How the order of cards affects their interpretation

gregory

OK - fair enough; I got hung up on the order of appearance - and as I don't always see courts as people ANYWAY....
 

Edward Tarot Hands

In responce to the original post
I like to play around with card spreads like 3 or 5 cards and move the order or read from reverse or read in a circular fashion. I think it's fun especially if you consider the idea that in the macrocosm things don't exist in a linear fashion and you use the tarot as the microcosm
7wouldn't do it in a fixed psition spread like the celtic tho
 

rwcarter

As the question was originally asked about my interpretations in a Your Readings thread, I didn't want to take that thread off-topic by answering the question there.

For those interested in the question of how order affects interpretation, take a look at the examples linked at Elemental Dignities Study Group Discussion & Index Thread. When reading EDs, the order definitely makes a difference in how the cards are interpreted. Changing which card is the central card completely changes what the interpretation is about.

In the specific case that prompted this thread, the OP listed the cards in one order but interpreted them in a different order in this thread. If you look at a series of cards (especially if they don't have positional meanings) as a progression in a story, then the order of the parts of the story are important.

For example, let's say we have three cards that are interpreted as success, heartbreak and ordeal. Those cards could be arranged as follows:
success, heartbreak, ordeal
success, ordeal, heartbreak
heartbreak, ordeal, success
heartbreak, success, ordeal
ordeal, success, heartbreak
ordeal, heartbreak, success

The terms equate to happiness, sadness and struggle and the order in which those things is placed gives a totally different reading. Are you happy and then some struggle occurs that leads to sadness? Or was there a struggle that led to sadness, but you ended up happy? Some components, different order, different interpretations.

Rodney
 

Luna's Crone

OK - fair enough; I got hung up on the order of appearance - and as I don't always see courts as people ANYWAY....

I don't either, but, so far, for some reason, when i do its usually in a neg way. is it me or coincidence. Or is it because i have negative feelings towards those i perceive to be in charge. hmmmm

is there a spread for this question? LOL
 

Barleywine

As the question was originally asked about my interpretations in a Your Readings thread, I didn't want to take that thread off-topic by answering the question there.

For those interested in the question of how order affects interpretation, take a look at the examples linked at Elemental Dignities Study Group Discussion & Index Thread. When reading EDs, the order definitely makes a difference in how the cards are interpreted. Changing which card is the central card completely changes what the interpretation is about.

In the specific case that prompted this thread, the OP listed the cards in one order but interpreted them in a different order in this thread. If you look at a series of cards (especially if they don't have positional meanings) as a progression in a story, then the order of the parts of the story are important.

For example, let's say we have three cards that are interpreted as success, heartbreak and ordeal. Those cards could be arranged as follows:
success, heartbreak, ordeal
success, ordeal, heartbreak
heartbreak, ordeal, success
heartbreak, success, ordeal
ordeal, success, heartbreak
ordeal, heartbreak, success

The terms equate to happiness, sadness and struggle and the order in which those things is placed gives a totally different reading. Are you happy and then some struggle occurs that leads to sadness? Or was there a struggle that led to sadness, but you ended up happy? Some components, different order, different interpretations.

Rodney

This had me going back and poking around in my ED material from Liber T, Israel Regardie and some other stuff I got who-knows-where. My understanding is that the interpretive meanings of the individual cards don't really count for much in EDs, where the goal is to see if the "principal" or focus card is strengthened or weakened by the nature of its surrounding modifiers; only the elemental attributions are important. Beyond that, the closest you might get to weighting the individual cards is to consider whether they're Major, Minor or Court cards. In that sense, synthesizing the meanings of the cards in a line wouldn't be immediately necessary since narrative subtleties aren't being sought at this point, but the elemental sequence could make a difference in the final weighing of the focus card.

I agree with your post in the ED study group thread saying that all the cards should be used, not just the two on the outside. So if I had Earth-Fire-Air, instead of the outside cards cancelling one another out and having no effect on the middle Fire card, I might see the "friendly" Fire and Air cards "trumping" the single Earth card (which is on decent terms with Fire anyway), giving the center card some strength. This would be amplified if the Air card was of a higher rank than the Earth card. The rote rules from the GD material seem a little clumsy and lacking in nuance.
 

rwcarter

I agree with your post in the ED study group thread saying that all the cards should be used, not just the two on the outside. So if I had Earth-Fire-Air, instead of the outside cards cancelling one another out and having no effect on the middle Fire card, I might see the "friendly" Fire and Air cards "trumping" the single Earth card (which is on decent terms with Fire anyway), giving the center card some strength. This would be amplified if the Air card was of a higher rank than the Earth card. The rote rules from the GD material seem a little clumsy and lacking in nuance.
But using your Earth-Fire-Air (EFA) example and tying the discussion back into this thread, EFA would be read differently than FAE or AEF, keeping the same order of the three cards and just changing their positions. The central card (since EDs are read from the center out) changes, therefore changing the interpretation.

