The Reconciler
Over the past few weeks I’ve written at some length about the various ways to read a three-card tarot spread. One idea I didn’t spend much time on is the aggregating power of the middle card: rather than merely being a transitional turning-point in the narrative or a “hinge” between the past and the future, it can collect and adjust the input of the cards on both sides of its position. This works in much the same way as the three-card Elemental Dignity array, but instead of drawing insights about the “principal” card’s potential solely from the elemental friendliness or unfriendliness of the adjacent “modifiers,” it captures the collateral meaning of the surrounding cards. In particular, this unifying action can mitigate their differences and reinforce their commonality of purpose by tweaking how they “play into” the central theme ( in the words of “MacGregor” Mathers, “for good or ill according to their nature,” although I don’t believe he did a very good job of explaining how this works in the Golden Dawn’s Liber T). We can ask ourselves “If this is the ‘root note,’ how do the other tones modulate it to create a chord?”
These notions surfaced when I encountered the practice of treating the middle card as the “mediator” between inimical energies on either side. But I don’t think this concept of arbitration goes far enough. Even if it is the weakest card in the series, its pivotal placement automatically awards it some jurisdiction in guiding development of the situation. It creates what computer programmers call a “handshake” between the adversaries that lets competing influences gravitate toward a negotiated resolution. This also emulates the role of the “topic” card in a Lenormand reading which anchors a confluence of incoming forces that can modify its significance in the overall account. I once likened it to a “spider’s web” that transmits premonitory vibrations along its network to the governing “cortex.” There are a couple of other useful analogies for this activity: one is that it operates as a conceptual “sieve” for gathering all relevant testimony under a single guiding principle; another is that it functions like a “sculptor” who adheres strictly to the design and carves away anything that isn’t germane to the overarching aesthetic.
The challenge in deciphering these combinations comes whenever the contributing cards are “heavyweights” and the supposed reconciler is anemic by comparison. It suggests a “tail wagging the dog” scenario that can skew the reading by “washing out” what was assumed to be the core context. Does the erstwhile controlling energy become neutered by its weakness or must it become more artful in its expression while striving to retain its primacy? It makes me think of a “wobbly orbit” in which satellite effects steer the trajectory of the primary body away from its appointed course. In less rarefied terms, we might assume that the disparate powers will be more “distributed” or scattered in their emphasis, with no organizing hub around which to coalesce.
How, then — with no potent “kingpin” on which to hang the interpretation — do we successfully integrate and harmonize the components of these ungainly triplets (not to mention larger spreads) into a seamless whole while granting each card its individual due, especially when their very essence seems to resist such a merger? Damn good question, eh? Here are a couple of random pulls to illustrate my point:
Here we have a cerebral “mediator” (6 of Swords) that is well-positioned to marshal “first principles” (the adjacent Aces) to its cause, thereby gathering stimulus for the formation of ideas that are constructive (Earth) and inspiring (Water) as well as supremely logical (Air). This is a good example of the middle card being “in the driver’s seat.”
In this instance we have the principle of “financial solvency” (10 of Disks) under pressure from dominant forces on both sides: the Knight of Wands cries “Spend it!” while the Magus wants to manipulate and leverage it. The goal would be to ensure that one’s “pockets are deep enough” to accommodate either scenario, with a nod toward optimization rather than depletion as the most sensible course. We could say that the 10 of Disks is “holding the purse-strings,” but it is hard-pressed to remain unmoved. There is clearly some deviation from the model in these decentralized influences.
Originally published at http://parsifalswheeldivination.wordpress.com on April 19, 2023.
