AUTHOR’S NOTE: I recently encountered the irrefutable argument that the aspects of life on which we focus with purposeful intent will expand in priority to fill our field of view, while those from which we withhold our attention will shrink in importance to the point of invisibility. In the realm of tarot prediction, this presupposes the use of some kind of formal spread to guide and sharpen our perspective as well as organize and rank our observations about things we find significant in any situation we’re exploring.

I’ve never been a fan of the so-called “freestyle” type of interpretation where one basically “throws the cards against the wall to see what sticks,” then laboriously sorts out the “scatter” using intuitive guesswork so it makes some kind of sense. I feel that I’m sufficiently attuned to circumstances most of the time to: a) know what I want; b) recognize how to go about getting it when the insight is shoved under my nose; and c) comprehend the ways in which it might announce its impending presence or absence via the cards. When dealing with clients, I try to coach them along these lines so they get the most out of the session. I say “Let’s define the scope of inquiry first and then let the random pull flesh out its dimensions.” No guesswork required.

This is the “shining moment” for a well-designed layout with intelligible position meanings that bring just the right details to the forefront of our awareness. However, care must be taken to prevent its design from supporting the “self-fulfilling prophecy” type of divination. If we ask for only what we know we can obtain, we ‘re cheating ourselves out of a chance to see beyond the end of our nose. We should always value the unexpected epiphany over having our desires parroted back at us, even if we dislike what we’re being shown. It requires being open-minded and at least willing to consider any and all advice offered by the cards; there is no point in sitting for a reading if all we’re seeking is confirmation of an opinion about which we’ve already convinced ourselves. Divination is not immune to the avoidance tactic of “selective hearing,” so why waste our time pretending it is?

The vast majority of the nearly 400 spreads I’ve created over the last eight years exhibit just such structural objectivity. (I see them [perhaps a bit immodestly] as worthy examples of the “fine art” – and passion – of credible spread construction.) If we’re going to trust the tarot to tell the truth, we must refrain from freighting its testimony with our own preconceptions. We can be expectant but should not be blindly so. That includes shunning an inordinate reliance on position meanings, which – while still being suitably definitive – must be flexible enough to allow for some imaginative improvisation. (As an old astrological maxim has it, “The stars (and, I would add, the tarot cards) don’t compel, they impel,” so we must still find the right path under our own power.)

It’s enough to frame the opportunity and then “let the cards fall where they may,” after which it becomes a simple matter of honest interpretation that steers clear of duplicity by not trying to coax the reading into telling us only what we had hoped to hear. There is no value in such chicanery for either the sitter or our own credibility as readers.