Waite’s description of the Two of Wands is thus: Between the alternative readings there is no marriage possible: on the one hand, riches, fortune, magnificence; on the other, physical suffering. disease, chagrin, sadness, mortification. The design gives one suggestion: here is a lord overlooking his dominion and alternately contemplating a globe; it looks like the malady, the mortification. The sadness of Alexander amid the grandeur of this world’s wealth. It also signifies that a young lady may expect trivial disappointments. Reversed – surprise, wonder, enchantment, emotion, trouble, fear.
However, this is not how I see the card. It’s an example of the differing views of different readers. When Pamela Colman Smith drew the cards, it is hard to believe that she encrypted the above meanings into her designs. If you look very carefully at the card itself, the man holding the globe only has one leg. He is holding onto a wand with one hand, with the world in the other. Does he need support in order to stay standing?
I can’t help but reflect on Rachel Pollack’s definition where she says that that the man who appears to have everything, including the world in his hand, is still looking out contemplating what more he needs. Is he bored? Is he sad, like the opinion Waite gives of this card? Some people describe this as a card of success, but it is difficult for me to come to that conclusion.
As for reversed, well, I think it’s a deepening of the lack of support. Is it time to walk away?