I am completely new to Lenormand

[kalliope]

Then we have the other tier - the newbies. And for us it is difficult. Because all too often, we see the sometimes heated dialogues between members of the other two 'tiers', get conflicting advice etc. Sometimes the advice is not real advice. It comes in the form of "you should have used xxx amount of cards, you should have used xxx spread, you should have read xxx pairing" etc and this can be very soul destroying. I have been aware of advice and guidance given here regarding tarot to newbies but I don't see it as being quite so blunt or prescriptive.

So I finish with my plea here on behalf of newbies. If you respond with insights, guidance, suggestions, are they supportive or prescriptive? Because when you receive just the latter, it will not do much for the confidence of those who are wanting to learn, who have been brave enough to share a spread or question. Let's keep AT a friendly place. One which supports, encourages and nurtures. I think where Lenormand is concerned there is some room for development where newbies are given the similar mentoring as their tarot cousins.

I always find it so interesting how people can respond to the the same things so differently. For me, personally, I WANT people with expert knowledge about a skill I'm trying to learn to correct me and give me prescriptive recommendations. After all, if they don't, I'll probably keep doing the wrong thing! I consider myself to still be a Lenormand newbie, and I don't find correction to be unfriendly at all, nor does it hurt my confidence, since on the contrary I will be better afterwards for what I will have learned. Sure, if someone's being mean or snippy about it that's completely uncalled for, but I don't think it's unsupportive simply when one says, "actually, Kalliope, if you're really trying to learn the method, that's not quite it -- it would be more correct for you to do it this way. Here's what you should do next time: XYZ-technique-blahblahblah." I think that a suggestion for how I should do it is advice, and it's advice I seek out and welcome. I'm also completely comfortable with the idea that I may, in the end, decide to do it my own way, but I'll recognize that what I'm doing isn't the actual Lenormand method at that point.

************

As for the other point about reading Lenormand vs. reading a Lenormand deck, I'll trot out my favorite analogy: I can dance to salsa music, but unless I'm doing certain special steps and movements, I'm not necessarily "salsa dancing," right? Is it wrong to point out that there is a proper way to salsa dance? Ballroom competitions certainly define the correct technique, and that defended list of requirements is part of WHY there is still something distinct and unique about salsa dancing. How else CAN we define salsa dancing, without listing the special, unique moves that distinguish it from everything else, like freestyle, or swing, or tango dancing? Don't we all understand why salsa aficionados would want to make sure that people learn what "traditional salsa dancing" is so we can recognize it as different from when people just start grooving to fun salsa music? I doubt many of us would consider it offensive if they pointed out the distinction.

I think the "Lenormand reading" vs. "reading a Lenormand pack" issue is the same as salsa dancing vs. moving to salsa music. One isn't better than the other in any way, but they are two separate things. Pointing out the difference when it comes to Lenormand seems to be much more emotionally charged, though. It seems that people might expect rules for dancing, but because rules aren't so common in the broader tarot culture, it can seem like an affront to someone who isn't excited by the prospect of learning a detailed method for its own sake.

I guess it gets confusing and hurtful because there aren't separate terms for these things, and the aficionados assume people are trying to learn the whole shebang of a method, while in fact some people are wanting to do the other thing (read the cards in the way that feels intuitive to them) and they understandably don't appreciate it when they start getting "corrections" based on something they're not actually trying to do.

 

[Seraphina]

I agree with kalliope.. I am more than happy to be given advice and help from a traditional Lenormand reader/expert. Why on earth would I want anything less??

When I became interested in Lenormand I knew I wanted to learn the traditional way... I am going to study hard and do my very best to master the Lenormand language.. I will incorporate the proximity method in my readings exactly as Andy has discribed..
As a newbie I need to start off on the right track, so thank you Andy for your knowledge and for sharing it in this thread, I respect your expertise in the Lenormand field and I'm looking forward to my Lenormand journey

 

[Teheuti]

As for the other point about reading Lenormand vs. reading a Lenormand deck, I'll trot out my favorite analogy: I can dance to salsa music, but unless I'm doing certain special steps and movements, I'm not necessarily "salsa dancing," right? Is it wrong to point out that there is a proper way to salsa dance?

