AUTHOR’S NOTE: It is often said that, within its range of customary definitions, every tarot card contains all possible shades of positive and negative meaning that will invariably yield a piece of the puzzle when wisely applied to a specific question. The analysis is typically approached as a deductive exercise that first zeros in on the “What” suggested by the card and then works backward into the “Why” explaining its appearance in the spread.

Correct interpretation involves identifying exactly where on the spectrum the best fit lies for the context of the reading. The diviner’s goal reminds me of seeking the “Goldilocks Zone,” which is an astrophysical term for the region of the solar system that is temperate enough to support life; like Baby Bear’s porridge, it is neither too cold nor too hot, but “just right.” This parsing of each and every nuance to get at the “heart of the matter” has always sounded like an arduous process of elimination to me, particularly when facing the ubiquitous “yes-or-no” question.

Although I’ve created my own list of “Yes-Leaning, No-Leaning and Maybe” cards to facilitate yes-or-no readings, it very seldom happens that the presence of an affirmative or dissenting example in a spread will deliver an emphatic verdict one way or the other strictly on its own merits. Depending on the rest of the cards, it can always be ambushed by an offsetting “Maybe” along the way and not turn out as anticipated due to this inconclusive “nudge” away from certainty. We can’t always expect abiding cooperation from a fickle Universe even when at first blush it seems intent on pushing us in a particular direction. Life has an inconvenient habit of stepping into the path of determinism.

This assumption aligns well with my belief that tarot divination is all about trends, tendencies and probabilities, it’s not a purveyor of absolute truth. An answer may be “trending” toward Yes or No, but it may never arrive there when ambiguity enters the equation. Its presumed likelihood will depend on its position in the overall narrative and what its companions have to say before and after the fact. In such cases I usually look for a preponderance (aka abundance) of one polarity or the other to guide my deliberation, with “Maybe” as a noncommittal “fallback” position.

I believe that every tarot card has a “sweet spot” that lies somewhere between what tradition assumes it’s trying to say and what intuition makes of it. This allows for a balanced view of its contribution to the situation at hand without favoring one extreme or the other. Seekers often sit for a reading when they are feeling unbalanced, and reinstating a bit of equilibrium in their perception of reality is often the best medicine we can offer. It vacates the premise that we must be 100% accurate in our observations and instead provides some philosophical “wiggle room.”

I look at every card in a spread for hints of a triggering impulse that can shift its testimony into the spotlight in a way that permits a lucid assessment of its impact. For example, the optimistic Sun sitting in the middle of a landscape of pessimistic cards might only “shine a bright light” on the problem, which makes highlighting the contrast its most valuable input. I would most likely back away from the Sun’s usual definition of self-evident blessing as one of the best cards in the deck and focus its unblinking attention on sniffing out the “rat in the granary” before it can foul the grist. This will turn what could have been “toxic positivity” in the face of sobering circumstances into a net gain in awareness. Otherwise it would seem more like “shoveling against the tide.”

With a contradictory card awash in a sea of mild encouragement, the “sweet spot” could emerge in deflating what would otherwise have been an implausibly sanguine outlook when exaggerated optimism isn’t warranted. It’s the “dash of cold water” that awakens a more pragmatic attitude toward the forecast, one that doesn’t assume a “spoonful of sugar” is sufficient to make the consequences palatable. In any reading scenario, I expect to be persuaded by the evidence, not importuned by suspicious presentments that don’t align with the objective overview.

I like to say that I’m a realist in all things related to tarot reading, with logic as my litmus test. If a prediction is too good (or too bad) to be true, it probably isn’t, bringing out the legal pretext of the “reasonable man” in me. If an enlightened individual wouldn’t accept a “handshake” agreement with no strings attached, I see no reason why a tarot reader should buy into such a vague promise either.