How important is the significator?

WhiteWizzard

I've been doing mostly the Celtic Cross, happy with the results. However right from the start deciding not to pull out a significator, thinking it just upsets the energy of the deck trawling through looking for a particular card. Does anyone else agree with this?
 

Grizabella

I don't think it upsets the energy of the deck to look for one, but I don't use a significator. Raymond Buckland says if you want to use something for a significator, it needn't be a card. It can be a coin or something else that belongs to the querent instead because that will have their energy associated with it. Some people have the querent write their question on a slip of paper and put it under the reading cloth or somewhere like that.

Also, when first starting out, the Celtic cross is really too complicated. I think a smaller spread is much easier to use and can give plenty of information. Many people use just three cards to begin with and the meanings of the positions can vary, as in body, mind, spirit, or problem, possible solution, outcome, or past, present, and future. I know lots of experienced readers who seldom use something as complicated as the Celtic cross. For myself, I use seven cards---the first two for the past, the middle three for the present, and the last two for the near future. Sometimes I vary the meanings of my positions, but seven cards seems to be my most workable spread no matter what meanings I associate with the positions.
 

WhiteWizzard

Thanks Lyric

Lyric said:
I don't think it upsets the energy of the deck to look for one, but I don't use a significator. Raymond Buckland says if you want to use something for a significator, it needn't be a card. It can be a coin or something else that belongs to the querent instead because that will have their energy associated with it. Some people have the querent write their question on a slip of paper and put it under the reading cloth or somewhere like that.

Also, when first starting out, the Celtic cross is really too complicated. I think a smaller spread is much easier to use and can give plenty of information. Many people use just three cards to begin with and the meanings of the positions can vary, as in body, mind, spirit, or problem, possible solution, outcome, or past, present, and future. I know lots of experienced readers who seldom use something as complicated as the Celtic cross. For myself, I use seven cards---the first two for the past, the middle three for the present, and the last two for the near future. Sometimes I vary the meanings of my positions, but seven cards seems to be my most workable spread no matter what meanings I associate with the positions.
Yes I have been happy with the results I was getting, Celtic Cross is a bit involved. However it's flowing for me now, plus adding an occasional card with certain ones after the spread is done, to clarify if need be.
 

Alissa

I never use a significator. I did early on, just because the LWB and its Celtic Cross told me to, but both a signifcator and the spread itself just don't make sense to me. So after years of trying to do it "right," I started having the confidence to just do it my own way instead.
 

Shaymus

I personally don't remove any cards from the deck as this would make the oracle incomplete. One thing that I try to do (where possible) is to think about the various people that may be involved in the situation and perhaps ascribe to them the appropriate court card.

For example, if it was involving my mother, I would think of her as the Queen of Pentacles, if I was concerned about my brother, perhaps one of the knights would be appropriate, etc. If the querent was having problems at work with her boss, I would think of him as the King of Wands, etc etc.

I then see what court cards appear in the spread, and see how they are behaving/influencing the situation.

Shaymus
 

Jeannette

Another vote here against pulling a card for use as the significator. I don't like "shorting" the deck even a single card -- I want the full range of possibilities to be available within the spread!

-- Jeannette
The Tarot Garden
 

MeeWah

I prefer not to use a significator in order to not remove a potential card that may appear in a throw.

Only on occasion do I use a significator, & usually in non-Celtic Cross spreads. I see the first or both the first & second cards of the Celtic Cross to describe the querent at the time of a reading.

On the occasions a significator used, I do not look for a court card but pull from the (face-down) deck any card. That can be a pip card as I see pip cards to be capable of expressing the character/personality or other related at that time.
 

Saturn's Winter

I don't use a significator, because quite honestly it confuses me and the focus that I would need would be lost due to that confusion. When I had first started tarot at 11 years old, i never thought to use one, so i guess that kind of stuck. I guess the advice that I would have to give would be to follow what you feel is best and go with it. With tarot, there is no such thing as being wrong with how you prefer to read the cards.
 

starrystarrynight

The only time I use a significator is when a court comes up in the outcome position of a spread, and its significance is not readily "obvious" to me. Then, I will use that as the significator of a Celtic Cross or even an impromtu spread, asking for clarification of its meaning in the original throw.

Otherwise, I, too, feel that isolating a card before drawing a spread allows that one less option for a position in a reading.
 

Lillie

I never bother with a significator.

When I started I couldn't decide which one should be me, So I never used one (I know now, though!)

Anyhow, the version of the CC that I use (and I can't remember where I learned it) has 11 cards.
All are dealt (or whatever) as normal.
First is the querent
Second is what covers,
Third is what crosses.

So I suppose it's like a significator, except it's dealt rather than chosen.

Anyhow, I couldn't be bothered to look through for one. Then I'd see them all and have to shuffle a lot.