Beautifully perfect analogy, thank you so much, kalliope. May I quote you?

 

[kalliope]

Beautifully perfect analogy, thank you so much, kalliope. May I quote you?

Quote away! I'm just glad someone found it apt, thank you!

 

[Tag_jorrit]

. . .and the aficionados assume people are trying to learn the whole shebang of a method, while in fact some people are wanting to do the other thing (read the cards in the way that feels intuitive to them) and they understandably don't appreciate it when they start getting "corrections" based on something they're not actually trying to do.

Brilliant, kalliope! You just nailed the whole 'traditionalist v. intuitive' dichotomy!

When I was first captivated by the Lenormand I didn't want intuitive creativity, I wanted the nuts and bolts of the traditional system.

It still baffles me - I guess I am not very smart - why some would want to pick up a Lenormand deck and not want to learn how to read it the way it's traditionally been read for the past 150 years or so. And then ask questions when they don't really want the answers.

 

[Teheuti]

Isn't it great what the right analogy will do for creating understanding! No one questions doing dances correctly, nor that there are clear differences among the various kinds of dances (even among other Latin dances), but they feel it is an imposition to even sugggest that a certain vocabulary and practices define a Lenormand reading. At the same time, we can see from TV dance competitions how the correography has evolved while still maintaining each style's distinctive moves and flavor.

 

[kalliope]

It still baffles me - I guess I am not very smart - why some would want to pick up a Lenormand deck and not want to learn how to read it the way it's traditionally been read for the past 150 years or so. And then ask questions when they don't really want the answers.

I actually kind of know where they're coming from as to the desire to pick up the deck, since I consider my relationship to the Thoth Tarot to be similar. I seem to have a mental block about all things qaballa/TreeOfLife, and only skimmed the BoT for 30 minutes, once, about 15 years ago. But I love the Thoth deck's art, and read it "intuitively" based on the emotionally evocative images, the keywords, random companion books, and my knowledge of astrology. So I always say I "don't read it right."

Here are my ideas as to the quite legitimate pull of the Lenormand deck, even for those uninterested in the traditional reading method:

• the decks are different in structure than tarot, which is interesting
• new things are exciting!
• the decks are small and cute, and there are a lot of them available now
• if one likes an old-world aesthetic, historical Lenormand decks are utterly charming
• their reputation for straightforward, everyday issue, practical, predictive readings is attractive (aside from the fact that this is likely due to the traditional reading method)
• one might like the idea of reading them differently, in some way, compared to tarot, even if one doesn't want to embrace the full-on method
• the community of new Lenormand readers online has a lot of energy
• card readers are used to picking up any deck and reading however we've always read, so proceeding similarly with the Lenormand isn't so surprising, really
• some probably find the limited symbol set challenging to their intuition in a positive sense, and evocative in their own way

But on the other hand I totally understand your bafflement, because to me, it was the lure of a new and different approach to card reading that was so enticing, so inspiring, so thrilling! (New and different from what I knew as card reading, anyway.) A new and challenging skill to learn! Something that would be rewarding only if I dedicated lots of time to learning the gritty nuts and bolts of process and practice! I was (and am) enamored with the idea of a very precise, specific, and thorough method that would allow me to give excellent and direct readings. That's what was unique about them and made them different from other oracle decks in my mind, and made me seek them out. If we toss out the unique method, it makes me sad because the method is their special superpower! Don't take it away! It's hard for me to understand someone not finding the method the absolute most interesting thing about Lenormand.

But, I get that not everyone is inspired by the same nerdy things that I am. I'm just excited about it, like to talk about it, love to hash out details, and enjoy learning "the right way" to do unusual things! It would be nice, however, to be able to discuss the technicalities of proper traditional method without anyone assuming those interested in such things are the fundamentalist Lenormand Police who want to squash all creativity or intuitive insight in the cartomantic world. I'm far from that, truly. I don't know why people take offense when others try to discuss the traditional method(s), since I think by now that most know it largely defines the decks historically. One can choose to ignore the method for one's own use, certainly! But why be bothered by the experts sharing their expertise and educating others from their perspective, especially if general questions are asked?

