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 .

DownUnderNZer

I remember looking at Mathew's book on Amazon (I think that was the site) when it first came out because of AT and there was something I saw in what she wrote (some of the sample pages) that did not go with the cards she was talking about at all- not sure if it was a printing error or what, but it is on here somewhere on AT as her book was discussed in it. I wrote the pages down in that thread and what did not make sense with what she was saying about that card(s).

It was not this exactly, but it would've been like someone saying "Cross" means "good times" when it is nothing like that at all.

And I know from speaking to one person here in Australia from Ireland that has her book - she has never been able to get through it, grasp it totally, or move pass pairs. In fact, as of June last she was still stuck on pairs and wanted to invest in another book.

Some books it seems are hard to learn from for some people for whatever reasons.




DND :)








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!
 

Barleywine

The "Work" and the "Sex" cards are two areas that easily succumb to confusion. (Do we even need a "sex" card?) I like the Moon as the Work card for an entirely non-system-based reason: the Moon connects with all things cyclical and habitual, which work certainly is for most people. Anchor then supplies the big-picture career angle. I wasn't going to use the Fox at all in this context, but decided that its cleverness can stand in for the skills and talents needed to do a job. So they all coexist happily in my mind. This is about as far as I go with a more intuitive approach, though. I like Lenormand literal, which has always been its main draw for me.
 

DownUnderNZer

I do like "Moon" for reputation and Moon or Stars if looking at "fame" or "high profile" jobs like Hollywood actors, but for normal work with the German system I would use "Anchor" and the French I would use "Fox".

I have a hard time seeing "Moon" as "work in general" or 4 or 5 cards for that matter to depict it. Moon is not an easy one for me in that light, but it does seem to work for others.

I do see how you view Moon for being cyclical and habitual because the Moon really is that with all its changes. E.g. Quarter/New.

As for "sex cards" I remember on Facebook Rana George didn't know "Lily" in that way at all, so then I knew she only knew the French system. But I did not know in Brazil the "Snake" is seen like that. Because I did not know the Brazilian system.

I think it can contribute as sometimes it is possible to see if a person is sexually active or has issues with their sexuality and/or sex life.

My nephew asked me to look at his sex life once (GT reading) as he wanted to know what the cards would show thinking that they would not come up with anything whatsoever and it showed "abstinence". And he did admit it. Even though he slept with his male partner - he was not ready to do the deed. I think he was still coming to terms with his sexuality back then actually because before that he was dating a female. :D


DND :)

The "Work" and the "Sex" cards are two areas that easily succumb to confusion. (Do we even need a "sex" card?) I like the Moon as the Work card for an entirely non-system-based reason: the Moon connects with all things cyclical and habitual, which work certainly is for most people. Anchor then supplies the big-picture career angle. I wasn't going to use the Fox at all in this context, but decided that its cleverness can stand in for the skills and talents needed to do a job. So they all coexist happily in my mind. This is about as far as I go with a more intuitive approach, though. I like Lenormand literal, which has always been its main draw for me.
 

Barleywine

I remember looking at Mathew's book on Amazon (I think that was the site) when it first came out because of AT and there was something I saw in what she wrote (some of the sample pages) that did not go with the cards she was talking about at all- not sure if it was a printing error or what, but it is on here somewhere on AT as her book was discussed in it. I wrote the pages down in that thread and what did not make sense with what she was saying about that card(s).

It was not this exactly, but it would've been like someone saying "Cross" means "good times" when it is nothing like that at all.

And I know from speaking to one person here in Australia from Ireland that has her book - she has never been able to get through it, grasp it totally, or move pass pairs. In fact, as of June last she was still stuck on pairs and wanted to invest in another book.

Some books it seems are hard to learn from for some people for whatever reasons.DND :)

I latched onto the playing-card stuff in Matthews' book and kind of let the rest go. In rank order of usefulness I like Andy's book above all, then the Anthony Louis e-book, Rana George's, Caitlin Matthews' and Sylvie Steinbach's (mainly as a reference for combinations). Best of all, though, from an ease of access standpoint, is the material I have in binders that I scoured from internet blogs and from posts here. Now if someone would only translate some of those reportedly excellent German and French books . . .
 

DownUnderNZer

My sister and I started doing translations on the German meanings back in 2008/09 and I do have pages and pages printed somewhere and/or on a USB - just not all of the combinations as I only made it up to a point as I went into full time studying again in 2010.

As for the translations - not many either and sometimes the translations were kind of "rough". Like broken English or lost in translation really. It might of been a bit too big for us in actuality.

Might have to see if I still have that somewhere or if my sister still has it.

DND :)

I latched onto the playing-card stuff in Matthews' book and kind of let the rest go. In rank order of usefulness I like Andy's book above all, then the Anthony Louis e-book, Rana George's, Caitlin Matthews' and Sylvie Steinbach's (mainly as a reference for combinations). Best of all, though, from an ease of access standpoint, is the material I have in binders that I scoured from internet blogs and from posts here. Now if someone would only translate some of those reportedly excellent German and French books . . .
 

Barleywine

As for "sex cards" I remember on Facebook Rana George didn't know "Lily" in that way at all, so then I knew she only knew the French system. But I did not know in Brazil the "Snake" is seen like that. Because I did not know the Brazilian system.

A bit of random sophomoric humor here, but when I was a pre-teen back in the '50s," "lily" was a sly code-word for the male organ. So maybe it's not that far-fetched . . . :joke:

As far as the Moon goes, reputation and honor are my main meanings; work as a place where those qualities are often at stake is secondary. But if I need a "work" card, I stick with Andy's idea since I've found him reliable.
 

Village Witch

...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.

My issue also. Glad to see it's not just me. Happened just his morning.

I think it comes down to if it is a "general" question (I do not like generals) you are tackling or a "specific" one, also, perhaps how well you know the cards to have that diversity.

But of course you may all have your own valid reasons as to what causes the issue.

SNAKE: If I was "describing" a person then that is how it would be used, but not for a "situation" like "job", "travel", "house repairs" or "a car" etc. Only if "people" come in to the equation regarding a "situation" - then of course. For example, if SNAKE was next to MAN, then I would be looking at it twice.

Nothing wrong with "basic" Village Witch - it will keep your reading straight forward. No going off on a different tangent hopefully.

But with "generals" that can go in all kind of directions for sure.

Thank you, DND! I am learning a lot from this thread.
 

Village Witch

...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.

I drew Snake on Snake in my last GT! Holy crap!

After I'm done reading the GT, I go through the cards one by one to see what house they landed on. I admit I get confused as a combo of cards might tell one story, but the houses underneath shed a whole new light on the read. *bangs head against the wall*
 

Barleywine

I drew Snake on Snake in my last GT! Holy crap!

Based on what Padma said, I'm wondering if Snake on Snake would create "Super Snake," or just undermine its potency? I would be inclined to see it as reinforcement of the basic card meaning rather than reduced emphasis. If it diminishes the benefit of a positive card, does it also diminish the impact of a negative one or make it worse?
 

Padma

Myself, I would see Snake in house of Snake as bungled attempts by a malignant person to harm the sitter. i.e. someone who is so obviously malignant, you can't miss it, and therefore gives the sitter more ability to control or steer clear of the person, or quell the attacks. Or, because the attacks or troubles coming are so glaringly obvious that the Snake becomes almost an inept caricature of itself. A self-defeating Snake that eats its own tail.

In the sense of Snake as problems that affect the sitter, and not Snake as a person, then I would see it as the sitter themselves creating his or her own problems.

But hey, that is just my take on it, based on reading experiences.