mislaid object spread
L.
So there I was at the cafe, on my way back from the courthouse, coming down, and I thought, why not do a lost object spread -- actually, a mislaid object spread, on that HRC logo singlet I cannot find -- and see what I get. I improvised a three-card spread and had already laid the three cards up
position 2 ace cups/position 1 ace pentacles/position 3 (6) lovers
before I realized that I had not assigned any values to the positions.
I had a fleeting impression, turning up the aces, of our first stay at C.'s in Ann Arbor, after you had been in Canada quite a number of weeks. The separation anxieties between us, the urgent sex.
But I had nothing in this spread to say, for example, this card represents your relationship with the object, this card, what was going on when you mislaid it, and this card over here, how you are going to find it -- though those particular assignments did seem to come forward, so I adopted them. But still I could not make much sense of the spread, so I drew three explanatory cards, and the resulting six-card spread looked like this
ace cups/ace pentacles/(6) lovers
two swords/queen pentacles, reversed/three wands, reversed
The pair of aces connecting with the two of swords, and also suggesting (1) magician and/or (2) high priestess. The net minus one among the pips in the lower row maybe suggesting (-1) magician, reversed, the upper row balancing the lower row in this way. Shadow card, knight of pentacles, reversed, connecting somehow to the reversed queen of pentacles in position 4.
This image had to seep in for several hours before it began to say something like:
The singlet was a physical object to which you had attached meanings connected with your tendency toward impracticalities. What was going on when you mislaid it had to do with an emerging intimacy and with some kind of avoidance. Which could be read somehow as referring to the time in Ann Arbor -- certainly invites me to re-think that time, as it may tell me something about where I am, or we are, now (at this point, the reading almost does not seem to be about the singlet at all).
So then what about (6) lovers and three wands, reversed? ethical issues in an intimate relationship, the sense of forward movement at an ebb. Then or now? or is that the perpetual backward look I am always giving this relationship, impeding spontaneity . . . not necessarily very constructive thinking, but the kind of reverie the cards often put me in. But the benefit is, maybe, you can see the mindfuck itself laid out there in the cards, objectified, as a sort of graphic, lying on the table. Shadow knight pentacles, reversed. I do feel I am learning to look back without regret.
Okay, so where is the singlet?
I am going to e-mail C. and ask her whether it turned up when she was packing to move.
zb
So there I was at the cafe, on my way back from the courthouse, coming down, and I thought, why not do a lost object spread -- actually, a mislaid object spread, on that HRC logo singlet I cannot find -- and see what I get. I improvised a three-card spread and had already laid the three cards up
position 2 ace cups/position 1 ace pentacles/position 3 (6) lovers
before I realized that I had not assigned any values to the positions.
I had a fleeting impression, turning up the aces, of our first stay at C.'s in Ann Arbor, after you had been in Canada quite a number of weeks. The separation anxieties between us, the urgent sex.
But I had nothing in this spread to say, for example, this card represents your relationship with the object, this card, what was going on when you mislaid it, and this card over here, how you are going to find it -- though those particular assignments did seem to come forward, so I adopted them. But still I could not make much sense of the spread, so I drew three explanatory cards, and the resulting six-card spread looked like this
ace cups/ace pentacles/(6) lovers
two swords/queen pentacles, reversed/three wands, reversed
The pair of aces connecting with the two of swords, and also suggesting (1) magician and/or (2) high priestess. The net minus one among the pips in the lower row maybe suggesting (-1) magician, reversed, the upper row balancing the lower row in this way. Shadow card, knight of pentacles, reversed, connecting somehow to the reversed queen of pentacles in position 4.
This image had to seep in for several hours before it began to say something like:
The singlet was a physical object to which you had attached meanings connected with your tendency toward impracticalities. What was going on when you mislaid it had to do with an emerging intimacy and with some kind of avoidance. Which could be read somehow as referring to the time in Ann Arbor -- certainly invites me to re-think that time, as it may tell me something about where I am, or we are, now (at this point, the reading almost does not seem to be about the singlet at all).
So then what about (6) lovers and three wands, reversed? ethical issues in an intimate relationship, the sense of forward movement at an ebb. Then or now? or is that the perpetual backward look I am always giving this relationship, impeding spontaneity . . . not necessarily very constructive thinking, but the kind of reverie the cards often put me in. But the benefit is, maybe, you can see the mindfuck itself laid out there in the cards, objectified, as a sort of graphic, lying on the table. Shadow knight pentacles, reversed. I do feel I am learning to look back without regret.
Okay, so where is the singlet?
I am going to e-mail C. and ask her whether it turned up when she was packing to move.
zb
posted by zach bender at 5:26 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home