Ana Cortez (Playing Card Oracles) videos on Youtube

lark

I pay attention to a reversed card especially if it is a court to see what or who it is facing if it comes up RX.
But I don't really read it any differently.
At least not at this point.
I shuffle with all the cards up right so if something comes up RX that is unusual and I pay attention.
Two people in a reading facing toward or away from each other can speak volumes.
If one flips upside down to face away from another card it would normally face I honor it's heroic effort to do that :D
 

MareSaturni

nevermind

Le Fanu said:
This will be the 2nd or 3rd time I have read the book. I remember being struck by how vague/bare some of her divinatory meanings are but I think there is usually one or two concepts among her meanings which make sense in the context of the card. It really is a book which stands up to rereading. But I'll be honest, the spreads never seem to be quite so full of information as my tarot spreads are. I suppose it's just practice. I am quite tempted to take on holiday with me...

Le Fanu... I suggest you give the book and deck another chance. But you may also consider that this method does not speak to you. We all have deck and oracles that do not speak to us. Like me and the Froud Faeries... I love the art, love the book, but when I do a reading I get so little information I feel like I'm constantly "making up" meanings.

When I first started using the playing card oracles, I couldn't take much information from the cards. But I really loved the deck and method, so I kept using... nowadays, I can asure you my readings are much more "complex".

But I could never get to that level with the Froud's Faeries... or the Madame Endora's cards... even being decks I'd really like to read well with. And the Thoth? I don't even know how to read a Thoth card! :laugh:
 

Moonbow

Marina said:
NO!

Ana DOES NOT use reversed meanings - she says that in her book, can't remember the page now, but she's explicit about it. The cards don't change meaning when they are reversed BUT, specially in the case of court cards, the direction the card is looking at may add an extra nuance to the meaning.

Of course, you are free to use reversals if you want, but I don't see why make it so mindboggling. I don't even understand the point of reversals in tarot to being with.

Ana's method concentrates a lot on the elemental combinations of the cards... the "weather" of the reading, as she calls in the book. How the cards look together, the picture they create, and how the suits relate to each other. This is what determines a more positive or negative view of the cards, not the fact they are reversed.......

No need to shout Marina!

I disagree that she doesn't write about reversed meanings. Pages 10 and 11 give Positive and Negative expressions of the cards. Reversed meanings do not mean reversed cards. She clearly states that: Quote "Each is a potential vehicle for every pip experience". (emphasis is hers not mine) Which says that she reads 'all' meanings/experiences for the cards and not just upright ones. This is exactly how I read cards.

One of the most refreshing views that she expresses is that she is clear that there aren't rules.
 

MareSaturni

nevermind
 

Moonbow

Marina, if you read my posts you will see that we are actually agreeing. I do not physically reverse cards to acknowledge 'all' possible meanings for the cards, both positive and negative, and this is same approach that the author seems to have (as in pages 10-11 of the book). An upright card can also reflect negative (or reverse) meanings and this is a method that some card readers don't seem to understand/acknowledge. All cards can reflect all meanings whether they are 'physically' upright or not, my own preference is to see the cards upright but that does not mean that I only read positive meanings. You seem to have quoted my own explanation back to me. If you see Ana's method as the first case then that is exactly what I explained that I also do. I really don't know where this is going.
 

MareSaturni

nevermind
 

Moonbow

Marina, look back at the posts here, you disagreed with me with a 'NO! Ana DOES NOT use reverse meanings'.

But that aside, and because its completely ruining a nice thread (and is off topic) and there is no nomenclature at AT [that's why its called 'Aeclectic'], I accept that you did not understand what I was talking about.

Getting back to discussing the deck...

Reading suits with elements is another area where people sometimes disagree and one which all Marseilles readers will be familiar with. I initially took the Golden Dawn element correspondences and incorporated them into the pips, then I looked at the implement for meanings. Now, I am coming around to Ana's correspondences as making sense. It appeals to me that the same method for playing cards and historical decks can be used.
 

MareSaturni

Moonbow* said:
Marina, look back at the posts here, you disagreed with me with a 'NO! Ana DOES NOT use reverse meanings'.

But that aside, and because its completely ruining a nice thread (and is off topic) and there is no nomenclature at AT [that's why its called 'Aeclectic'], I accept that you did not understand what I was talking about.

Okay, I get it now. You are talking about cards having the possibility of adopting reversed meanings, and not about the physical reversibility of the cards.

But I still don't agree with this idea. Not in the way you seem to be putting it.

I never saw any mention to reversed meanings in her book. I never read, for instance, that the 5 of Hearts (a card that stands usually for illusions, confusion and a restless heart) could mean "enlightening" or "end of illusions" depending on the context. It may get a better connotation depending on the atmosphere of the spread, but not a completely reversed meaning.

I don't think it's off topic, it's a discussion about what two people read in the same book. Now, if we cannot disagree with each other, then I don't know why the hell we bother discussing anything. I don't see the sense of only talking amenities as to not "kill" the thread...
 

Bernice

I have this deck & book set. Initially I devoured both :)
But then I found that the elemental meanings and a few other things just didn't sit well with me - so I've used the cards in my own fashion. I prefer to use cards upright, but if one shouild (accidently) appear upsidedown, I do alter the 'book' (or my standard) meaning. I'm having no problem(s) with this.


I love the geo-spread though :).


Bee :)
 

Moonbow

Meta is off topic, but hopefully we have kept this meta on topic enough to make it relevant because if we are reading Ana's book in a different way (and I don't see that we are) it is perhaps through the written word and not the interpretation of the deck. Just because someone is very familiar with a deck doesn't mean that there isn't more to learn or consider from someone else, and by that I am also referring to my own interest in the Marseilles pips and their connection to the playing card decks.

Any book that expresses positive and negative meanings for the cards is showing upright and reversed meanings. The orientation of the cards is moot.