Left to Right - The Advantages of Reading "Without a Spread"

Thread originally posted on the Aeclectic Tarot Forum on 10 Mar 2005, and now archived in the Forum Library.

Milamber	10 Mar 2005
Left to right; that's how I read the tarot when I deal them without a spread. Actually, I turn over the cards one at a time, whereas with spreads I always dealt the entire spread face-up from the start. In both cases I did such without really thinking about it or planning it out. I never really decided to do it that way . . . I merely just did. And the other day, I was wondering why I did so. When dealing cards into a spread with positional meanings, the cards will each fall into the position whose meaning they represent. One must then hunt down the interactions between the cards in different positions; the 10th (Outcome) and 6th (Near Future) positions in a Celtic Cross might have cards that can be read together, for example. One follows from the other. Therefore, when making a reading from a Celtic Cross, or other such spread, I find I very rarely read the cards in the order they are dealt. Enter the open reading, courtesy of Mooncat2's challenge in a somewhat recent Circle of Stones thread. Now I find myself dealing a row of cards, left to right, face down, and then turning them over and reading them one at a time. Why? Well, the other day I think I figured it out. With no positional meanings to constrain which card goes where, they can all fall in the order you need to read them in. Since you're not lining them up into delineated positions, the cards land in the optimum order, each one leading into the next. While any card could still add to the meaning of any other, cards that do share meanings tend to fall together now. And in fact, among the freeform readings I've done to date, some of them even seem to have positional meanings after I've made the reading, each card clearly representing a specific factor in the question. To test this point, I've rearranged, at random, a couple of the non-spread readings I've done in the past. In their resorted form, they tend to be a lot harder to decipher. It's like scattering the letters in a word -- you can still find the word, but it takes a lot more work! When I first decided to take up the challenge of reading "without a spread," I was rather worried that it would be much harder than reading with one. However, while I wouldn't recommend it to the very freshest tarotists*, I think that in the end the spread turned out to be much easier to read than a normal one, because you can read it -- left to right. * This is to new tarotists, here's a thought. Many agree that the best spread for up and coming tarotists to practice with is the three card spread, be it past-present-future, or situation-action-outcome, or any other such combination (you can find lots in the spreads forum). Once you're really confident with these, consider giving a three card spread a try where the positions don't have any meanings. You might be surprised! ** This is to the mods: I wasn't 100% sure where to put this, but scanning through the index of the spreads forum brought up nothing about freeform readings, and I remembered seeing topics about freeform readings here, so I figured this was the right place. My apologies in advance if 'tis not.

Flavio	10 Mar 2005
I like "without spread" readings but I don't consider myself skillful enough to read like that all the time, so far I only use "without spread" reading when: After finishing a CC, I take the most critical card for the reading and use it as a significator, then pull 3 to 5 cards to describe the "homework" to the Querent after the CC. Spontaneous and quick readings with 2 to 5 cards to answer a very staright question or asking for advice. As Milamber I don't read the CC "in order" I see the big picture and try to connect cards even if there are not in continuous position.

Bosorka	10 Mar 2005
When I do readings without spread it´s when I have clarly set question, and I always pull three cards. But I don´t strictly follow reading them from left to right, though I tend to do it. Sometimes I just feel like to change order, or read backwards. There´s no rule for that, just sometimes it is easier to read like that. Maybe it´s just my lazines, forin that case is harder to find meaning from left to right, but I think that my readings are more acurate when I read how I feel at that moment.

Joermit	10 Mar 2005
I use two spreads I made up for most of my readings... While learning I found that I didn't quite click with the celtic cross or any other of the better known spreads. For one spread I use 14 cards in sort of 3 arc pattern--7 cards in top arc, five in the middle, and two on bottom... I read the cards left to right with the cards furthest left being past influences and then progressing to the present and then future as you move to the right... the middle card in the top row I see as the "most present" or heart of the matter... I turn over that first middle cards, and give my impression on that as it relates to the present.. the I look at the three cards to the left and read those as past influences/issues... I flip over the cards beneath to sort of get more specific and add details or further focus my thoughts... then I look to the present and do the same... the middle card in the middle row I turn over last as a sort of summation on the entire reading or a final thought... It's important that I only flip over a couple cards at a time for some reason... and... after they're all flipped I look at the big picture and how the whole spread relates to a time arc... it's pretty interesting how the cards progress.... what I usually do is use this very general spread to give a cold reading with the person, then if they have a specific question I also use a smaller nine card spread that concentrates on thoughts and actions and a specific question... I would say I'm a pretty unorthodoxed reader, but it really works for me... I may also see if whomever I'm reading for has any questions and if they do I lay three cards and give my impressions for an answer... It's not a standard reading by any means but those whom I have read for who have had other readings seem to like my style and feel "I'm right on"... like I said... it works for me... I am looking to learn a double horoscope/houses of the zodiac spread, as some of my teachers use it and I find it can be very specific in seeing a number of answers to many questions in one large spread involving 30 cards...

Paul	10 Mar 2005
May I suggest a looksie at my thread? Rather than be redundant, in my thread "Paul's Tiered Minor Arcana System" I go over a non-spread way of reading the whole deck that lays out 3,5, or 7 cards in a sentence format. Then, a concomitant "grammar" system helps the reader understand the SYNTAX. Here's the thread: http://www.tarotforum.net/showthread.php?t=32084. You'll have to browse within the pages, but look for my Tarot Grammar. Hope you enjoy.