Rodney
 

Barleywine

But using your Earth-Fire-Air (EFA) example and tying the discussion back into this thread, EFA would be read differently than FAE or AEF, keeping the same order of the three cards and just changing their positions. The central card (since EDs are read from the center out) changes, therefore changing the interpretation.

Rodney

Yes, certainly whenever you change the elemental nature (suit or sign/planet correspondence) of the focus card in addition to it's number and/or rank, you change the complexion of the reading. I think you would have to start over with each set, bearing in mind that the idea is to see what each new focus card's interpretation brings to the narrative whenever it's "power" is altered by dignity. I see elemental dignity as a kind of "seasoning" that either perks up or tones down the "heat" of the focus card without changing its core meaning. For example, no matter how much or how little chili powder you throw into the pot, you've still got a pot of chili, even if you now need five fire departments instead of three to put out the fire. (For those unfamiliar with the expression, "five-alarm" chili will blow the top of your head off! :)) On the other hand, if you change the order in which you add ingredients, the finished product may not taste quite the same (believe me, I've done it); that might be considered an example of changing the order of the cards in the series, regardless of elemental dignity. The Tower at the end of the series rather than at the beginning could show at what point during cooking you burn the chili! Clear as mud, right?

But, as I think you were getting at in the other thread, you also need to see how that altered focus card "stacks up" against the other two cards in the series when it's introduced as an "actor in the play." I think of it as a kind of "roadway" analogy; if you have two "bumps" (elementally friendly cards) followed by a "pothole" (card elementally unfriendly to one or both of the others), you're ride is going to be different than if you have two "potholes" followed by a "bump," two "bumps" with a "pothole" in the middle, or two "potholes" with a "bump" between them. Trying to insinuate the idea of "friendly but neutral" into the mix makes a rather hopeless dilemma, so I'm going with the "complementary opposites" idea. Overlaying this model onto the actual card meanings puts the whole picture into "3D."

I'm in the middle of laying out all the possible permutations of a Wands focus card in combination with all the other suits, using both the original GD rules and my extension of those rules, and will take photos of the layouts along with adding commentary. (By the way, the English Magic Tarot with its wide elementally-specific borders is perfect for this exercise.) That should probably be posted in the ED Study Group thread. Do I have to sign up to participate in that?
 

rwcarter

That should probably be posted in the ED Study Group thread. Do I have to sign up to participate in that?
Yes, please continue this conversation in the ED Study Group thread. And, no, just start posting. :)

Rodney
 

tapasr_57772aeb7

This had me going back and poking around in my ED material from Liber T, Israel Regardie and some other stuff I got who-knows-where. My understanding is that the interpretive meanings of the individual cards don't really count for much in EDs, where the goal is to see if the "principal" or focus card is strengthened or weakened by the nature of its surrounding modifiers; only the elemental attributions are important. Beyond that, the closest you might get to weighting the individual cards is to consider whether they're Major, Minor or Court cards. In that sense, synthesizing the meanings of the cards in a line wouldn't be immediately necessary since narrative subtleties aren't being sought at this point, but the elemental sequence could make a difference in the final weighing of the focus card.

I agree with your post in the ED study group thread saying that all the cards should be used, not just the two on the outside. So if I had Earth-Fire-Air, instead of the outside cards cancelling one another out and having no effect on the middle Fire card, I might see the "friendly" Fire and Air cards "trumping" the single Earth card (which is on decent terms with Fire anyway), giving the center card some strength. This would be amplified if the Air card was of a higher rank than the Earth card. The rote rules from the GD material seem a little clumsy and lacking in nuance.
I have issues with dropping the conflicting flanking cards too. Thanks for that.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk
 

nisaba

Hiya! rwcarter mentioned in another thread that the order in which the cards are drawn affects their interpretation, and I wanted to learn more about that so I'm starting a new thread here. :)

Well, every spread has different positional meanings, and the order in which you pull a card influences where it ends up in the spread.

Say, for instance, you use pone of my spreads, and you pull the Star first. It might mean that the Star is the crucial thing you need to pay attention to and have been avoiding.

In that same spread, if you pull the Star second, it will indicate that this is the best possible outcome you can get if you do everything right.

In the same spread, if you pull it third, it will represent a part of yourself that you don't trust and don't act on.

Fourth, what is coming to an end for you, fifth what is about to begin for you, etc.

See how its meaning changes by position? And the positions it ends up in will be determined by the order you pull it in.