Is there value in adhering to a traditional Lenormand system? If so, what is it?

[tarotlyn]

Mary, I am not on the study group or on here 'every day,' like you are,
and I must have missed a lot of your posts explaining all this.

Got it now... and now just trying to assimilate it to be usable with my mindset.

Thank you again...
Hugs, Lyn

 

[Teheuti]

Is Lenormand becoming a modern Tower of Babel?

Rather than a single language (albeit with regional phrases and "accents"), is the language in danger of being lost in a multiplicity of individual languages such that no one will be able to understand anyone else?

 

[Asher]

Droesbeke

With Erna Droesbeke, for instance, I'm told that although her first Lenormand book closely adheres to the 19th century text, she began to create spreads, the use of reversals, and add modern meanings that she made up based on her own experience as a reader.

Yes, I have a copy of her 1989 English version, _The Oracle of Mlle. Lenormand_. Chapter 5 is "The Traditional Meanings and a Modern Interpretation of the Thirty-Six Cards of Mademoiselle Lenormand". The traditional meanings average a paragraph in length, while the modern interpretations are quite a bit longer, and make much use of near and far, and occasionally direction that the person or object is facing. This book does not mention reversals, and only occasionally does she mention card combinations.

Chapter 6 is "Several Methods of Arranging the Cards". Included here is a block of 9 cards, with each card having a specific, positional meaning. For example, position 2 is "This card indicates the likely course of future developments".

Her Past, Present and Future Cross spread begins by laying all the cards out in a 9x4 grid. The column in which the significator (Man or Woman card) falls is read as the present, the cards to the left of the significator are read as the past, and the cards in the row to the right are read as the future.

Another spread is the Cross of Fate (or the Karmic Cross). The 9x4 is again used, and the "cross" are the cards diagonal to the significator, forming an X. According to Droesbeke, "the cards which lie on the diagonals to the left of the [significator] provide information about the questioner's past, offer insights into developments which have led into his present life situation, and hint at the historical roots of his current problems.The cards which lie on the diagonals to the right of the [significator] provide information about the questioner's future. They show how the questioner's present situation is likely to develop and point toward the consequences which his past actions will have on the future" (page 95).

Droesbeke also describes the "Traditional Distant-Near Method", which uses a 8x4 +4 arrangement of the cards. She says, "Most importantly, we must consider the relationships which link each of the cards to the [significator] and to the Clouds. She emphasizes the importance of looking at which cards are on the dark and light side of the Clouds. This spread is followed by a summary of card meanings when the card is 'near' or 'distant' from the significator.

Finally, using the 8x4 +4 layout, she offer the "Distant-Near Method in the Present, Past and Future". She never uses the term Grand Tableau, but this layout seems to be close to what we call the GT today.

I hope this is helpful!

 

[Teheuti]

Thank you, Asher. This is a good description of Droeskeke's English translated book. It follows and expands on the 1846 instruction sheet. As I mentioned it's her later books that are not in English that begin to add new material that seems to be her own invention - including using reversed cards - a technique that is rarely found among Lenormand readers. It's really a pity that this first book is no longer in print. I've found it very helpful in that it shows you exactly how to use the Near and Far designations and the value of the old meanings. Most of her structural descriptions for the Grand Tableau are standard, although her examples for using them are, again, extremely helpful.

 

[tarotlyn]

Thank you Mary, for directing me to Helen Riding's write up (comparison) of the
various known 'traditional' schools of keywords. ("not a comprehensive list of keywords") - BUT...
enough of their *basic* keywords to see the *similarities* between the different schools.

Very insightful, Mary, thank you again!

I have slept on this last night, and have come to this conclusion (for myself):

I think that when LRichard said: "... maybe there are several equally valid traditions..."
He may have been onto something here.

Since each of these known traditional schools are correct in their own right, and *mainly*
because most of them are basically very *similar* in their keywords, maybe it is okay for me to
use *any* of these school's keywords for my 'traditional base.'

So actually my intuition would kick in and figure out *which* of these school's keywords
is appropriate for each card in my readings. (I am already doing this)

I then believe I am a traditionalist in that sense and my *intuition* is then used *within*
these traditional meanings. I don't invent my own meanings.

Also, thanks to Mary, I do believe that I am leaning very heavily toward the Gluck deck
meanings as my traditional base, but as I said, a few other traditional schools' meanings
also make sense.

So as to the subject of *intuition* (if used the way I just described), I don't see how that
can hurt the traditional meanings. Maybe other initiatives are doing it differently than noted here.

Thank you Mary, and everyone else, for the clarity given in this thread <3

Love and Light,
Lyn

 

[Teheuti]

Rather than Glück OR ___, you might want to consider that the Glück/Philippe Lenormand meanings (or very close to these) were the only meanings around for nearly 100 years - in that the verses on all the 19th and early 20th century decks are closely related to these if not exact copies and were the only other printed information. So, those "other traditions" that you talk about are really modern additions grafted onto this skeletal framework. Some of these newer meanings have become more dominant in readings because of the need for them in our modern life. So, yes, it helps at first to learn one of the specific modern lineages that has developed. Eventually, in the course of doing many readings, you'll find that certain meanings function better than others in your own readings.

