very clear and concise, which is extremely helpful when you are not fluent. The two books are very slim volumes, both less than 100 pages. What I have found extremely helpful is that each card is described on whether it is above, below, behind or before the MP. 

For example, Good Lady behind the MP2 can indicate that the mother has the daughter’s back. So the inauspicious nuances do not have to be default. Below, the mother thinks of the daughter (reversed if above).
 

It’s extremely illuminating in terms of drawing the cards. 
 

Quote

 

Germans are not immune to new age rose-colored glasses, lol. The site IS named after a forest fairy.


But it's still an excellent resource.

 


Lol.  If we ever get to Elphame, one does suspects more than a few surprised faces... 

 

Quote

Yes, the titles in english change from one source to the next. I tried to stick fairly close to the translations, but a lot of them sound a bit awkward.

I’ve tried to stick as close as possible... Get Together rather than Meeting or Convene, Sitting Room rather than Lounge, Magistrate rather than Court Official... nothing too divergent. 

Edited by leroidetrèfle
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/18/2020 at 7:03 AM, leroidetrèfle said:

Having some extra free time, I have decided to look again at the Kipper-karten.

 

I have owned and utilised the Kipper-karten in the past but preferred the Leiding-karten. However, I did not connect with the cards at that time. Consequently, I am approaching this a total overhaul.

 

The first step was to determine the approach. I have read Toni Puhle's primer, but there was a disconnect in some sections. Consequently, I settled on Hildegard Leiding and Utu Dietrich as primary sources.

 

Three weeks in I'm quite impressed.  Thus far, I have focused on short lines.

 

One thing I have noted is that there seems a consensus to remove the Hauptperson 1 or 2 before the reading. I do not mind both laying and reading right to left (with Hauptperson 1). But does one always need to remove the significator? I always like to see if it appears in the reading. 

I quite like Kipper, though my experience is limited to about a 9 months. I had a deck with very bad directional cues at first and didn't connect, but as soon as I bought a more traditional deck, I connected instantly. I have Puhle's book and think it is good, but I can see where there are places where it's needed to fill in the gaps. I just kind of went with my intuition after I read hers, but 'll look for those resources you mentioned to help with getting more comfortable with the really large spreads, which is what I want to tackle next.

As for the 1 and 2 cards, I actually usually DO remove them for readings, so I am in the minority here. But, I've also left them in for some types of questions. In a grand tableau/grosse tafel, it is standard practice to leave them in and see where they land in relation to each other and the rest of the spread. So, I don't think there is any right or wrong way to do it.

I often use the cross spread with Kipper cards, so that may be one for you to try next if you are inclined. It's become my go-to for figuring out internal influences and motivations in situations. I've done cross spreads both with and without laying extra cards until I get a stop card. Both ways work. It just depends.

Edited by Czenzi
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/22/2020 at 1:00 PM, katrinka said:

I'm almost 100% sure that's what happened.

When I was trying her method, I listed the cards in their categories in the back of my copy of her book for quick reference. (I don't know why she didn't include something like that.)
There are 7 Start cards, 4 Movement cards, 6 Cause & Effect cards, 4 Connector cards, and 15 Stop cards. A lot of the Stop cards don't add up. The Living Room, for instance, usually means something is close, it will happen soon. "Will happen" doesn't equate "end" or "over with".  Oddly, the Stop cards don't include the Funeral (though I can also see the Funeral as Cause & Effect.) The Stop category is a bit of a catch-all, maybe for cards she couldn't fit in the other categories? A good many of them defy logic.

The Start cards are people cards, but the deck includes people cards other than the ones listed as Start cards. What if the Official is a person in your reading? Or if you want to know if the False Person or the Thief is going to get caught?
 

I am sure that Puhle is inventing as she pulls from a wider tradition. I agree that it is sometimes hard for me to follow her logic. Prison makes total sense to me as a stop card. Some of the others do not. I'm not well versed enough to know the history and authenticity of different Kipper techniques. I just tend to take what works for me and leave what doesn't. So, I'm probably guilty of the same thing as Puhle in a way. If I'm using her "stop card technique," I just treat the "stop" cards as functional and don't get bothered by if their meaning matches what I think of as a stop. "Stop" means they are like the punctuation on the end of the sentence. That's all. The card itself tells me what that sentence means. I don't always use this technique, though, and I'm not even sure she advocates that we should.

