Ok I'm just thinking out loud so I'm not sure how coherent/eloquent this will be or how to best structure it. I wanted to write about open readings (just laying cards out without assigned spread positions), how they're better than spreads, and how I often see people do them in a way that's taking the worst of both worlds...
An open reading allows the cards to exactly describe their relationship to each other just by their geometry, the images, the movement of the symbols between the cards. People moving, reaching, looking away. The suit symbols lying on the ground, flying through the air, transforming into other symbols and creatures.
Let's imagine a simpler cartomantic system and say you pulled the cards "man", "apple", and "knife". Looking at the images, assuming it's a scenic deck like most of the tarot out there, it becomes quickly apparent whether the man is chopping up the apple for a recipe, cutting off slices and eating it for lunch somewhere on the road, or perhaps having a knife flying at his head where the apple is sitting. All very different stories.
Positional spreads can only achieve this accuracy if you already know all the dynamics involved and can pick or design a spread to address them. You might suspect what's involved and pick a spread that's "close enough ". Or you might use a very big spread to account for a multitude of possibilities so that it might cover the relevant ones (but then you get a lot of noise which might drown out the actual important bits of the message).
I imagine the recent rise in popularity of pip/Marseille decks is responsible for people trying out the more traditional open method but not really getting all the way there. I see a lot of "card 1 means A (expounding on meaning), card 2 means B" etc. That's like going on about "man" (creativity, dexterity, arrogance), "apple" (nature, nourishment, knowledge), and "knife" (craft, tool, weapon), trying to string a narrative only based on the words-you-said-previously, or the overlap of the "cloud" of meaning associated with each symbol. It might yield something interesting and activate the intuition in some way, there's definitely a reading in there. It might have worked a bit better in positional readings - "card 1 means A, and in B position, in response to question C, it means D" (honestly in that case most people just want to know that final part, they're not there for a tarot lesson, especially if they're paying by the minute). But without assigned positions there's much more to be gained from simply looking - the cards are after all a visual medium.
You could have the best of both worlds! read the open reading (still in response to a specific question) as a single scene - unified, all elements interacting - and once you've identified your key players and relationships, ask about each one in a positional spread! Or do another open three card reading about whichever one you need to know more about.
I know I use and recommend some positional spreads myself, but recently I prefer really small ones, so that each position can be read using a three card open reading. Even a simple past, present, future spread can yield so much more information if you look at the whole shape of a 3 card story for each of the positions. Which elements prevailed, which have exited the picture, which might reemerge in the future, how, why?
It's like reading the word instead of the individual letters. Or the sentence instead of treating the words separately. Join up your very neat yet individual printed letters and soon, with some practice, you'll be writing in beautiful, natural, /personal/ flowing cursive.