Milamber	11 Mar 2005
Well, I think in a few minute long read, I couldn't hope to digest everything in that thread. That said, there does seem to be a base similarity between the readings styles. I'd stylize my own as more of each card being a paragraph though -- I tend to linger on each card, come up with several thoughts and correllations, and then write such a paragraph about it. I suppose the whole reading then becomes an essay, or chapter. (Of life? :P) Anyway, the reading style in your thread is quite interesting, but I don't think I'd ever be able to use it myself. When enough "mental thinking" type connections crop up, my mind gets thinking too hard, and my intuition seems to shut down. This is perhaps the disadvantage of a mind that loves to tackle problems. In short, that it's interesting to me is the reason I couldn't effectively use it, even if I got past being interested in it. Ironic, ne? Perhaps that's another reason the freeform reading worked for me. No positional meanings means that the "thinking" aspect of the reading is reduced. For me, thought and intuition are sort of on a balance scale. When the need for thought is reduced, the potential for intuition grows. Every reading I have to leash in my mind to stop it from wandering off and frolicking. ;)

rainwolf	11 Mar 2005
I used to read this way a lot, then i decided to start making my own spreads. In 1 2 3 tarot, each card has a long sentence, but i find it useful to assign each position a sentence part to give the reader a message. For instance, in a three card spread, one could be a noun, two could be a verb, and three an adjective. I think its very interesting to do this.

contradiction	11 Mar 2005
Without position's is my main reading style, so I have became real comfortable reading this way. I lay out the cards one at a time, getting a general feel for the card as I lay it down. Then I go back and look at all the cards together. I have found that sometimes, even though it is readings as a sentence, I need to mix up the order in which the cards are read. Actually, what I mean is that, one card will add to, or support another card that is not next to it. For example, a five card layout, cards 2 and 5, will compliment each other, so I have to read the two together, to get the whole picture. How do I know which cards go together? To be honest I don't know. I just have to do what feels right at the time. Intuition is the key.

Cagedflame	11 Mar 2005
Occasionally, any spread of set positions will be too constraining for what the cards would like me to know, and if I just read them one after another after another they tell a story to me chronologically ordered. I'll usually notice it because in their specified positions they don't make that much sense, but as a left to right story they work. Recently the reading seemed sort of muddied and vague and I decided oto se what the card at the bottom of the deck was, and then noticed the one after it, and the one after that, and so on until I came to the Magician. I find that in this deck, when I read for myself, the Magician signifies the point where I have all the tools I need for a happy outcome/to progress to the next stage/to make something happen/etc.

Kiama	12 Mar 2005
I read this way when the querent has a very specific question (and I mean very specific - none of the uncertain questions where there are a lot of different issues worth exploring, but a simple, cut and dried question.) I consider the 3-5 cards to be the spread itself, and sometimes they act as one card would, whilst other times I see them based on where they are in relation to each other. For instance, I often find with a 3 card spread that the 2 of Swords falls in the centre of two other cards, and to me this usually screams 'choice' between the two cards... Or, I've seen the centre card as a focal point, or one card on the right or left as the one being moved away from, or moved towards... It really does depend. Kiama

Elven	12 Mar 2005
I dont often read a three card spread. Only if Theres a specific question - like clarifying an issue on the querants mind. If this spread is used I will do two things: Read only major Arcana or using a full deck - read the Major card first regardless of its position and apply the other two cards collectively to the answer. I find this gives me a definite response. Also if nothing comes up within the first viewing I do not do another 3 card spread to keep trying to clarify the question. I find a that using a 3 card spead a little more restricitive than relying on the celtic cross, but then again I dont always use the positions of the Celtic cross in their traditional sense. The 10th card I will always use as the outcome but depending on the reading I may use it as a bridging card to the next 2 celtic cross spreads. Like a trilogy - a three part answer - with the last spread the final outcome. Then I may lay my three card spread down to bring it all together in a concise sentence. Just another variation on all the great threads given here. Hope this gives some expression to your spread and readings. Take care Elven x

Maelin	13 Mar 2005
Oh! You intuitive people make me very jealous! The few times I have tried to read without set positions, I just confuse myself. A card comes up, and I am flumoxed - is that the truth about now? Is it something I'm supposed to do? Something I am supposed to watch for - something that will happen or has happened? That is why I am a big fan of the Celtic cross, and its descendent, Rachel Pollack's work session spread. Even with three card spreads, I really have to decide before what each spot means, or the thing collapses in uncertainties.

Bosorka	14 Mar 2005
Maelin, try a spread where are more cards for every position. You´ll learn to combine them and later you can interpret more cards even without spread. (At least it worked for me... ;))

Milamber	14 Mar 2005
Using a spread with no positions as a position in a larger spread -- that's a great idea! :) I can see how that would make the transition easier.

crazelion	14 Mar 2005
I find it easier to read left to right without a spread. It helps me with not having to get the cards right in order the spread. That may change when I get more advance as right now it works for me.

The Left to Right - The Advantages of Reading "Without a Spread" thread was originally posted on 10 Mar 2005 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.