Camoin Method - Confused with precedence of rules

[Flavio]

Please refer to attached image.

I understand that under Camoin Method, spreads grow from left to right and from bottom to top, but I'm not sure how to solve a conflict in the spread if the Solution and Gazes cards are to be considered also.

In the sample image the future position will need a Solution card and a Gaze card once the solution is understood, I understand that processing the whole solution has precedence over processing the gaze card.

So, in the image there are two cases:

Case 1 developed the Solution with XXI and XV as its gaze, after the solution was done, we pull a new card for the "Future" gaze it was XX.

Case 2 pulled Solution card (XXI), then Gaze card (XV), after that, went back to the solution and pulled XX as a gaze for XXI.

I understand Case 1 is the right way to apply the method, am I right?

Thank you very much for the help.

 

[Paul]

O.k. Let me dig into this one a wee bit.

Here's how I have been taught the method. Although we lay out the cards in a sort of maze method, we don't necessarily have to follow the maze card-by-card when reading the cards. All of the rules of the Method are more fluid, even though I know Camoin presents them in a L'Empereur-like manner.

So, in your example, I might take solely Le Monde to be the solution to XIII-R, but if it were salient to the reading that both Le Diable and Le Monde were a combo-platter, then both cards together-- perhaps even left to right-- would be the overall solution. The strength of this method is its use of relationships between cards, whether that relationship be a type of gaze, repetition of a symbol, variation of a symbol, repetition of an idea, variation of an idea, etc.

So, I know I have seen some students on Camoin's site get into this 1...2...3...4...5 method of leapfrogging around through the spread and following gazes, and reading cards in a particular order. To be sure, this may serve the reading well. My teachers have simply not been as rigid, and these folks really hung out with Camoin and learned it very well.

My teachers of the method of course have used the gazes when laying out the cards, but only use the gazes when reading the meaning when it seems salient, given the context of the question. For example, when L'Imperatrice and L'Empereur gaze at each other (or not) this is salient for a reading about two people connecting on a project. I have not seen as much emphasis on following the gazes directionally when reading the cards. But, ya' know, I never could ask Camoin, himself, about this. So, I could be wrong.

So, back to your example, La Justice moves upward to Le Diable in the Present column. Well, this could be read at any time in the reading and need not be read in any particular order. As I mentioned, Le Diable could be related symbolically or ideologically to Le Monde and is thus connected to Le Monde, as Le Monde sits above as the solution for XIII-R. So, it could be read this way. Maybe it is significant that Le Monde gazes at Le Diable in the sense of the meaning of the reading; maybe it's just the gaze methodology and the meaning runs from left to right (Le Diable to Le Monde). The context of the question helps.

FOr example, if your spread were about a mother (VIII/XV) who was anxious about allowing her children (XV) to take a trip (0) to Europe(XXI), Le Diable --> Le Monde shows binding of a protective mother with freedom. This has a transformative effect on them (XIII) and greatly expands their horizonas (0 --> XX).

In any event, once XIII is uprighted, we see XX.

Just a final word on "don't look at a card until the uprighted card's gaze points you there". Yes, this is a guideline, but fluid. In actuality, it may be salient that the cards are NOT looking at each other, yet, until the solution is applied. So, this point may be salient for the reader or querent. This is why, after awhile, I think many people like to get all the cards out as a sneak preview (or movie trailer) of the story.

Does this help or obscure, Flavio?

(PS) We should inquire on Camoin's site and get different views about whether Camoin says we follow gazes even right-to-left when reading the cards and not just when laying out the cards. I've been taught the method with more emphasis on laying out the cards, but being more left-to-right when reading them, unless the gaze-following is especially salient. Whew! Perhaps that's all I needed to say.

 

[Paul]

I'm seeking clarification with my teachers, now.

 

[Paul]

I understand Case 1 is the right way to apply the method, am I right?

Thank you very much for the help.

Yes, however, I have noted earlier that I might read Le Diable-to-Le Monde. Or, La Justice-to-Le Diable.

 

[patrickjutte]

Hello Paul,

I'm confused too, but for another reason.
If you look at the cards of the past (with the solutioncards), how do you interpret the solutioncards: like "there was a problem in the past...but the solution WAS..." (to unblock the problemcard), or "there was a problem in the past...but the solution SHOULD HAVE BEEN..."?

Greetings Patrick

 

[Aoife]

In similar vein...
I've interpreted the solution card to a reversed card in the past position as - the baggage I've brought from the past... left-over, unresolved issues - which can now be resolved by the solution card.
Do I have it wrong?

