Which book? pro and contra

daphne

Agreed..and somewhere on here is a thread or two about Matthew's book.

I got to read through parts of her book and found inconsistencies not to mention some of her examples didn't match up with the card in question or something wasn't explained very well.

I actually did point out pages and/or examples of what was inconsistent in one of those threads.

Not the reviews one. :D

Oh, did you?! Great, then I do not feel that I totally do not get it. Indeed, I remember when reading the book that some interpretations were totally against the former presented idea noun-adjective method, it was suddenly quite reversed, adj-noun. Which I managed, though without any experience with lenormand, to see it right away. How come, it doesn't make sense anymore, I was thinking quite upset, everything goes then, we can mix whatever?
I guess I really like structure and consistency when learning. :)
I will try to find those threads you said, from discussing inconsistencies I hope to make some peace with this book.
 

daphne

I really like Rana, Caitlin and Andy's books, especially for reading techniques, examples and practical experience. Each has something to offer and each may appeal to different people.

My number one, go-to book, for the meanings of the cards - is the ultra-straight forward book by Anthony Louis, Lenormand Symbols - only $3.99 in kindle format (available on all mobile devices).
http://www.amazon.com/Lenormand-Symbols-Exploring-Origins-Images-ebook/dp/B00J7229O2/
.

Yes, it is true, each has something to offer. But this is after I get to learn a consistent method to go. Then I can add stuff from different sources and views without being so bothered by differences, contradictions even in same explained method, or personal twists.
But to start I just need a good structured and good written book, not too motherly, with no contradictory info, which can simply lead my first steps, not confuse them more.

Thank you for Anthony Louis suggestion!
I did not know he wrote a book about this (or forgot) and I never read digital books. But I think I will make an exception here. I know his style from tarot, it was quite pleasant, noninvasive and consistent. I am happy to hear he wrote also on lenormand topic. Maybe he is the answer to finally get this system to work for me too.
 

DownUnderNZer

Am looking at Louis's and Andy B's contributions now out of absolute curiosity. :D:D:D
Have only looked at so much and certain pages - so have yet to read each fully.

Two somewhat difficult cards to get are the SNAKE and FOX for the type of "deceit" involved. Neither seem to really detail the difference between the two which is interesting.
However, Andy B does state that is comes down to personal (Snake) versus loss of livelihood or whatever (Fox).

Telling you now there is a real difference between the two and it isn't necessarily to do with work or business.

Both do "NEAR and FAR" which I like, but I've only learnt that with the "people" cards.

Louis does refer to Andy B in regards to, more or less, the "RIDER being another suitor or the likes". I have only read so much of each, so am not sure if Andy B crops up elsewhere as a mention, only time will tell.

The historical aspect to each card is indeed interesting I find. Louis has done a good job of that. It is really informative as to where he has sourced the info as well as translates it if need be.

Certain cards are mentioned through one (or both) from different makers only I do not see the relevance, or have worked out the relevance yet, of describing something like "THE MYSTICAL has a Sarcophagus".

What is lacking is the "Astrology signs" assigned to each card or "body organs" etc. So, the basic meanings are there only.

Might be suitable for learners or beginners and if some are interested in the historical backgrounds to certain cards or even the takes on "TRADITIONAL 19th CENTURY READINGS" etc it is all there and translated by Louis I think.


Still yet to read through both properly though. :D



Yes, it is true, each has something to offer. But this is after I get to learn a consistent method to go. Then I can add stuff from different sources and views without being so bothered by differences, contradictions even in same explained method, or personal twists.
But to start I just need a good structured and good written book, not too motherly, with no contradictory info, which can simply lead my first steps, not confuse them more.

Thank you for Anthony Louis suggestion!
I did not know he wrote a book about this (or forgot) and I never read digital books. But I think I will make an exception here. I know his style from tarot, it was quite pleasant, noninvasive and consistent. I am happy to hear he wrote also on lenormand topic. Maybe he is the answer to finally get this system to work for me too.
 

daphne

Am looking at Louis's and Andy B's contributions now out of absolute curiosity. :D:D:D
Have only looked at so much and certain pages - so have yet to read each fully.

Two somewhat difficult cards to get are the SNAKE and FOX for the type of "deceit" involved. Neither seem to really detail the difference between the two which is interesting.
However, Andy B does state that is comes down to personal (Snake) versus loss of livelihood or whatever (Fox).

Telling you now there is a real difference between the two and it isn't necessarily to do with work or business.

Both do "NEAR and FAR" which I like, but I've only learnt that with the "people" cards.

Louis does refer to Andy B in regards to, more or less, the "RIDER being another suitor or the likes". I have only read so much of each, so am not sure if Andy B crops up elsewhere as a mention, only time will tell.

The historical aspect to each card is indeed interesting I find. Louis has done a good job of that. It is really informative as to where he has sourced the info as well as translates it if need be.

Certain cards are mentioned through one (or both) from different makers only I do not see the relevance, or have worked out the relevance yet, of describing something like "THE MYSTICAL has a Sarcophagus".

What is lacking is the "Astrology signs" assigned to each card or "body organs" etc. So, the basic meanings are there only.

Might be suitable for learners or beginners and if some are interested in the historical backgrounds to certain cards or even the takes on "TRADITIONAL 19th CENTURY READINGS" etc it is all there and translated by Louis I think.


