View Full Version : What makes a good CREATIVE spread?
I was just wondering. What do you think makes a good spread? Why?
Personally, I think that not a lot of cards, (like under 15), would get you to a good start. then next, i think that it should be for a specific concept.
(i.e. clarification, friends, money etc.)
and last, i think it should be 100% original!
Hmmm, I am not sure if this answers your question, but Iprefer small spreads to large ones, although my latest creation(see my post below) is 14 cards. I feel you only need a small spread to get a really good reading. You will notice this if you look at my posts in the Reading Exchange section. Most spreads I use are small, and in most cases, variations of a Celtic Cross.
http://anjastarot.dk/index.htm
I usually prefer spreads with 15 - 20 cards so this is the range you'll find my selfmade ones in.
I like deep views and I just don't get them with a 3 card spread, this seems to me just like reading the headlines in a newspaper.
I don't like spreads with too many cards, I find them hard to interpret. Ah, I guess I'll get better at that too! :D Now I prefer spreads with 3-12 cards. It also depend a lot on the spread and how easy or difficult it is to interpret.
~aeonx~
Whish to share some of those spreads of yours ?? :D
mail me if that is a yes :)
abn@lillehjem.dk
Ravenswing
06-07-2002, 16:33
as you may have noticed by now, i hold the triangle to be the basic unit of 'reality'. and i tend to go into geometric patternings. so, hang on for a bit of a ride... :D
when we throw out cards for a reading, we consider the cards to lie on a flat plane (after all, they are...). but what happens if we consider spreads to be three dimensional?
consider the celtic cross for a moment. we have:
1. this covers
2. this crosses
3. this is beneath
4. this is behind
5. this crowns
6. this is before
if we consider card 2 to pass over top of card 1.-- a bridge of sorts-- we have two non-intersecting crossing lines. the line 4 - 2 - 6 is a line of linear time; the line 3 - 2 - 5 can be considered a line of spiritual growth. the addition of dimensionality gives us a much different view of the spread.
so-- if we add the third dimension to our 'simple' spreds, we can obtain a more complex concept compacted in a few cards....
three card spread-- spacially represented by the triangle (minimum relationship) or a linear relationship (such as past, present, future).
four card spread-- spacially represented by the tetrahedron (minimum structure). each card interacts with every other card. the tetrahedron can be considered to be constructed from four triangles. so the four card spread is a 'shorthand' for 4 inter-twinned three card spreads.
six card spread-- spacially represented by the octahedron. this contains eight triangular spreads and three 'unfolded' four card spreads.
building each of these figures will greatly help in visualization
if you have any questions, drop me a line
quite a bit of information stuffed into a small package. })
LVX
steve
truthsayer
06-07-2002, 16:49
Originally posted by stevepolsz
as you may have noticed by now, i hold the triangle to be the basic unit of 'reality'. and i tend to go into geometric patternings. so, hang on for a bit of a ride... :D
when we throw out cards for a reading, we consider the cards to lie on a flat plane (after all, they are...). but what happens if we consider spreads to be three dimensional?
building each of these figures will greatly help in visualization
if you have any questions, drop me a line
quite a bit of information stuffed into a small package. })
LVX
steve
steve, i think i have figured out why you lost me on the symbolon thread. you are able to visualize shapes and do geometry in your mind. in other words, your spacial relations skills are tremendous. i am a visual person in terms of colors. my verbal skills are also very good. i've taken so many drawing class and i still can't visualize shapes. the only think i can do is print out what you said and try putting the cards in that order. octohedron! my word! i've used the celtic cross for most of my life but your rendition just about give me a headache!
you don't happen to be a mathematician, engineer, or architect by trade? it's been my experience that males usually have greater ability in spatial relations. that's why men are generally better at pool than women. my husband has tried many times to explain the game to me but i can't see it. what i've read of science seems to bear this out, too. not to say females can't have great spatial relation skills but the likelihood isn't as high.
so steve, you may have to come up w/ a more verbal way to get your points about tarot and symbolon across to me! LOL ;)
Geenius at Wrok
07-07-2002, 02:29
Originally posted by truthsayer
it's been my experience that males usually have greater ability in spatial relations. that's why men are generally better at pool than women.Tell that to my friend Rachel. :)
CRACK! plonk plonk plonk plonk plonk plonk
truthsayer
07-07-2002, 11:39
women who spend more time w/ their fathers when they are under 3 years of age are more inclined to develop greater spatial skills. boys that spend more time w/ their mothers in that time frame have greater verbal skills. my husband has better spatial skills than me but not good enough to be a mechanic or mathematician. he spent most of his time w/ his mother as a young child b/c his father worked all the time. he has difficulty doing even simply home repairs. careerwise he was an employment interviewer. his father worked 40 years in a textile mill.
ask your friend rachel if she spent lots of time w/ her father when she was growing up. when i was small i spent some time watching my father do minor home repair. consequently, i can do some minor home repairs my husband can't even though i can't visualize a game of pool like he can. my manual dexterity is pretty good compared to my dismal spatial skills. my manual dexterity is better than hubby's who was never able to pass a typing class. while i do pretty good. i was w/ my mother most when small so my verbal skills are strongest. my mother was a pianist and i think that also had a bearing on my manual skills.
gender, genetics and environment are imp. maybe that's why tarot cards appeal to me. i can use my verbal/visual skills to interpret and my manual dexterity to shuffle.
sorry to be so off topic but the question was too tempting!
Originally posted by Sam
I was just wondering. What do you think makes a good spread? Why?
First of all, names/meanings of the positions are important. A spread I used as a newbie (now long-forgotten) had a position called "the gate". I got some of my best reads from that position.
An evocative metaphor like that can be adapted to the specific nature of the cards and question much more than something very concrete, like "emotional influences from your family."
Also, it adds richness to a spread when there are a couple of different ways to group and compare the cards. Like in a 3x3 square, you can read rows, columns, or diagonals.
A really impressive example of this is James Schlesselman's Pyramid Spread:
http://www.geocities.com/Paris/2110/pyramid.html
In addition to reading the 10 cards as the Tree of Life, there are nine further ways to break them down, and that probably isn't even exhaustive.
The last point is a negative one, and I may be going out on a bit of a limb here. But:
I don't like it when spreads duplicate information. I've never thought much of ones that have positions for 'emotion' or 'intellect'. Emotional and intellectual states should already reflect themselves in whatever watery or airy cards come up (or if they come up at all).
Ditto for the Tree of Life spreads and ones based on the zodiac. That stuff's already in the tarot.
But again, this may just be me.
Ivy Rhiannon
09-07-2004, 05:38
No I agree minos. I don't like spreads with too little cards. I have always had trouble with three cards spreads. It just doesn't explain enough, but then again too many cards are a hassle. I think a good creative spread: gives advice, shows possiblities, helps you understand the situation, and is fun to use!