Lenormand: What Difficulties Do YOU experience?

"Lenormand: What Difficulties Do YOU Most Experience As A Learner".

  • Understanding one system or any for that matter.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Certain cards when in a combo or spread. E.g. Sun/Cross.

    Votes: 11 40.7%
  • How to answer a question whether specific or general.

    Votes: 10 37.0%
  • I find it tricky reading them in pairs, threes, or more than 5.

    Votes: 10 37.0%
  • I cannot get my head around certain cards. E.g. Coffin.

    Votes: 4 14.8%
  • I find it hard to read when a card like Tree/Heart/Fish turns up for a question like Job.

    Votes: 10 37.0%
  • I do not know when I am the "Man"/"Woman"...or not.

    Votes: 4 14.8%
  • I do not understand the basics.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • I find it confusing as one source says this and another that.

    Votes: 6 22.2%
  • Other: State Reasons In Comments.

    Votes: 3 11.1%

  • Total voters
    27
  • Poll closed .

celticnoodle

Years ago one of my German teacher's taught us that when a card falls on it's own house it is in the "right place to be" and for some reason it has "double impact" I suppose.

Some combos can throw you especially when you get cards that you don't think relate to the question.

Be interesting to see how others see it I reckon.


DND :)

I generally do try to leave it at the same your teacher taught you. If a card falls in its own house, it just gives extra 'power' to it. So, for instance the cross in the house of cross would be really heavy burdens or it could be a huge spiritual feeling-depending also upon the question at hand and/or the cards around them.

However, I still often will find myself looking at a card in its own house and be at a blank as to what it means for the given focus of the reading.
 

Barleywine

My Lenormand practice is almost entirely with the "wide-lens" Grand Tableau, so there is a certain elasticity in how I read specific combinations. I like to look at the eight cards surrounding a topic card as a kind of "vortex" that feeds into the central focus. There are a bunch of these little "gravity wells" around the layout, and as a group I treat them like the interpenetrating ripples that you see when you throw several rocks in a pond at the same time. It's really just a fanciful take on the Near/Far method that brings in the "connecting tissue" between general topics (intersections, mirroring, knighting, etc.) My main problem with combinations is in a line spread, trying to decide which card dominates beyond the usual "linguistic" noun-modifier concept.
 

Barleywine

I generally do try to leave it at the same your teacher taught you. If a card falls in its own house, it just gives extra 'power' to it. So, for instance the cross in the house of cross would be really heavy burdens or it could be a huge spiritual feeling-depending also upon the question at hand and/or the cards around them.

However, I still often will find myself looking at a card in its own house and be at a blank as to what it means for the given focus of the reading.

I treat houses as strictly a secondary consideration, and usually look at the houses only for cards that are brought into high focus for other reasons; it adds just a little more "color" to the interpretation.
 

Barleywine

I think my main difficulty is that combinations can mean anything whatsoever and you only really know what after the event! When I look at different possibilities of combos, really, the cards can mean anything and everything... but - you know - I keep trying ...

George Carlin once made a very funny - and relevant - observation about the way a word can mean two radically different things in different contexts, using a baseball analogy: the balls-and-strikes count on a batter. A sports announcer saying matter-of-factly "Roberto Clemente has two balls on him" has a dramatically different meaning than the same announcer saying to his co-host "I think he hurt his balls on that play, Curt!" I try not to go "all intuitive" with my Lenormand interpretation (I have too much respect for the tradition), but I can see his point.
 

Le Fanu

To me that's obviously not the case, because in my experience, two people using the same meanings/methods can arrive at exactly opposing conclusions. I can see that for myself when I do a reading and I see that it is possible to apply two different valid traditional meanings for a card or a combo and it leads to two different and often opposing conclusions for the spread.
Imagine a question like - how will my boss react when he finds out X tomorrow? you could give any two combinations - really, the cards are immaterial - let's say fox and birds or fish and heart or scythe and bouquet - and you really could get an outcome that would allay your fears (phew! Positive outcome) or see something negative. Honestly, I can see positive and negative answers in every combination.

That's probably why I tend to do Grand Tableaus and just read the cards around the issue - but even then you're like - er - should I be looking at that fox (work) or should I be looking at that moon (work)?

