Glimpses From The Window: Combating “Card-Blindness”
AUTHOR’S NOTE: In The Petit Lenormand Oracle, Lisa Young-Sutton offers insights about the problem of becoming “card-blind” while attempting to read a Grand Tableau, a malady that can arise due to the convoluted layers of information created by the various “sub-routines” — in particular the “house” system — once everything is compiled and delineated. In a previous post I called it an overwhelming “blur of conflicting and confusing impressions.” Interestingly, she comes across as an exemplar of such obfuscation in her sample readings, with their exhaustive chains of card-in-house meaning that almost instantly produce a dazed stupor and undermine any coherent understanding of what she’s trying to convey (at least I was defeated, and I have a mind for detail). I think she became overly enthusiastic and didn’t follow her own guidance. (I will be posting another essay on the travails of Lenormand houses in the near future.)
Probably due to my astrological and qabalistic background, I’m partial to structure in divination as opposed to psychic vagueness. This explains my strong affinity for the Lenormand cards, and I’ve characterized my own approach to the GT as “lean;” I strip down the protocols to the minimum necessary for a clear view of my objective. If a technique doesn’t contribute to clarity, I push it off my plate, at least for that reading. The nucleus of my method revolves around the principal focus card or “significator” as it appears in the layout, from which I radiate out in a disciplined way into the surrounding matrix of cards. Ideally, the focus card will sit at or near the center of the array — something that can be “forced” in a line spread by using an odd number of cards — but its placement is random in the GT unless we intentionally lay the significator in the middle of the pattern before dealing the rest of the cards.
In recognizing that the 8X4+4 GT layout does not exhibit a true center position in either the horizontal or vertical direction (assuming we exclude the bottom row of four cards as a separate “mini-reading”), I began contemplating exactly what constitutes the “heart” of the spread and found that it amounts to the four positions (12, 13, 20 and 21) in the middle of the series that resemble a “window-pane.” This led me to consider how we might “look out of that window” as a supplemental practice that is independent of dissecting the frequently off-center significator. Because there is no hub in this quartet, the meaning of the four cards in the “window” is more distributed than sharply focused; they all contribute equally to a “center-piece” that can be expanded in a manner similar to but less comprehensive than the various ways of extrapolating outward from a single focus card.
I propose to look first at the card extending diagonally from the outer corner of each of the four “core” cards, the one that is not contiguous with any of the other three. I might envision it as peeking “out of the corner of my eye” at an oblique drama in four acts. I will then fill in the narrative with the other eight cards that connect the “extended corner” cards, specifically pursuing the clockwise flow that moves between them.
This in effect becomes a small-scale replica of the manner in which most of us read the traditional “four corners” of the tableau. We might consider it as showing the “inner dynamic” of the overall situation while the exterior corners provide the “outer dynamic,” together forming the overarching theme or “signature” of the entire reading within which the Primary Significator and its attendant cards supply the actionable details and advice. (Note that this would work differently in the 9×4 GT, which displays only a two-card, centrally-situated “window” with six interstitial cards.)
I view this innovation as a highly-organized “parallel overlay” with a single purpose that can be applied in addition to the usual network of meaning derived from the standard approach to the GT, which I would most likely not iterate to its full expanse with house correlations, chaining, counting round, etc.
If I were to use the “house” system with it, I think I would employ the concept of “movable houses” in which the houses are depicted by randomly-dealt cards, furnishing some much-needed flexibility. I don’t believe the Birds (12), the Child (13), the Garden (20) and the Mountain (21) of the normal layout would make for a particularly inspiring baseline in every situation; without some serious rethinking, I might read them as “A nervous, vulnerable nature makes going out in public difficult,” whether or not the circumstances warrant it. (In the 9×4 GT it would be the Fox [14] and the Mice [23], an even less auspicious core group.)
Here is an imaginary example reading without house correlations:
The querent is a man who wants to start an enterprise of some kind in the field of public education but he has no idea what to expect since he is an entrepreneur and not an educator. I decided to look for the Ship (enterprise), the Book (education) and the Park (public engagement), and they showed up right on cue as part of the Inner Dynamic!
The Core Quad (1–4) holds the Mice, the Sun, the House and the Fish, suggesting that any early losses will be amply recovered.
The Inner Dynamic (5–8) delivers the Park, the Ship, the Book and the Mountain. The implication is that attempting to mount a knowledge-based (Book) public (Park) enterprise (Ship), perhaps some type of mentoring or training service, will face an arduous climb. Mice + Park looks like the querent is receiving unreliable advice from outside interests; Sun + Ship advises raising anchor and sailing away; House + Book indicates that a “home learning” product could be the best alternative; Mountain + Fish suggests abundant financial difficulties that the querent could turn to his advantage with the right strategy. One possible interpretation is that he discovers (Book) the substantial cost (Fish) of the infrastructure (House) he will need and realizes it will be too much of a drain (Mountain) on his solvency. He needs an alternate plan and this predicament could spur him to it.
The “interstitial” cards in the Inner Dynamic series are as follows:
Anchor + Bouquet is a sign that he may have to take out a loan to get his feet on the ground.
Clover + Birds shows that he’s started a small favorable “buzz” with his stated goals
Lilies + Bear, two cards of “protection,” could possibly mean that he will garner the support of “family-oriented” organizations that have clout within the academic community.
Rider + Scythe looks like a “feedback” loop warning about the risks associated with the major financial obstacle he faces. This could be the impetus for seeking a business partner as we will see in the Outer Dynamic scenario.
The Outer Dynamic (A-D) shows the Crossroads, the Fox, the Coffin and the Lady. The querent needs to be cautious about any decision (Crossroads) to join forces with a female partner (Lady) who is up to no good (Fox) and who could wipe him out (Coffin) with her shady machinations. This looks like a false promise that he might chase after when the Mice with their “appetite for destruction” are nibbling at his start-up capital. This Lady is clearly no “white knight,” and she bears watching.
I’m limiting the “interstitial” cards for the Outer Dynamic to those touching the corner cards and mirroring one another. They are as follows:
Heart + Child reflect his love of working on behalf of children.
Dog + Cross could be someone who professes friendship but turns out to be a major problem. (Dog follows the Fox, which ties it to the Lady later in the sequence.)
Clouds + Tree make me think his female partner’s maneuvering and manipulation will baffle him and take a toll on his mental health.
Snake + Whip imply that she will try to worm her way back in if he cuts her out of his plans. (As a side note, the Cross and the Coffin touch the Ring, a clear caution against signing any ironclad contract with her.)
The focus card (Man in this hypothetical reading) is in the “summary” line of the GT with Letter and Stork before and Key after. I would interpret this to mean that changes (Stork) to the mode of delivery (Letter) for the services he intends to offer will be the answer (Key) to turning things around as promised by the cards of the Core Quad. The Inner Dynamic will give him something to push against, while the Outer Dynamic is warning him about failing to pick his partners wisely.
The final take-away from this reading is that the querent should steer clear of the Lady, concentrate on financial risk abatement and diligently develop his product. Although almost everything in the spread is “weighing down” on him, being in the independent “summary” (aka “destiny” or “fate”) row followed by the Key should afford him the opportunity to do this.
As an afterthought based on subsequent work, here is another approach to design of the layout using a 6×6 array that provides two full “circuits” of cards — an “inner” and “outer” loop — surrounding the “core quad.” In this case the “base” cards are similar to Grand Tableau “houses” but they don’t have to be used as such; if you want to involve houses you can still keep the pattern but use “movable houses” as described above. I think I’m going to like this one better.
Originally published at http://parsifalswheeldivination.wordpress.com on September 27, 2023.