That said, Fatality/Funeral makes 100% sense to me as a cause and effect card, which is how she defines it is a card that takes direction. In fact, it is the most directional card in the deck with five positions. For her, "stop" cards cannot be added to in this way. More than that, Funeral has a position for what has ended and a position for what has been transformed. I like this reading of Funeral and tend to use it. It is not, however, at all how I would really read Coffin in a Lenormand deck. 

I've generally have taken the people in the cards as actions rather than the people doing the actions. I kind of read Sibilla the same way since it is so heavy in people cards. Otherwise, for me, it's be a whole cast of characters with no plot. I would look at a square of nine and be like "There are seven people standing in a living room. One has a toddler." That's just me though and my brain/skill level. And, that said, I can totally see how they can also stand in as people in some cases. To me, this is like the inverse of the court cards in tarot--which I usually take as people unless otherwise guided. 

I'm not really trying to defend Puhle per se. I agree it's a bit misleading to call this the "traditional" way when it really is just one personal way. I actually have taken some things from her though. I'd really like to learn about the master card technique, but I haven't really gone too far into tracking down (read: translating) sources. So, I'm definitely not beholden to one style of reading.

Edited by Czenzi
Link to post
Share on other sites
timtoldrum
41 minutes ago, Czenzi said:

I quite like Kipper, though my experience is limited to about a 9 months. I had a deck with very bad directional cues at first and didn't connect, but as soon as I bought a more traditional deck, I connected instantly. I have Puhle's book and think it is good, but I can see where there are places where it's needed to fill in the gaps. I just kind of went with my intuition after I read hers, but 'll look for those resources you mentioned to help with getting more comfortable with the really large spreads, which is what I want to tackle next.

As for the 1 and 2 cards, I actually usually DO remove them for readings, so I am in the minority here. But, I've also left them in for some types of questions. In a grand tableau/grosse tafel, it is standard practice to leave them in and see where they land in relation to each other and the rest of the spread. So, I don't think there is any right or wrong way to do it.

I often use the cross spread with Kipper cards, so that may be one for you to try next if you are inclined. It's become my go-to for figuring out internal influences and motivations in situations. I've done cross spreads both with and without laying extra cards until I get a stop card. Both ways work. It just depends.

Thank you for your comments, @Czenzi.  It is fantastic to hear your thoughts. 

 

Toni Puhle’s title is a good introduction and I have returned to it twice this week. Her courses are also well regarded, and I believe that they include the große tafel.  Leiding includes it but not to the extent Toni does; there is no example read. I still await Zitzl’s book but believe that it is covered with an example. 

 

Since the opening post I’ve developed a better understanding of why one would remove 1 or 2. Interestingly, it was Leiding’s emphasis on the 4 points that make up the cross-draw. It will be the next draw. I’ve focused thus far on lines but think cross might be more beneficial. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, leroidetrèfle said:

Thank you for your comments, @Czenzi.  It is fantastic to hear your thoughts. 

 

Toni Puhle’s title is a good introduction and I have returned to it twice this week. Her courses are also well regarded, and I believe that they include the große tafel.  Leiding includes it but not to the extent Toni does; there is no example read. I still await Zitzl’s book but believe that it is covered with an example. 

 

Since the opening post I’ve developed a better understanding of why one would remove 1 or 2. Interestingly, it was Leiding’s emphasis on the 4 points that make up the cross-draw. It will be the next draw. I’ve focused thus far on lines but think cross might be more beneficial. 

The GT is pretty complex feeling to me, so more sources is better. Right now, I am still doing smaller spreads, so the Leiding book would still be interesting to me for that reason alone. 

Right now, I don't have Leiding's book, so I'd be interested to see if her four points are the ones I've learned to use.

Good luck with your journey!

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.