For instance, is your car referred to by Rider or by Ship?

Does Fox work better as the major work card, or as a warning of wrongness and falsity, or does it advise being smart, or is it a person with red/ginger hair, or something else altogether? Of course, it could act as any of the above depending on the question and surrounding cards, but usually one or two of these will tend to dominate. Does a different card assume one or more of these meanings for you?

 

[Teheuti]

Think of the different country's trends as "modern lineages of the Lenormand tradition," rather than as different traditions altogether.

 

[Teheuti]

BTW, my current favorite translation for the Grand Tableau is "Big Picture" - as in getting the "big picture" of my life, rather than a brief snapshot (short layout).

 

[kalliope]

Tarotlyn, although you've said you understand better now what Mary was referring to as traditional, I just wanted to toss in my 2 cents as well. And I wanted to respond a little bit to your first post about using intuition with the cards.

As I said in a few other posts, regardless of what the very first or original meanings were, there are several traditions alive and well in various countries that have clear connections to the past. They are more similar than different, and have been remarkably consistent in their meanings over time while still adjusting to be relevant to modern life. These stable, multi-generational systems are what I consider to be "traditional" at this point.

I understand your point that for certain readers, intuitive flashes are natural and common, and that it would be difficult to read without paying attention to those feelings.

My hope for those readers, though, is that if they concentrate on learning the traditional method and meanings, they can train their intuition to make leaps within the method instead of outside of it. I mean that they could have intuitive insights about complex card combinations that might be new or unusual, but which a traditional reader could understand once told about them. This is in contrast to a reader making purely personal associations about the card symbols that no one else could fathom. I'll give an example in my next post when I respond to other comments.

I do recognize that for talented intuitive readers, they will occasionally have an insight that is "out there" compared to common meanings, but that is accurate nonetheless. The problem, as Mary pointed out earlier, is if people then permanently attach these new, unrelated intuitive meanings to the cards and also mostly replace the traditional meanings with the intuitive ones. That is what would end up stretching the language of the Lenormand over time to the point of breaking it up completely.

 

[kalliope]

Is Lenormand becoming a modern Tower of Babel?

Rather than a single language (albeit with regional phrases and "accents"), is the language in danger of being lost in a multiplicity of individual languages such that no one will be able to understand anyone else?

This issue is the one I understand to be the most pressing from the perspective of traditional readers. It's not a close-minded attempt to stop progress, but a desire to protect a language before it becomes too fragmented by everyone's personal slang. I think there is still room for individualism while still keeping the language intact.

Eventually, in the course of doing many readings, you'll find that certain meanings function better than others in your own readings.

For instance, is your car referred to by Rider or by Ship?

Does Fox work better as the major work card, or as a warning of wrongness and falsity, or does it advise being smart, or is it a person with red/ginger hair, or something else altogether? Of course, it could act as any of the above depending on the question and surrounding cards, but usually one or two of these will tend to dominate. Does a different card assume one or more of these meanings for you?

Yes, personalization of the meanings will naturally occur, and yet even a traditional reader from another country could still understand another's reading. I may use the Fox to mean falsity, and a person within the French tradition will see it as work, but we know that about each other's "dialects" and can still make sense of everything.

This also goes back to your point about new meanings spring from the functional, core meanings vs. the allegorical symbolism of the card images. I think that if modern readers are flexible in the first way the language can remain stable enough survive.

For instance, Woman-Ring could refer to a woman in a relationship, signing a contract, or getting married. Any interpretation that makes sense using the Ring's functional or core meanings of commitment, relationship, or cycles still works within the tradition: contracts, relationships, marriage, partnership, buying a house (with House), etc. We could understand any extrapolation of these core meanings, even if they were stretched quite a bit or into new combinations. This is how intuition and creativity can still fit into the traditional perspective.

But if someone decided that Woman-Ring meant that "this woman is a snob" (because the Ring looks like a snooty rich woman's ring), that would be an extrapolation based on the symbolic Ring. Or if Man-Fox means "a man with fancy clothes" because a reader always thinks of her grandmother's fox stole when she sees that card, that's a personal association. The Key meaning "being locked up in jail" or Lilies meaning "a funeral" because one thinks of them as funeral flowers, the Coffin meaning "going to an Egyptian museum exhibit" because one has the Mystical Lenormand and the card depicts a sarcophagus (or Ship-Coffin meaning "a trip to Egypt" for the same reason)... This is the personal slang I was referring to above. These are now oracle readings to me, because the Lenormand language isn't being used, the images are. Should we still call this Lenormand reading?

A group of readers couldn't usefully discuss readings like the ones in the last paragraph. They are too personal, there could be no consensus; that aspect of the Lenormand tradition would be lost. Wouldn't that spoil some of the fun? We can only hope that if readers get a good enough foundation in the traditional method they won't stray too far, as Tarolyn suggests.