Disregarding spread positions?

Thread originally posted on the Aeclectic Tarot Forum on 29 Aug 2004, and now archived in the Forum Library.

Aun	29 Aug 2004
Do you think is right to interpret a group of 3 or more cards in a large spread, which seem to have a strong connection together, but disregarding their original positions? For example: Let's say on a CC you have, The Devil on the crown, the Ace of Cups RX beneath, and the 7 of Cups on the future (positions could vary, just picked some randomly). These cards together could be indicating some sort of addiction or substance abuse, if analysed as a group, but in another context. However, the spread positions and the actual question narrow the meanings of these individual cards down to something else. I came across a situation like this recently, and I'd like to know if others have experienced something similar, if it could be valuable information or a mere distortion of the facts...

Rusty Neon	29 Aug 2004
That's the intended idea of defined spread positions - they narrow down the possible range of meanings for a card or cards. The defined spread positions work as a kind of "locational dignity" for the card. However, nobody says you have to use a fixed position spread, e.g., the CC. If you wish to try to read a group of cards in a spread (or in part of a spread) as a group with no defined spread position and therefore with corresponding wider scope for interpretation, you are free to do so. That said, it's probably more intellectually forthright to decide so before you have dealt out the cards as fixed position cards and have seen them; however, you do have the 'right' to read the cards as you wish. For more on spreadless layouts, see the post here.

full deck	29 Aug 2004
Nowadays, when I read, I don't know how many cards I will pull until I start selecting cards. As a recent example, I did a reading where I pulled five cards and stopped since that was all that I felt (saw) should be pulled. Here's the interesting thing: when I flipped the cards, they were in a symmetrical pattern, the middle card being the focus, the other cards being a commentary upon the one, related by position, imagery and topic. To me, I look for symmetry in the results as per my own system of reading and calibration thereof. I also have some distrust of spread positions as they can harbor expectations on my part and I am still my own worst enemy, in that respect. Using spreads is a bit like a Jazz musician playing out a musical chart, *always* hitting the V's and I's as described in the original chord chart. One can make music using this way of working but it can be much richer if one can play and listen at the same time, changing as inspiration comes.

The Disregarding spread positions? thread was originally posted on 29 Aug 2004 in the Talking Tarot board, and is now archived in the Forum Library. Read the active threads in Talking Tarot, or read more archived threads.