 

[Paul]

Wow!

What great questions!!!

Here's my understanding and experience. When looking at the Past, I tend to see the spread tell my story as it happened. So, the solutions were what took place. UNLESS, my question is "what should I have done differently?" which would be a very interesting question that I don't hear often from querents. So, I over and over again see the Past story essentially reflect upwards and outwards the back-and-forthness of the issue; its ebb and flow.

In fact, the appearance of all of this Past material in the reading is comforting, somehow, confirming, that the reading is speaking to your issue.

 

[Flavio]

So, in your example, I might take solely Le Monde to be the solution to XIII-R, but if it were salient to the reading that both Le Diable and Le Monde were a combo-platter, then both cards together-- perhaps even left to right-- would be the overall solution. The strength of this method is its use of relationships between cards, whether that relationship be a type of gaze, repetition of a symbol, variation of a symbol, repetition of an idea, variation of an idea, etc.

Paul, thank you very much for this elaborated and comprehensive answer, in the example, Le Diable was pulled as a gaze card, what was Le Monde looking at? but I didn't realize those 2 cards would create a new type of "conflict" whether they can be read together left to right.

From your explanation, I understood only Le Monde would be the solution to XIII-R but if we let the cards speak by themselves and something they show really pops, then we might me able to apply the rules with flexibility, I think that is right, I don't want to be uber-concerned about the application of rules instead of focusing in cards interpretation.

I have not seen as much emphasis on following the gazes directionally when reading the cards. But, ya' know, I never could ask Camoin, himself, about this. So, I could be wrong.

OK, so the gazes are more "useful" when laying the cards and might be during the reading but that depends on the cards.

So, back to your example, La Justice moves upward to Le Diable in the Present column. Well, this could be read at any time in the reading and need not be read in any particular order. As I mentioned, Le Diable could be related symbolically or ideologically to Le Monde and is thus connected to Le Monde, as Le Monde sits above as the solution for XIII-R. So, it could be read this way. Maybe it is significant that Le Monde gazes at Le Diable in the sense of the meaning of the reading; maybe it's just the gaze methodology and the meaning runs from left to right (Le Diable to Le Monde). The context of the question helps.

The relationship you mentioned between La Justice and Le Diable was a surprise to me, because I understood Le Diable was only working with Le Monde as a solution to XIII-R, but he is doing more, I like that because the spread and method start to feel multi-dimensional and full of interpretation layers to explore.

FOr example, if your spread were about a mother (VIII/XV) who was anxious about allowing her children (XV) to take a trip (0) to Europe(XXI), Le Diable --> Le Monde shows binding of a protective mother with freedom. This has a transformative effect on them (XIII) and greatly expands their horizonas (0 --> XX).

In any event, once XIII is uprighted, we see XX.

Thank you to put the cards in context with a situation this was very helpful to appreciate the relationships and influence.

Just a final word on "don't look at a card until the uprighted card's gaze points you there". Yes, this is a guideline, but fluid. In actuality, it may be salient that the cards are NOT looking at each other, yet, until the solution is applied. So, this point may be salient for the reader or querent. This is why, after awhile, I think many people like to get all the cards out as a sneak preview (or movie trailer) of the story.

Does this help or obscure, Flavio?

I really helped! basically I got a clear notion about what conditions allow us decide how much a rule might be "stretched".

Regarding the "don't look at a card until the uprighted card's gaze points you there" sounds reasonable, sneak previews are always nice but I think in this case is better to let the story unfold without skipping stages because we already know "the end" of the movie

(PS) We should inquire on Camoin's site and get different views about whether Camoin says we follow gazes even right-to-left when reading the cards and not just when laying out the cards. I've been taught the method with more emphasis on laying out the cards, but being more left-to-right when reading them, unless the gaze-following is especially salient. Whew! Perhaps that's all I needed to say.

well, that was a summary but the richness of your post is all about the details you discussed, thank you very much again for helping us(me) with the method and the time you used to answer the original question.

 

[Paul]

I like that because the spread and method start to feel multi-dimensional and full of interpretation layers to explore.

Indeed!

Of course, one caution: Once the salient (Latin: to leap out) aspect is determined, we move on. So, we follow the rules and the laws and then stop analyzing once the point is discovered. With practice, the "point" becomes very rapidly discerned, and is in fact "felt" before the cards hit the table.

It's sort of like a first date, share just enough to get them interested, any more than that is too much information, and then only obscures one's fabulousness.