Still yet to read through both properly though. :D

Thank you, really useful info here. Makes me think more about the choices, which book to get next, Andy's or Louis's. Now I think maybe first Andy's and then if I have time still, Louis's...
 

seedcake

A few words of advice: Pick one and learn from only one teacher at a time. Ever hear the old saying, "too many cooks spoil the broth"? That way any conflicting information won't get you confused. You will find differences between each teacher which doesn't make any wrong. Just stick with one and once you learn, then branch out to see other points of view. And Steinbach is totally non-traditional so if you are interested in learning Lenormand in a more traditional way, stick with one of the other 3.

I'll work with Rana's book first. It was translated in my native language but I was rather to get the English edition, especially when I got by the nice price with other two books. I checked how it was constructed and I thought it'll be good for the start. Later, I'll take Matthews'.
 

DownUnderNZer

Have to say digital reading is very very different on a Kindle app.

Looked at both a little bit more - I think Louis has better structure like: Core meanings/ Alternatives/Adjectives etc.

Both seem to use "pair" meanings at times too to illustrate a point.

Andy B does acknowledge "STAR" in the way of being Psychic, Mediumship, Tarot card readings etc. Think he might have forgotten Astral travel whereas Louis doesn't at all. Spiritual is what he states and maybe Essoteric I think, but not a full list of possibilities in that area.

Andy B doesn't refer to BEAR as grandmother which surprises me and as yet I haven't looked at what Louis has written.

More to BOUQUET than what is written in meaning.

Enough definitions are given for each card, but perhaps not everything in some respects. EG STAR.

If it is the French and German systems used by either- "Star", for example, really wouldn't be that different in meaning or lacking might be a better way of putting it.

But the $3.00 or $4.00 is well worth the spend for what you get! :thumbsup:







Thank you, really useful info here. Makes me think more about the choices, which book to get next, Andy's or Louis's. Now I think maybe first Andy's and then if I have time still, Louis's...
 

Teheuti

What is lacking is the "Astrology signs" assigned to each card or "body organs" etc. So, the basic meanings are there only.
I assume you mean Anthony Louis's book. Astrology signs, body organs, personal characteristics (red hair, etc.) were all added much later and differ, sometimes drastically, from teacher to teacher.

Anyone can make up a system using Lenormand cards. However, Lenormand differs from Tarot: Tarot was not designed as a divinatory system; Lenormand was. Lenormand (and its direct precursors) were used in essentially the same way since the late 18th century until all the modernisms crept in starting roughly 30 years ago. It would be a pity to not learn the Lenormand tradition that served well for over 150 years.
 

Teheuti

Andy's book and course are fabulous for learning reading methods and modern meanings based solidly on the tradition.
 

DownUnderNZer

I didn't learn Tarot first, but the Playing Cards then the Lenormand.

I do not confuse the Tarot with the Lenormand whatsoever and was taught the French and German systems at the same time only didn't know it. One teacher was traditional and generational.

And as I see it if the Lenormand branched off of Playing Cards, am sure I read somewhere Madam Lenormands deck was Playing Cards with symbols drawn all over them, I would think some of the meanings would be in association with them. Before they became their own 36 card deck.

I know the playing cards differently to how they were likely read and known back then, but cards like the "Court Cards" described people even a few of the "Non Court" ones.

Example:

King of Diamonds : Older man, professional, fair to brown hair.

Queen of Spades: A widow. A woman that has had her share of trouble and heart ache.

4 of Hearts: Baby girl.

6 of Cups: Young female. Likely under 20.

8 of Clubs. Coastal.

So, I'm sure if the Lenormand branched off of Playing Cards the Playing Cards must have had some influence in meanings.

If so...it must go back further than 30 years.

DND :)

I assume you mean Anthony Louis's book. Astrology signs, body organs, personal characteristics (red hair, etc.) were all added much later and differ, sometimes drastically, from teacher to teacher.

Anyone can make up a system using Lenormand cards. However, Lenormand differs from Tarot: Tarot was not designed as a divinatory system; Lenormand was. Lenormand (and its direct precursors) were used in essentially the same way since the late 18th century until all the modernisms crept in starting roughly 30 years ago. It would be a pity to not learn the Lenormand tradition that served well for over 150 years.
 

DownUnderNZer

Adding: Playing cards, from what I have just read, came off of Tarot.

My understanding of the Lenormand is that the purpose of it being developed was to find a more simpler and direct way of reading cards for everyday matters.

If you look at its "cousin" the Mystical Kipper it has more people cards in it and was created over 100 years ago.

The Lenormand and Playing Cards came off of the Tarot and are possibly not unique in that way.

But as for meanings...they must have come from somewhere first.

Then evolved and/or mutated. :)

One person pointed out something about the "insets" in that the Germans viewed Clubs being worse than Spades. And just maybe it was confused and mixed up when it crossed over the border.

Who really knows?

But it could explain why there are 5 cards that vary in meaning between the German and French systems.

Or maybe not.

But if the Kipper is related to the Lenormand yet created more people cards over 100 years ago I'd tend to think the Lenormand must have had something as well just not "court" people or "thieves" or "under 25" or "over 25" kind of cards.

Even back then I'm sure questions were asked about future love and the likes and if so more than just a basic card meaning would have had to be given.

Eg Bear & Bouquet. Your future love will come from an aunt's side and he will like younger females. :bugeyed:

Great! A cousin that prefers them young and I'm near on 35!. :D :D :D

Anyways, if they originated from Playing Cards, then so did their meanings to some extent. Had to have come from somewhere.
Including Astrology and Characters etc.

That is what I think and/or wonder.























.......................................