Elemental dignities

I'm so confused by elemental dignities. I did a reading for "How does A feel about B?" and got the five of pentacles, the ace of cups and the 6 of wands.

The five of pentacles can mean A feels that B has left them out in the cold. The ace of cups can be a sign of reconcilation and can be a good omen. Since earth and water are "friendly" towards each other, does that mean that the cards strengthen each other? So maybe that means A is hoping for a reconcilation with B after feeling left out in the cold? What confuses me even more is that water and fire weaken each other, don't they? So any feeling of victory in the 6 of wands is diminished? Is that right? I'm new to elemental dignities, so I'm not really sure. I hope I've not posted this in the wrong place. I'm more confused about the elemental dignities than I am the meaning of the cards individually.

Thanks in advance.

I'm new to ED as well, but from what I've read you look from the center card out. So you look at how the cup relates to the pent & how the cup relates to the wand. If you read ED then you're also not choosing to read reverse, so one way to look at that wand is as a reverse meaning. So, to me it's not very positive of a read. The ace strengthens the feelings of the 5 and reverses the 6. So, possibly feeling pretty miserable or left out and also feeling that it's a no-win situation.

violetdaisy said:

I'm new to ED as well, but from what I've read you look from the center card out. So you look at how the cup relates to the pent & how the cup relates to the wand. If you read ED then you're also not choosing to read reverse, so one way to look at that wand is as a reverse meaning. So, to me it's not very positive of a read. The ace strengthens the feelings of the 5 and reverses the 6. So, possibly feeling pretty miserable or left out and also feeling that it's a no-win situation.

Click to expand...

Ah thank you for clarifying that! Oh, ouch, that is a pretty horrible reading.

Take a look at Elemental Dignities Study Group Discussion & Index Thread for info on how to read EDs and links to 9 example threads.

As I understand it, in general practice the center card is the "focus" card and those on either side are "modifiers." (This does sort of leave out the concept of a "time-line" approach.) Deciding which of the modifiers has the greatest influence on the focus card is where judgment comes in. Elemental dignity is an "auxiliary" technique: the nature and relative strength of the individual cards is still the first consideration. The dignities show how well or poorly they cooperate within the context of the reading, and whether the potency of a given card is enhanced or degraded by its close associations.

Water and Earth have a complex relationship. In the best scenario, Earth serves as a vessel for Water, containing it and shaping it to useful ends. In the worst case, when combined willy-nilly they just make "mud," creating a murky outlook. Regarding Water and Fire, the idea is that they cancel each other out; I sometimes see them - in proper proportion - as creating "steam," which can also be a "hit" on clarity (although another thought to play with is that steam can be a useful motivating force when harnessed and directed; I'm always looking for ways to turn these assumptions on their heads and get more insight out of them).

In this reading, it could be said that the Ace of Cups is beset on both sides by challenges to its purest expression as "emotional bliss." The Ace is more of a "primal" force than either the Five or the Six, so I could see it as being dominant. The Earth/Water mix would then be swayed in the direction of "mud," and the Water/Fire mix in the direction of - for lack of a better word - "fizzle." In practical terms, it looks to me like the emotional outlook here is clouded.

I'm sure those who are more deeply entrenched in the "canon" of elemental dignities will have a different opinion on some of this. I'm just offering my imaginative take on it based on my long experience with the concept of elemental proponderences and deficits in a spread overall, coming from well before I encountered the convention of applying the dignities in this way.

Some More to Chew On

In my experience, correctly assessing the "admixture" of the elements is where most of the "art" of reading elemental dignities lies. Depending on the cards represented, not all elemental influences are created equal. If they were, you would have a static "tripod" and not a fluid, nuanced interchange of energy.

The combination of Fire, Air and Earth is a perfect example:

Fire provides the energizing "spark"
Earth supplies the "fuel"
Air delivers the "medium of exchange" between the two.

Think of a campfire, something many of us have had the experience of trying to start and keep going.

A flame source, a bit of tinder, some dry sticks and a sheltered spot allow for a well-managed "burn." In tarot terms, this would involve three cards of relatively equal "strength."

Too little fuel (possibly signified by a "weak" Earth card) and the fire quickly burns out. Too much fuel (like a large log or "earthy" Major Arcanum) won't "catch" quickly enough to keep going for long. Fuel that is too "wet" (perhaps a dominant Water card in the equation) also won't support continued combustion.

Too little air and the fire will be starved; too much air (think a high wind) and you'll have a conflagration, burning out of control.

The variables in these vignettes are supplied by the nature and potency of the different cards involved. Similar analogies can be applied to all combinations of the elements. I find these exercises to be very engaging and instructive.

I used ED for awhile, after I decided that reversals are too restrictive. I soon found the same to be true (for me) with an algebraically rigid ED system, so I took a more intuitive approach to elemental interactions, somewhat similar to that described by Barleywine.

Richard said:

I used ED for awhile, after I decided that reversals are too restrictive. I soon found the same to be true (for me) with an algebraically rigid ED system, so I took a more intuitive approach to elemental interactions, somewhat similar to that described by Barleywine.

Click to expand...

I also experimented with EDs but found them overly restrictive too, if followed rigorously. I do look at the additional input they are providing, i.e. I get suspicious when a Cup card is flanked by two Wand cards. Also, I note a preponderance of a certain element in a spread. Then again, seeing a lot of Cups in a relationship reading isn't necessarily something undesirable, nor are plenty of Disks when the reading is about finances, etc.

Further, I found that many spreads don't lend themselves to determining EDs. Relying on EDs pretty much limits you to laying out some simple patterns.

Richard said:

I used ED for awhile, after I decided that reversals are too restrictive. I soon found the same to be true (for me) with an algebraically rigid ED system, so I took a more intuitive approach to elemental interactions, somewhat similar to that described by Barleywine.

Click to expand...

I believe it was your input, when I first joined back in 2011, that got me onto them. I immediately recognized that it isn't a simple "add-and-subtract" (or even "multiplication") scenario, more of a creative "weighting" technique. I brought the idea of elemental synthesis with me from astrology to my early tarot practice, and it still serves me well when looking at elemental interactions.

Michael Sternbach said:

I also experimented with EDs but found them overly restrictive too, if followed rigorously. I do look at the additional input they are providing, i.e. I get suspicious when a Cup card is flanked by two Wand cards. Also, I note a preponderance of a certain element in a spread. Then again, seeing a lot of Cups in a relationship reading isn't necessarily something undesirable, nor are plenty of Disks when the reading is about finances, etc.

Further, I found that many spreads don't lend themselves to determining EDs. Relying on EDs pretty much limits you to laying out some simple patterns.

Click to expand...

I recall a previous discussion about how they might be applied to the Celtic Cross, for example. Because it doesn't logically split into "threes," it becomes rather awkward. Also, I can't agree - as I read in some of my source material - that you can just throw over all other considerations about card nature and potency, and just rely on EDs.