Reversals

Ruby Jewel

The "wow factor" is a good way to put it. I forgot that one way I used to characterize reversals was "turning over rocks to see what crawls out from underneath." It seems more like "getting your hands dirty" than simply taking a cerebral approach to examining the possibilities.

I get the WOW factor in the upright position; and also, my point is that by keeping the card upright, you eliminate the cerebral approach with its myriad possibilities that come with the changing positions, and approach the card intuitively, which is always a direct hit. I used to turn over the rocks in my garden just to rescue the beautiful little "night crawlers" and deposit them in my compost where they might live happily ever after. Isn't everything in life a "WOW factor"?

Also, as you know I am quite fascinated with the Kabbalah...quite familiar with Papus, presently studying Crowley, and decided to forego reversals after having used them for several years. My rejection of reversals is based solely upon the realization that I didn't need all the extra meanings that come with the haphazard possiblity of the card appearing upsidedown...due to the fact that it wasn't upright to begin with.
 

Gaston D.

I was resistant to reversals for a long time for several of the reasons already mentioned here (not to mention the fact that having to learn what I perceived to be 79 additional meanings for the entire deck felt pretty daunting when I was first starting out.)

But then I came across Joan Bunning's simple but incredibly useful approach to reading reversed cards (on learntarot.com and in the published version of her course) and haven't looked back since:

"A reversed card shows that a card's energy is present, but at a lower level. For some reason, the energy cannot express freely, normally or completely."

(via http://www.learntarot.com/howcard.htm#howreversed)

The beauty of this, I think, is that you don't have to consider reversed meanings as separate from the upright meaning of the card because it's exactly the same - the only difference being is that the meaning or energy is somehow blocked, stunted, or otherwise prevented from manifesting itself fully. It's an approach that works with both "positive" and "negative" cards, and brings an extra level of insight and subtlety to my readings.
 

Ruby Jewel

I was resistant to reversals for a long time for several of the reasons already mentioned here (not to mention the fact that having to learn what I perceived to be 79 additional meanings for the entire deck felt pretty daunting when I was first starting out.)

But then I came across Joan Bunning's simple but incredibly useful approach to reading reversed cards (on learntarot.com and in the published version of her course) and haven't looked back since:

"A reversed card shows that a card's energy is present, but at a lower level. For some reason, the energy cannot express freely, normally or completely."

(via http://www.learntarot.com/howcard.htm#howreversed)

The beauty of this, I think, is that you don't have to consider reversed meanings as separate from the upright meaning of the card because it's exactly the same - the only difference being is that the meaning or energy is somehow blocked, stunted, or otherwise prevented from manifesting itself fully. It's an approach that works with both "positive" and "negative" cards, and brings an extra level of insight and subtlety to my readings.

I can see that.....but then I just read the cards. The querent gets the job of deciding how much energy to invest in each card, the reason being that I don't know what is going on in their lives and they do. In fact, that is the reason I don't give advice. What I really love about reading the cards is that when you lay them out in front of someone, they can see the story themselves. In fact, my last reading I threw up my hands because I didn't think I was making any sense with what I was saying, and the querent started jumping up and down in her seat saying...."no, no, everything you are saying is right....that is exactly what is going on." I read blind....no question, just the energy. The client puts it together themselves because they know their own lives. I just read the card in their upright position and the rest is in the hands of the querent....simple as that. The least control I have, the better I like it. I don't want power over someone else's life.
 

Barleywine

I was resistant to reversals for a long time for several of the reasons already mentioned here (not to mention the fact that having to learn what I perceived to be 79 additional meanings for the entire deck felt pretty daunting when I was first starting out.)

But then I came across Joan Bunning's simple but incredibly useful approach to reading reversed cards (on learntarot.com and in the published version of her course) and haven't looked back since:

"A reversed card shows that a card's energy is present, but at a lower level. For some reason, the energy cannot express freely, normally or completely."

(via http://www.learntarot.com/howcard.htm#howreversed)

The beauty of this, I think, is that you don't have to consider reversed meanings as separate from the upright meaning of the card because it's exactly the same - the only difference being is that the meaning or energy is somehow blocked, stunted, or otherwise prevented from manifesting itself fully. It's an approach that works with both "positive" and "negative" cards, and brings an extra level of insight and subtlety to my readings.

"Diminishment" is certainly one way to look at the effect of reversal. But here's another thought: think about the idea of passing water through a venturi tube. If the incoming flow rate (the energy of the card) remains constant (its basic meaning doesn't change) constricting the cross-section of the flow path (the outward manifestation of the energy) is going to increase the upstream pressure (the stored potential energy) of the process stream. In that sense, the consequences of reversal don't necessarily fade into the background, they can be front-and-center, often in an uncomfortable way that demands attention. They make me think of a pair of shoes that are too tight.
 

Barleywine

I can see that.....but then I just read the cards. The querent gets the job of deciding how much energy to invest in each card, the reason being that I don't know what is going on in their lives and they do. In fact, that is the reason I don't give advice. What I really love about reading the cards is that when you lay them out in front of someone, they can see the story themselves. In fact, my last reading I threw up my hands because I didn't think I was making any sense with what I was saying, and the querent started jumping up and down in her seat saying...."no, no, everything you are saying is right....that is exactly what is going on." I read blind....no question, just the energy. The client puts it together themselves because they know their own lives. I just read the card in their upright position and the rest is in the hands of the querent....simple as that. The least control I have, the better I like it. I don't want power over someone else's life.

