positions verus nothingness

Thread originally posted on the Aeclectic Tarot Forum on 30 Aug 2002, and now archived in the Forum Library.

HOLMES	30 Aug 2002
take the celtic cross it has postions, begiiners spread perhaps , but they can get vey indepth :O) (celtic lover here ) yet the 25 card layout all next to each other with no defined meanings i get lost too many patterns and no focus the general pattern doesn;t appear :O( it becomes like trying to make something out of a void with limitless potential for anything which style do you prefer ? (new thread from the specific ve general thread )

Trogon	30 Aug 2002
Being a relative beginner... ;) I have only 3 spreads which I am currently using.... I like to use the Celtic Cross in readings when I, or another person, needs a relatively in-depth look at an issue. However, it is not a layout which I can use on a frequent basis for the same person for the same question (in other words more than about once every couple of weeks). If the person has a new question or issue which has arisen in their life, then i will do a new Celtic Cross reading. (Learned from "A Complete Guide to the Tarot" by Eden Gray.) For a quick check up on the progress of an issue, or for a look at a simpler question or issue I use a simple 5-card line with 2 cards looking at past influences/occurences, one indicating the present and 2 looking at upcoming influences/events. By the way, I find that this layout lends itself to adding clarifying cards much better than the Celtic Cross. This layout was gleaned from the Tarot FAQ by David C. Jones - you can see v4.0 at: http://www.geocities.com/Athens/2377/LayoutFAQ4.html For a quick look at what I (or someone else) might be facing for a single day I use a 3-card layout with 1 card for the beginning of the day, one for the "peak" or main theme for the day, and one for how the day will end up. This is a fairly new one for me, but it does seem to be working very well - it also should be very easy to add clarification cards to when needed. I picked this one up at: http://www.tarotspreads.com/ I have also just learned of a Birthday layout which was posted here at AT under the thread "Birthday reading...?" This seems like a really good spread for a fairly simple yearly reading, though I haven't tried it yet. You can see this thread (and a description of the layout) at: http://www.tarotforum.net/showthread.php?s=&threadid=6099 Hope this helps... Trogon

Marion	30 Aug 2002
Quote: Originally posted by HOLMES yet the 25 card layout all next to each other with no defined meanings i get lost too many patterns and no focus I am with you Holmes. I cannot read huge rambling spreads. I know some folks prefer it, but I prefer defined positions to work out the cards, and the life's, inter-relationships. To me, a good spread has up to 10 cards or so. And often only 3 cards spin a wondrous tale. And even they work better with defined positional meanings. My opinion and I respect it.

Maan	30 Aug 2002
For me it is like Marion and Holmes... My best reading are from three/four cards spreads. Most of the time a ask the cards what they need to tell me about....( fill in any subject) I layout three or four cards and take the card on the bottem as a key card. But there are exeptions, like there is a big 15 card past life spread that really works for me and the "wings of the phoenix" spread from Phoenix is a great spread to that i use every two weeks or so! GREAT SPREAD PHOENIX!!!!! Love and light Maan

Molly	30 Aug 2002
I made up a spread that has both: 4 cards have a definite positional meaning and then 4 cards do not. The second 4 cards, I read as "link" cards; further insight/thoughts; influences; any point of time - past, present, or future... I called it my FLOW OF ENERGY spread... (thus, the four definite positions, and the flow of energy between them being undefined.) I don't know which I prefer... I think having positions undefined can definitely be more confusing and vague... but there is also the potential to get a good strong "feeling" or intuition or to "hear" better. I had only used this spread on myself, and I thought it worked well, but only because I *got it* for me. But I recently used it on someone else, and they said that reading came out pretty good. I was actually surprised. Perhaps being able to work with an undefined spread is really just something that comes with practice. . . For example, at first when I started studying the cards, I looked everywhere online and in books for good spreads, hoping to build a vast repertoire. I have since realized that I do much better with spreads I make up myself... I didn't even realize you could do such a thing at first. *G*

Umbrae	30 Aug 2002
I disagree, but not really. I have been known to use a 20-card spread. However, they are not just laid out there. True, the positions have no ‘set’ meaning; however, they do have meaning (albeit flexible). Such spreads are useful, nay-critical when looking at changes in various aspects over time. If you are simply throwing the cards out with no rhyme or reason-no sense will occur. But then you know, I stress more on the reading-and less on the mechanics. A different spread does not equal a better reading, as a different deck of cards does not equal a better reading. You may want to try toothpicks.

Mojo	30 Aug 2002
My absolute favorite readings to do are a single card. I love the challenge of having to work out a complex, meaningful story from just one card. Not to mention how intimate you become with that particular card! Otherwise I have 4 or 5 different spreads, including the CC and my own version of the gypsy spread, which I find meet most of my needs. Do I maintain strict definition of the positions? Hell no. They're simply guidelines. I note the position in my mind, but I focus more on the story that all of the cards together are telling. Another favorite way to do readings is to just lay out 7 cards in a row and read them like a story. I can then build up or down from this row by overlaying cards across pairs of cards for clarification. This ends up creating some elaborate looking layouts, but it really enables me to go into incredible detail.

Laurel	31 Aug 2002
I like flexible, non precise order ;P 20 is more cards than I like to read with- 15 or 16 tops me out. I prefer layouts where there are 2-4 cards in a row or column that relate to a specific piece of information (the situation, the environment, forces you're not aware of or beyond your control, etc) so its neither as strict as the Celtic spread or as nubious as no positions at all. Laurel

Kaz	31 Aug 2002
i very much dislike the CC, having said that...... what i do most is flip the cards from the top of the deck in a straight horizontal line and don't give meanings to positions. just 3 or 5 or 7 cards, always an odd number. start reading from anywhere in the line, sometimes here, sometimes there.... i am not very fond of the positional spreads, i do them for others sometimes, and for trying them out, but i like the straight line no positions best. kaz

Alex	02 Sep 2002
spreads with several cards, fixed positions. Every card I take off the spread makes the work harder for me. Reason being: one card restricts the meaning of the others: if they all have to converge to one story, it's easy when there are many. More restrictions, more meaning. That's however cause I'm a bit stupit. Smart people can read a 3 card spread very well. I can't. It kills me. Alex.

Rhiannon	03 Sep 2002
I use a variation of the Celtic Cross quite often when I do readings for others. (I actually don't read for myself very often anymore... I've run out of questions ;) ) But I like to sort of make it up as I go along too. I don't make an elaborate spread, I usually just line the cards up horizontally. But each card has a purpose, like: card #1 is the atmosphere, card #2 is how the querent feels, etc. R :)

The positions verus nothingness thread was originally posted on 30 Aug 2002 in the Using Tarot Cards board, and is now archived in the Forum Library. Read the active threads in Using Tarot Cards, or read more archived threads.