*from an Old English verb, “hwinsian,” which means “to wail or moan discontentedly.”
As I continue to explore the “build it as you go” approach to positioning a topic card in a small Lenormand spread, I decided to tackle the subject of what is likely to happen with Donald Trump’s border wall. I selected the Mountain for the topic card as symbolic of a barrier, and used the Heloise Lenormand for the reading. Note that for the most part I’m not reading the Mountain as a negative modifier here, only as a passive stand-in for the wall itself as the subject of the reading. In his book, Lenormand 36 Cards, Fortune-Telling with the Petit Lenormand, Andy Boroveshengra said “The Mountain can also indicate another country, especially one you share a border with,” and that’s how I’m using it here; I’ve also seen it called simply a “border” or “boundary.”
Because the Mountain appeared in the far-left column of its row with no cards in front of it, I set down three more cards in the empty space to the left and three below to create a 3×3 square centered on the Mountain. There were cards above it, so I turned over everything that didn’t form part of the square to avoid confusion over which cards to read.
The four corners of the square, Storks-Key-Ring-Star, suggest that moving forward (Storks) will be the answer (Key) to “closing the deal” (Ring), thereby achieving Trumps vision (Stars). The Woman sits between the Storks and the Key, as well as above the Mountain with the Book beneath, indicating that the Woman (probably Nancy Pelosi, the Speaker of the House) will attempt to use the “rule of law” (Book) to block that movement. The Paths knights to the Woman and the Book, implying that her legal maneuver will “stand in the road.” It looks like her opponents believe the law is on their side (Book is below Mountain and knights to Storks and Key) in supporting the “encirclement” of the country with a physical barrier (Stars-Book-Ring), with the Book knighting to the Storks and the Key in addition to the Paths lending credibility to that assumption. The series Storks-Ship-Stars could mean “clear-sailing,” while Key-Birds-Ring could signify a retort to the legal briefs that, with the knighting of Birds to Storks and Stars, the courts will find sound and binding. The diagonals tell of success as well; Storks-Mountain-Ring speak of bringing the wall to fruition, and Stars-Mountain-Key state that the vision is true. But it gets more complicated from there. The Ring knights to the Ship, but also to the Clouds and the Woman, making me think the outcome of that move would be uncertain. The inner diamond of Woman-Ship-Birds-Book shows the Woman mounting a lively legal counter-attack.
In the original row (before I added the extra column), the Mountain mirrored the House, which tells me that the wall is a major objective of the White House, and also one that is a significant hurdle. The Whip as the central card in the row shows that argument, disagreement, and general unpleasantness lie at the heart of the matter. The series Ship-Mountain-Birds show that a lot of innuendo (Birds) is being thrown at this enterprise (Ship-Mountain), aimed at complicating and diverting its progress (Birds-Paths-Clouds.) The fact that the Birds mirrors the Fox suggests the underhanded nature of some of this invective. The series Paths-Clouds-Whip says that making headway against this orchestrated outpouring of anger (the “whinging” of the title) will be a challenge. However, Anchor + Tree look like a bulwark against erosion of the original purpose, while Whip and Fox on either side are intent on picking it apart. The Tree-Fox-House series means that there is an ongoing effort to infiltrate and corrupt the roots or foundation of the effort.
However, despite the curve-balls thrown at him (Clouds, Whip and Fox), the House at the end implies that Trump could “bring it home” as long as his “inner circle” shows resolve and solidarity. The 3×3 square looks generally supportive as well, with all positive or neutral cards; except for the legal “battle of wits” symbolized by the Woman-Book axis, the most volatile push-back here seems to be sniping from outside the main arena. Regardless of the rhetoric, it will probably come down to which side is favored by the salient points of law, but my opinion, based on the testimony here, is that Trump will get his wall (or at least a portion of it in the time left to him).
For the record, I don’t have any problem with tighter border control; it is, after all, the “law of the land.” I didn’t when the Democrats touted it during the Obama administration, apparently to protect American workers (but then went in the opposite direction, obviously to fatten their voter base) and I don’t now. Regarding walls, Robert Frost said “Good fences make good neighbors” (although even he seemed to be whinging about his neighbor’s insistence on it.) But I think that, instead, our congressional politicians should be required to enforce the existing immigration laws that they swore to uphold, in addition to every other constitutional obligation they’ve been flouting in their rush to enrich themselves. In that case, no wall would be necessary, just an update to the laws to make them more efficient. Unfortunately, I still don’t think they have any intention of doing so.