I agree with this pretty much 100%, but I don't think whether or not we read reversals has any bearing on the legitimacy of what you're saying. I have some sitters who home right in on reversed cards in the spread and we have a productive dialogue on the implications. It can add a three-dimensional quality to what might otherwise be an unremarkable passage in the reading.
 

Ruby Jewel

I agree with this pretty much 100%, but I don't think whether or not we read reversals has any bearing on the legitimacy of what you're saying. I have some sitters who home right in on reversed cards in the spread and we have a productive dialogue on the implications. It can add a three-dimensional quality to what might otherwise be an unremarkable passage in the reading.

You know Barleywine, the way I feel about reversals is that it is just a personal choice. I would never speculate on whether the way of reversals right or wrong. I'm not sure there is a right way or a wrong way. If I were getting a reading from someone who reads reversals, I sure wouldn't stop them or change the way they read. I think it comes down to an inner feeling that goes with reading the cards, and your basic philosophy of life. Everything I do in life is simplified down to the essence. My brain rejects complexity. If you could see my paintings you would understand the way I approach the tarot. I don't paint 3 dimensional. My paintings are flat, simple images in empty space. I look for essences in everything and strip away detail....that entails trying to uncover the core meaning and stripping away that which I consider extraneous. Sort of like editing out all the adverbs and adjectives in my writing...and getting down to the subject and verb and direct object. I didn't stop using reversals because I think they are wrong. I stopped because I felt they were "extra" and that they blurred the focus of the card...if that makes any sense.
 

Barleywine

You know Barleywine, the way I feel about reversals is that it is just a personal choice. I would never speculate on whether the way of reversals right or wrong. I'm not sure there is a right way or a wrong way. If I were getting a reading from someone who reads reversals, I sure wouldn't stop them or change the way they read. I think it comes down to an inner feeling that goes with reading the cards, and your basic philosophy of life. Everything I do in life is simplified down to the essence. My brain rejects complexity. If you could see my paintings you would understand the way I approach the tarot. I don't paint 3 dimensional. My paintings are flat, simple images in empty space. I look for essences in everything and strip away detail....that entails trying to uncover the core meaning and stripping away that which I consider extraneous. Sort of like editing out all the adverbs and adjectives in my writing...and getting down to the subject and verb and direct object. I didn't stop using reversals because I think they are wrong. I stopped because I felt they were "extra" and that they blurred the focus of the card...if that makes any sense.

Since I studied graphic design in NYC back in the '60s, my art is pretty much two-dimensional as well. I was never much of a realist or an admirer of the "Old Masters" in those days. Words are another matter; I strive to find just the right words for any expression, and I bring the same approach to my tarot reading: just the right tool to make the most sense out of what the cards are trying to tell me. The same applies to use of correspondences; they may seem counter-intuitive, but really all they do is provide "seasoning to the stew." So I guess in that sense I'm a completionist rather than a minimalist. I like to look at all angles to see which offers the best success path, and adopt any that add to the overall picture. It helps when having to change gears in the middle of an incoherent reading. On the other hand, you might also say I "throw everything against the wall to see what sticks." What I'm after is depth as much as breadth of vision, what I like to call a three-dimensional approach to reading, or maybe peeling an onion is a better analogy.
 

Gaston D.

"Diminishment" is certainly one way to look at the effect of reversal. But here's another thought: think about the idea of passing water through a venturi tube. If the incoming flow rate (the energy of the card) remains constant (its basic meaning doesn't change) constricting the cross-section of the flow path (the outward manifestation of the energy) is going to increase the pressure (the potential impact) of the output. In that sense, the consequences of reversal don't necessarily fade into the background, they can be front-and-center, often in an uncomfortable way that demands attention.

That is an extraordinarily lucid and helpful way of looking at the effects of reversals (and I'm glad I remember enough high school physics to know what a Venturi tube is :)

It also dovetails nicely with one of the ways I tend to look at reversals already: as a means of the reversed card saying that the issue it's describing has to be dealt with whether we're comfortable with it or not.
 

Gaston D.

So I guess in that sense I'm a completionist rather than a minimalist.

I'm with you on this as well. As my Tarot studies have progressed over the years I've come to appreciate learning about different ways of interpreting the cards (Kabbalah being the most prominent among them) to supplement my intuition, which will always remain, I think, the most important element in interpretation.

But other ways of looking at the cards, and this includes incorporating reversals, add more colors to my palette as it were - or seasonings to the spice rack, if we're going to go with the food metaphor.

All that said - there's nothing wrong at all for keeping things simple per Ruby Jewel's approach. It's simply another way of doing things. As an art historian by academic training I love the symbolic and compositional complexity of, say, a Bronzino portrait - but I can also appreciate the simplicity and conceptual clarity of a Donald Judd sculpture or the luminosity of a painting by Helen Frankenthaler. It's a testament to the richness of Tarot that there's more than enough room for both approaches.
 

Barleywine

All that said - there's nothing wrong at all for keeping things simple per Ruby Jewel's approach. It's simply another way of doing things. As an art historian by academic training I love the symbolic and compositional complexity of, say, a Bronzino portrait - but I can also appreciate the simplicity and conceptual clarity of a Donald Judd sculpture or the luminosity of a painting by Helen Frankenthaler. It's a testament to the richness of Tarot that there's more than enough room for both approaches.

That's certainly true. I work with decks that aren't intended to be used with reversal (the Voyager is an example) and those that don't lend themselves well to it. I work with decks that don't have the usual esoteric correspondences, and some that don't do much in the realm of directionality (aka "facing"). Different tools for different purposes is the best way to approach it. On balance, though, I do like more "grist for the mill" of any kind.