New book! (Rana George's The Essential Lenormand)

I've had this book about a week now and I love it, such a gem of Lenormand info, Rana's approach to learning is quite laid back, not regimented like some others, the traditional way is there, which I'm pleased about, because that is how I want to learn, but as Shadowdancer says there does seem to be fluidity in how she interprets the cards which to me is great, she pretty much covers all possible scenarios which is really helping me... I like that she has the advice and action there for each card too.
She mentions starting with a 2 card daily draw, which I have done for a few days now and I'm beginning to piece together the meanings of the 2 cards together as a combo, at first as I looked at my dailies, I couldn't make sense of them, but now, although it's very early days, and I'm checking my cards against the book, I am *getting* it and quite accurately too lol... So with the help of this brilliant book and my study deck (instant Lenormand) I'm practising, practising and practising some more!
I really cannot praise Rana's book enough, it is my Lennie bible!

Does she also discuss cartomancy meanings on Lenormand (the playing card insets) ?

No, but Caitlín Matthews will in her next book. The closest associations are to old German cartomancy meanings that varied somewhat from region-to-region. For instance, Clubs (Acorns) were the worst suit and Spades (Green Leaves), the best.

Helen Riding has several blog posts about them: http://lenormanddictionary.blogspot.com/p/lenormand-suits.html plus specific meanings associated with the old German cards: http://lenormanddictionary.blogspot.com/p/wdytya-clubs.html

I give some examples of old German cartomancy decks here: http://marygreer.wordpress.com/2013/10/04/lenormand-playing-card-inserts-possible-sources/

Ahhhhhh. I am reading this book right now. I love it!

It is important to remember that this book is Rana George's style of reading. It seems to work well for her, and I wish her all the best.

However, after reading through this book, I will probably pass it on to someone else. Much of the book is multiple meanings for cards. From my perspective, way too many meanings, and this will tend to confuse beginners and even intermediates. There are also lots of layouts, but you really only need three. The GT section is the typical yet confusing approach to the GT: Mirroring, knighting, corners, past/present/future designations, houses, etc. I tend to avoid all these techniques, and for me, this allows the cards to speak the message clearly and elegantly.

Here is a little secret for you..........the Lenormand is simple. Yes, I really did say that the Lenormand is simple. Perhaps this is why the divine is so happy to use it as a vehicle for communication.

In the final analysis, each reader must find his or her own way. My way is a way of simplicity.

Izzydunne, I respect your views and agree - Lenormand is magical due to the fact it has a sense of simplicity. Certainly that is the case when compared to tarot.

But I am going to bat a little for Rana if that's okay Rana is not the only one who gives multiple meanings for cards. I think every source and book I have read has done the same. As a beginner I do still on occasion have a head scratch as to which angle I should be applying, due to the fact some of the meanings are so very different, but I know I will get there with practice. And it does get a little easier as time goes by. However, she does in appendix C just give a quick interpretation guide, with only 3 or 4 or keywords per card. That could be a good start point for someone totally new. It wouldn't be so confusing or intimidating.

I did not see any mirroring mentioned, and for that I was grateful. That and knighting to me, seem to be a little in the realm of overkill. I even checked the glossary and couldn't find mention of mirroring. Yes, she does include the idea of knighting, but I read it and ignored it. I don't think it is something you need to use, and if you don't?? I don't think you necessarily lose anything from the reading. Just my take - I am guessing some will jump in with how the knighting is a key part of the GT, but I just felt I would be using it, only to cover all possible chess moves. It just didn't feel right or relevant to me. And with Rana's style and approach, I don't think she is dictating its use. I remember reading that she had done away with using a GT for a long time, and had only recently began to use it again - mainly because she was asked to. I think with this book if she hadn't included the GT and been comprehensive in doing so, there would have been grumbles that it was not definitive enough.

So, if you were able to describe how to read a GT, how would you do that, without it coming across as cumbersome or complex? I am assuming you have a system that works for you which may not include the steps that seem to be commonly used?

For myself, I typed out an 11 step precis. I will be dowsing which steps I use for a particular reading. This is taken from Rana's book because out of all the descriptions I have seen for a GT, hers made the most sense and seemed the easiest to follow. I have a feeling over time, I may only use a handful of the steps. And will be using only 50 words where only 50 are needed As you say - simplicity.


So yes, I do agree with you Izzydunne, but also wanted to defend the book a little, as it is IMO the best one we have in the English language.

Moderator Note

Moderator Note

A few off-topic posts concerning an alternate way of reading the GT has been split off into its own thread. It may be found by clicking on the link below:
how I read the GT

Let's please get back to topic of this thread - Rana George's book.

Thank you,
Glass Owl

Izzydunne said:

It is important to remember that this book is Rana George's style of reading. It seems to work well for her, and I wish her all the best.

However, after reading through this book, I will probably pass it on to someone else. Much of the book is multiple meanings for cards. From my perspective, way too many meanings, and this will tend to confuse beginners and even intermediates. There are also lots of layouts, but you really only need three. The GT section is the typical yet confusing approach to the GT: Mirroring, knighting, corners, past/present/future designations, houses, etc. I tend to avoid all these techniques, and for me, this allows the cards to speak the message clearly and elegantly.

Here is a little secret for you..........the Lenormand is simple. Yes, I really did say that the Lenormand is simple. Perhaps this is why the divine is so happy to use it as a vehicle for communication.

In the final analysis, each reader must find his or her own way. My way is a way of simplicity.

Click to expand...

I think I felt similarly. I was not in love with the book. Even though it was my first book on the topic. I found also too many cards meaning the same thing in it and I could see that her style of reading is not mine. It was an interesting book for me, I loved to hear about her life story and how the cards spoke to her.

But I sense that my way of reading is going to be different in a number of ways. I did get some useful ideas, but also I knew a lot of her meanings and ways of reading were never going to be mine. I didn't get a "Key" feeling from the book. That AHA feeling, or missing piece to the puzzle where it all fit into place smoothly. A lot of it just felt wrong to me, to who I am and how I would read.

I don't get to pass my book on so much as I have the Kindle edition of it. But I did learn some things from it too. But not so much in love with the book myself.

Babs

Hi Babs:

Yes we agree. The part of the book I actually enjoyed was Rana's personal story, and the time line of Mademoiselle Lenormand's life. As an aside....... I still use the term Mademoiselle to describe an unmarried woman, even though the silly French have dropped this word from usage.

There's a difference between learning the mechanics of something and having integrated it so well that the mechanics appear effortless. For instance, when the Man and Woman both knight to the same card that lies between them, it's a pretty powerful connection, but even if you only read that one card (ignoring all others that are knighted), you need to know the process well enough to see it at a glance. Certainly, you can't do everything possible if you are trying to read a Grand Tableau in an hour or less, but if you are stuck, it helps to be able to reach into your bag of tricks for a method that could unlock the whole thing.

I've seen Rana jump to a realization right away, and then back-track so she can show me the mechanics of how she most likely got to something instantaneously. She's taken apart those structures for us - so they only seem labored when we don't know what we are doing. Through a lifetime of reading the cards, she's developed an "intelligent eye" (a learnéd intuition), which is what the rest of us are trying to do.