“Bottom-Feeders” — A Creative Solution
AUTHOR’S NOTE: In nature (as well as in human affairs) there are creatures that lurk in the depths and augment their livelihood by sponging off the enterprise of others, either passively or more aggressively. As tarot readers we have all experienced readings of a largely negative kind where the “bottom-dwelling” miscreants among the cards act as a drain on the vitality of the querent or the situation. Our challenge is to fashion constructive advice from the countervailing influence of the less-ominous cards in the spread. (See the attached list of affirmative, undecided and contrary cards.)
Whenever something relatively nasty shows up in a reading, we immediately shift into “recovery mode” and attempt to apply the premise that “It’s all good,” which asserts that there must be redeeming qualities somewhere within the impending upset shown by the stressful scenario. We generally look for the “good” cards to outweigh the “bad” ones to the point that encouragement can be found in the forecast, if not outright “empowerment.” But there are times when we come up short on optimism due to the inconclusive contribution of the palliative cards; they are either weak or isolated from immediate contact with their target.
Call the following solution the “White Knight” theory of clarifying cards, a compensatory action similar to the white blood cells that surround an infection and prevent its spread. I’m proposing that we temporarily set any such ill-favored cards apart from the layout,* remove the remaining disagreeable cards from the rest of the deck, shuffle it and draw companion cards for all of the “nasties” that are of a more auspicious (or at least unbiased) complexion, such that they might impart an offsetting corrective stimulus. Consider it a structured clarifying subroutine that will ideally infuse the negative cards with a metaphorical strain of cleansing “antibodies” that can theoretically blunt or even thwart their malignancy. The goal is to avoid relying on intuitive guesswork as the only way to carve reassuring insights from a “mixed bag” of polarized content in the initial draw (which is seldom a straightforward task).
The remediated “bad actors” can then be returned to their positions in the spread with confidence that their dire consequences will be cast in a new light of diminished antagonism. This softening will be based entirely on how potent the ameliorating influx was, and in the best cases the supplemental cards could mostly overshadow and neutralize the impact of the adverse ones, rendering it negligible (for example, the Sun could substantially “wash out” the dismal 9 of Swords). Their interaction can generate an advantageous dwindling or rerouting of the negative energy. On the other hand, if the antidotes don’t appear to make much difference, they can be disregarded.
These moderators can either be left aside or included in the layout as visual cues to remind us of their influence, which should be added to any beneficial presence already contained in the original pull. Although this approach blatantly overthrows my customary stance on the non-use of incidental clarifiers, a position that simply lets problem cards “simmer in my consciousness until they make sense” (as James Rickleff advises), there are limited situations where I build extra cards into the structure of the reading as a creative way to augment the interpretation by introducing another dimension to it.
*Note that all cards can be left in the spread with clarifiers to be added as is commonly done, but I envision segregation as setting up a “clean-room” environment that sharpens the focus and discourages cross-contamination from the preliminary analysis; that can be factored in later.
Here is a random example reading with no specific question. All cards are from the Golden Art Nouveau deck, copyright of Lo Scarabeo, Torino, Italy.
In the initial pull, although the anxiety-plagued 9 of Swords wants the undivided attention of the monarch, its maudlin theatrics are overmastered by the unflappable maturity of the King of Wands, who is none too pleased with the drama but who still manages to enjoy a productive interlude with the 10 of Pentacles as his handiwork. However, the aggressive Knight of Swords wants a piece of the action, and a vigorous tug-of-war ensues from which only the 2 of Pentacles escapes intact, although destabilized; everything else is “equitably apportioned” (perhaps corroborating the 9 of Swords’ woeful premonition).
I set the 9 of Swords apart and drew the 3 of Cups as its more auspicious companion. The joyous occasion shown in the latter takes the edge off the angst of the despondent woman in the former and offers a glimmer of hope for a happier future. Maybe they’ll play Tom Petty’s Mary Jane’s Last Dance to get her out of bed: “Oh my, my, oh hell yes/You’ve got to put on that party dress.”
I put both cards back in the spread to show that the King of Wands is appeased by the newfound optimism, although the dewy-eyed cheerfulness of the 3 of Cups might grate on him a little. The final implication is that if the 2 of Pentacles is “invited to the dance” (he already has the prancing down pat), everything will work out well.
Originally published at http://parsifalswheeldivination.wordpress.com on October 11, 2023.