 

[Teheuti]

to me, it was the lure of a new and different approach to card reading that was so enticing, so inspiring, so thrilling! (New and different from what I knew as card reading, anyway.) A new and challenging skill to learn! Something that would be rewarding only if I dedicated lots of time to learning the gritty nuts and bolts of process and practice! I was (and am) enamored with the idea of a very precise, specific, and thorough method that would allow me to give excellent and direct readings. That's what was unique about them and made them different from other oracle decks in my mind, and made me seek them out. If we toss out the unique method, it makes me sad because the method is their special superpower! Don't take it away! It's hard for me to understand someone not finding the method the absolute most interesting thing about Lenormand.

Again, you've spoken my mind brilliantly! I approached Lenormand in exactly the same way.

It would be nice, however, to be able to discuss the technicalities of proper traditional method without anyone assuming those interested in such things are the fundamentalist Lenormand Police who want to squash all creativity or intuitive insight in the cartomantic world. I'm far from that, truly. I don't know why people take offense when others try to discuss the traditional method(s), since I think by now that most know it largely defines the decks historically. One can choose to ignore the method for one's own use, certainly! But why be bothered by the experts sharing their expertise and educating others from their perspective, especially if general questions are asked?

Yes! I really appreciate it when a more experienced reader points out something I've overlooked or an approach that doesn't work traditionally. I learn so much this way! In actual readings, I am a little more flexible, drawing on that intuitive sense. But, I try to always double-check my interpretations with a very traditional overview before I conclude. Sometimes I catch myself in an assumption that's not truly warranted or that should be checked carefully with the querent.

 

[Le Fanu]

Here are my ideas as to the quite legitimate pull of the Lenormand deck, even for those uninterested in the traditional reading method:

• the decks are different in structure than tarot, which is interesting
• new things are exciting!
• the decks are small and cute, and there are a lot of them available now
• if one likes an old-world aesthetic, historical Lenormand decks are utterly charming
• their reputation for straightforward, everyday issue, practical, predictive readings is attractive (aside from the fact that this is likely due to the traditional reading method)
• one might like the idea of reading them differently, in some way, compared to tarot, even if one doesn't want to embrace the full-on method
• the community of new Lenormand readers online has a lot of energy
• card readers are used to picking up any deck and reading however we've always read, so proceeding similarly with the Lenormand isn't so surprising, really
• some probably find the limited symbol set challenging to their intuition in a positive sense, and evocative in their own way

Fascinating. I enjoyed this list. I also think that subonsciously people are drawn to the old-fashioned allure of traditional cartomancy complete with headscarf - you know, with cards that have suits on them. A yearning for the time before tarot got all Celtic. I think at some subconscious level many people think of Lenormand cards (because most people want to "keep" the playing card element/insert) as pictorial/scenic playing cards and want to read them thus.

 

[kalliope]

I don't know why people take offense when others try to discuss the traditional method(s), since I think by now that most know it largely defines the decks historically. One can choose to ignore the method for one's own use, certainly! But why be bothered by the experts sharing their expertise and educating others from their perspective, especially if general questions are asked?

Well, this was a dumb comment of mine, since I actually answered myself in an earlier post!

it gets confusing and hurtful because there aren't separate terms for these things, and the aficionados assume people are trying to learn the whole shebang of a method, while in fact some people are wanting to do the other thing (read the cards in the way that feels intuitive to them) and they understandably don't appreciate it when they start getting "corrections" based on something they're not actually trying to do.

I think what I said above is it. They're asking questions from their own perspective, from wanting to read the Lenormand in a manner that feels intuitively correct to them (perhaps borrowing some traditional ideas, but largely reading in their own way). They do want answers, but ones from their own perspective, which likely includes a long list of acceptable ways to read the deck. The traditionalists of course answer from their perspective in which there is a basic method that makes Lenormand what it is, and which includes right and wrong ways to do things. Both are "innocently" asking and answering from their respective Lenormand worldviews, but of course they're clashing, since like I said, the traditionalists are correcting something the others don't consider to be an error, assuming their goal is something it's not.