FOR YOU, PERSONALLY, What Makes Lenormand...Lenormand?

greatdane

**I just wanted to start this thread by saying I think everyone should have decks they way they want them, designers should design what they like.

This thread is not what MUST be, a deck MUST have to be Lenormand, but ....what it makes a Lenormand a Lenormand for all of us individual readers with our own preferences.**

I know we just had a deal breaker thread about what would keep us from getting a deck, but how do we each define a Lenormand deck for OURSELVES?
Where does DEFINITION start and just preferences in style begin?

For me:

36 CARDS - (A deck can have EXTRA cards, like two Men, two Women, two of any of the standard 36 and EXTRA cards with different images, but IT MUST HAVE THE STANDARD 36 at least)

RECOGNIZABLE IMAGES - As soon as I take the deck out of the box, I want to go through and INSTANTLY KNOW what a card is by sight. I should be able to take a new deck, shuffle it, and any card that pops up....I KNOW wHAT IT IS. I shouldn't need a title and substitutions (like a bunch of pencils in a jar as Bouquet) don't really make me see Lenormand.

FOR ME, PERSONALLY, this is the definition of a Lenormand deck. I have other PREFERENCES, size, card stock, how I like to see an IMAGE portrayed, but as far as just seeing a deck as Lenormand, as opposed to oracle or any other system, those are the basics.

When we discuss Lenormand, tarot, oracle, it seems there is SOMETHING that makes it that for us, so we're on the same page (or deck). SO....when you hear or see the word..."LENORMAND" what do you think?
 

Joon

Hi GD!

Great topic. I like questions that ask me to have a clarifying think about the cards.

I agree that the standard 36 emblems on the cards is the starting point, and the answer at its most basic. They are the basis of the system.

For me, the playing card associations are part of the answer, too. I can use a deck without them, though I generally choose not to because I like the visual of having the suits and the "people" reminders in front of me. For me, those are an integral piece, but I would not argue that a reader who doesn't use them isn't reading Lenormand.

I don't see extended decks as Lenormand. Subbing in cards, such as the partner card choice, owls/birds, whip(s)/broom - sure, no problem for me if one is still able to use Lenormand meanings for the card. Pencils/bouquet - LOL! - no. Now card 9 would be about "bunches" instead of good feelings and reciprocity. LOL, GD.

Adding cards like the 4 extras for the Mystical, or the full 52 Maybe Lenormand, or the Gypsy Witch.... now the system is changed. Nothing wrong with doing that, if it is the reader's choice. For me it means another it's time for a good think about how that changes things. For example, if your deck now includes both the Fox and the Cat cards, why? what's the difference? which Fox interps are given over to the Cat? what does the Cat bring to the deck?.... so I don't define the extended decks as Lenormand.

Aside from the cards themselves, Lenormand means, to me, a system for reading the cards: proximity/distance, the "grammatical" approach to a line, and meanings/interpretations of the cards from the PL sheet and extended from those, going to the historical roots of what the emblems signified.
 

Le Fanu

I'm ashamed to admit It - a bit, but not too much - but when someone mentions Lenormand, I think 'historic deck'. I think of something older, 19th Century. A feint aura of tweeness and gentility. I have some of the modern ones but authentic Lenormand for me is old. Period.
 

celticnoodle

When I think about Lenormand, I also think "36 cards". Basic pictures that is exactly what it is suppose to be. Bouquet is, (as GD pointed out) not suppose to be a jar of pencils. No, it MUST be a collection of flowers for me, too.

I do have decks that have the extra cards--and this is fine. Sometimes I even use them--but rarely tbh. But the cat card, as was mentioned by Joon--I believe I have one deck of Lenormand that offers a choice for card #18--(typically "dog") and the other choice is the cat! I don't really mind that, especially as it still comes with a dog card--just leaving it up to the reader and if they happen to prefer cats, well, now they can have that card!

So, I also like to see the card number on the card--nos. 1 thru 36---just so I know exactly what the card is suppose to be! I also do like the title on the card, (only to further help with cards that could actually be seen as something else), but not 100% necessary. It just depends on the deck. I also like it to have the playing card number and suit on there in some way. It further helps me with reading the Lenormand--as I pay attention to the playing card suit now too---(something new I'm learning from Andy B's book on Lenormand reading.
 

Barleywine

For me, it's the 36 traditional cards with no ambiguity in the images and no extraneous "clutter." I also like playing card inserts, although I've barely scratched the surface with them. Verses aren't mandatory for me, and neither are extra cards. I don't mind artistically accomplished modern remakes of the images as long as they stay close to the spirit of the original meanings.
 

peacewing

I definitely enjoy the traditional Lenormands, but what really makes a deck for me is 36 cards, and simple, recognizable images that are free from clutter. I don't like having to guess what everything is. I also like having playing card insets or a small label or something.

I don't really have any big preferences on size or card stock, but sometimes I have some preferences on which direction objects/images are facing. I also really need to like the backs of the cards... I frequently leave my favorite decks out on my desk, so I need to enjoy looking at the backs. =)

I think that novelty decks are very artistic, but they are hard for me to connect with and read in many circumstances.
 

cybercat

Smaller cards 36 in number with clean images. Borders are fine, dark background is fine also as long as picture pops off card. Extra cards are OK for male and female even choices on some others. I don't have to use them if I don't want too.

I prefer playing card in small icons like 9đź’™ instead of playing card insert. No poems no off colors that make it hard too see images. No subs on traditional images that are a stretch. Like black rose for coffin.
But smaller cards so I can do a GT easy and see the image no issue.
 

Barleywine

Smaller cards 36 in number with clean images.

I forget to mention size. Smaller cards are preferable, but anything too small can't withstand my clumsy shuffling (rather than a couple of "jumpers, I get a veritable "geyser" :)) Pixie's Astounding Lenormand is pushing it for me. Since I use Laura Tuan's large-size Lenormand Oracle for house placeholders in the GT, smaller cards to place on top lets me easily see what's underneath (I still haven't memorized all the house numbers and placements, so yes, it's a crutch similar to a positional spread cloth).
 

DownUnderNZer

:heart: "The Lenormand" :heart:

The cards have been discussed in a number of threads already I reckon.

For me it would have to be GTs when it is read the exact same way by all readers (or very similar) regardless of time, day, or hour. So, this would have to be the Lenormand Traditionalists really more so than Intuitive, Fast food readers, or GT wannabes.

Nothing quite like it really and that to me "makes the Lenormand" - Lenormand.



DND :)
 

greatdane

DownUnderNZer

I meant what makes a deck Lenormand for readers.

When you see a deck, what makes it Lenormand for you? I would really enjoy reading when you hear Lenormand regarding a certain deck, what you think it SHOULD have to be a Lenormand deck vs tarot or any other oracle.

We all have our own tastes re artwork, size of cards etc, but there have been decks I thought were beautiful, but I didn't easily see the standard 36 images.