My conclusion is invariably - well when this has all blown over in a few weeks' time, I'll know what the answer was... Not the greatest of help...
 

Padma

I also find the Lennies both literal and figurative. So it can be quite confusing. For instance, wondering how the court case would go in regard to DT and the court, I got Child and Sun. That could mean both great news for the "new" (Child) people entering the States, or good news for the "Child" leading the States. It turns out it was good news for the "new" people entering the States. It's hard to tell sometimes.

Also, when asking a question in a yes/no method, we are advised by expert readers to frame the question into the positive side; but if the answer cards are negative, do we read it as a no, or do we then interpret those negative cards? No answers for that.

Also, I would realllly appreciate it if the so-called experts in the Lennie world would stop saying "Coffin and Scythe don't necessarily mean a death, there has to be supporting cards for that". Well, what ARE the freaking supporting cards? I want to know! Because one can sugar-coat it all they like, but death is a natural happening, and it happens all the time. So stop saying it doesn't mean what it means.

Further: a) I find it really disturbing when certain people claim to know everything there is to know about Lennies (I call BS, sorry)

and b) when a card falls into its own house, I have found, by retrospect experience, that it is a corruption of that card/house, not a positive thing! So, for instance, Stars in the house of Star would be a negative explosion of things, i.e., infamy, cancers growing and multiplying, a lot of negative press, not happy or hopeful fame. Bouquet in the house of Bouquet would mean unhealthy narcissism, and not lovely gifts, dates and compliments, etc.
 

DownUnderNZer

If a sitter asks about her/his marriage/relationship and the Ring/Heart turn up on those two houses it means that they are in good steed with their relationship and that the love and commitment is there. A strong bond.

So, the "right place to be".

I think you just have to work out how it applies to the different houses and only the ones you would be using in your GT reading if looking at specific areas and if a card turns up in it's own house.

"Rider on Rider": Currently, there is news/information you have received and/or are still waiting on that is absolutely crucial and of importance...it outweighs anything else going on right now. (Emphasis on the placement of the card).

I sometimes do not use the houses - it all depends on the mood and what I choose to cover.


DND :)





I generally do try to leave it at the same your teacher taught you. If a card falls in its own house, it just gives extra 'power' to it. So, for instance the cross in the house of cross would be really heavy burdens or it could be a huge spiritual feeling-depending also upon the question at hand and/or the cards around them.

However, I still often will find myself looking at a card in its own house and be at a blank as to what it means for the given focus of the reading.
 

DownUnderNZer

With "Fox" I could see that as "negative" regardless of which system, but it would depend where it is in your spread as it could have something like Bouquet following it which could mean a "relief" to the situation. The issues/hassles/situation sorted out.

As for OWLS that would be "gossip" and "half truths" if using the German system, but not really for the French. So, it may depend how you see OWLS as being. Could be Belgium as well - I think the only really difference with the Belgium is the "Snake" not being seen as the "other woman" and the "Bear" when it comes to "family".

With "Moon" as "work/job" that belongs to a different system all together if I am remembering it correctly and not really German or French. Maybe Belgium or other.

I would be confused too if I did not know the difference between the French and German systems. As for the others - still learning.


DND :)


Imagine a question like - how will my boss react when he finds out X tomorrow? you could give any two combinations - really, the cards are immaterial - let's say fox and birds or fish and heart or scythe and bouquet - and you really could get an outcome that would allay your fears (phew! Positive outcome) or see something negative. Honestly, I can see positive and negative answers in every combination.

That's probably why I tend to do Grand Tableaus and just read the cards around the issue - but even then you're like - er - should I be looking at that fox (work) or should I be looking at that moon (work)?

My conclusion is invariably - well when this has all blown over in a few weeks' time, I'll know what the answer was... Not the greatest of help...
 

DownUnderNZer

And some use like 4 or 5 cards as "Work/Job" or "Career". I do not know why that is so necessary in one GT unless the only question is focused on "Work" perhaps. And even then....

DND :)
 

Le Fanu

With "Moon" as "work/job" that belongs to a different system all together if I am remembering it correctly and not really German or French. Maybe Belgium or other.
It's the one Caitlin Matthews refers to in her books. It completely threw me the first time I read it. You could say it is more the "status" side of work - where you are in what you do, whereas the Fox is more "graft", the "doing" side of work!