6-Week Wonders

Joermit said:

and training to be a ballerina is grueling work... you should see a girl's feet when first going onto pointe... the bruises, calluses, blisters, and blood... it's awful... but you did mention an important part.... the audition... a ballerina can still go through those blisters and blood and such and still not get parts... no matter their training... and wonderfully trained singers can go to audition after audition and still not record an album...

Click to expand...

I know. I have been there. And in gymnastics, as well. Hard work doesn't mean success, but it does mean a good foundation.

This sucks, it certainly does... but... are the readers at fault? or the store owners? the owner of any metaphysical space should have a responsibility to their readers and the public to hire a 'professsional reader'... there should be an 'audition' of the reader or even several, but again, this is very subjective... but does a store owner have to?? do they always?? no... it's their business, their money, their networking contacts, their word of mouth... they run it as they see fit... this is where, for me, personally, I would not read with them as there is a cross purpose and difference of professional opinion...

Click to expand...

Anyone who 2 months ago publically expressed that she cannot connect with tarot and never will, doesn't own a single deck and has no interest in it, then suddenly "becomes" a shaman, healer, tarot reader and starts reading/healing professionally lacks common sense, IMO. The audition or practice run for this reader was overlooked because she was a friend of the owner and thus, they had no idea where she was coming from. Bad move on their part. Bad move on all parts! She (the reader) pulled this stunt over the winter, trying to boogie up some customers, but ended up with no one. At this point I believe even her friend are on to her, so more than likely that is the last we will see of her, for a while. Unfortunately the people who hang and work at this store have a tendency to gather up every title they can find, easily, tap it on to their names, have cards made up and try to look self-important. But only a small handful actually know what they are doing. The older ones are making for bad role models for new people who come in. It is a frustrating situation that gives tarot reading and other practices a bad name. Jack of all trades, Master of none....

I also have to say, upon further reflection over some coffee and toast with jam, is that back then, I never would have entertained the thought of the possibility of making money with telling stories based on what I see in the pictures on cards. Nope! I had my cap set towards gettin' me a degree in teachin' and directing a chorus of kids in highschool and keep goin' back to school to get my PhD in music. Sheesh!!

I guess that is why I will listen with patience to some 6-week wonder spout on. They have their own process that they are going through. They think they're right. One of the biggest concepts that a 6-week wonder has to understand is that there is no right and there is no wrong. There are basic constants, but even they if they don't resonate with that person don't have to be adhered to.

That being said and going by that premise that 'There is no right or wrong in Tarot,' who are we to say that a 6-week wonder can't charge money for their readings. They can and as we have seen they do. And when the sitter comes to them, sits down and gets an appallingly bad in technique reading (that's the only thing that you can go by, whether or not the info. given in the reading is correct or not remains to be seen), that reader will either be laughed at, or will not be paid. Then by word of mouth, that reader will get a bad rep. and unless that reader learns from that experience and grows he will, by virtue of a crappy reputation go out of business.

Interesting discussion, I like the similarity drawn with the arts and Tarot.

I'm very appreciative of all of your viewpoints.

I guess I automatically liken Tarot to the arts: all deal with intuition, creativity, attaining a level of proficiency (whether gained through long or short-term study), and the deciding public (comprised of lay people and connoisseurs alike).

The thing about the client deciding whether a reader is worth her or his salt is that, as mentioned above, there are clients who would take anything anyone says hook, line, and sinker, as there are those who can smell a charlatan a mile away. I think a "responsible" reader/artist would educate their clients as to what/who is a valid reading/reader by maintaing integrity and staying educated (self-study, workshops, mentorships, etc.). Is that how this works?

Maybe this is a spinoff in the making but I also wonder about the balance between these things (self-study, pure intuition, workshops, mentorships) in the field of Tarot. What people do/have done to familiarize themselves with Tarot.

I guess the lawyer answer would be "it depends" on what kind of learner one is?

OK, going off on tangents. I see there is a similarity b/t 6-Week Wonders here and in the dance world. I feel that here, there is more patience for them. In the dance forum, they're being crucified! :0[

Look, we were all 6-week-wonders at one time or another, even if we turn up our noses at the new people coming along and want to make some sort of "official" schooling and testing of new people now and elect ourselves the dispensers of all knowledge and ethics with regard to Tarot---for a price, mind you. We may not have put a price on our readings back then, but we were still 6-week wonders, if we'd only admit it. I think the majority of readers today go into it with humility and good intentions. I think the era of the rip-off artist with $600 candles is on its way out the door, with the foot of the rest of us on its backside. I still maintain and always have that there's no way to certify that someone else has the ability to see, feel and hear what the cards are saying to them. No other person has the right to tell any reader that what they're getting from the cards is "acceptable" or not. If we're so worried about the client, then let's mind our own p's and q's and police our own neighborhoods to get rid of the charlatans---and let's do it for free, just out of concern for the client.

I think it depends on the individual to be honest - I started to read for pay at 16 years ,the pay really only amounted to pocket money. I had been studying Tarot for 1 year . Sitters can choose and make their own decisions ,some would never see me at 16 prefering an older more experienced reader-one glance told anyone i was 16-Yes we do all have to start somewhere-hopefully from an honest place!

Imho

When interviewing candidates in my "day job" one of the things we look out for is the difference between 20 years of experience and 1 year of experience 20 years in a row. We try to determine that not just through a review of a resume or notation of education degrees and certificates, but by having that person talk to a lot of people.

I think in this profession, years of experience does not necessarily equate to talent or integrity. The last flim-flammer I went to must have been in business at least 30 years. I think we are trying to discern talent and integrity and eliminate frauds.

Shall we have a Readers Guild that fosters apprentices (ideally), molds them to a certain way of reading (worst case)? As an old reader, but newer professional, I'd say it might be better to focus on exposing liars, cheats and frauds who KNOW they are taking advantage of people.

And for 6-week wonders, why not extend a hand in friendship? If it is rebuffed, extend it again. If they are sincere in their pursuit, they might reach out to you and seek your wisdom, even after a headstrong delay. But if you rebuff them, why would they ever seek your advice? And how would they every improve? At the cost of their sitters, the way most people do?

I have come to view my own youthful hiatus in reading as an act of maturity rather than an error. That break probably kept me from being the 6-week wonder, or 6-year or whatever. I had no mentor. Wouldn't we all have benefitted from one, in some small way? Or perhaps not.

6 of Pentacles: The giver gives what they have to give; the receiver receives what they can; the 2 are not necessarily in synch and isn't it always that way? And later, if the receiver picks up a coin overlooked in the transaction, the benefit comes even if the giver never sees that fruit. As givers, is it our place to demand to see the results of our generosity? As the receivers, must we be required to understand the gift perfectly, immediately? Or in the fullness of time. Is the giver even aware of the gift they give? It might not be the one they thought they were giving.

As readers, when we look at '6-week wonders,' isn't it really that we regret our own stumblings on our own path, regret our own enthusiasm that we mistook for self-confidence? Can't we give ourselves the gift of forgiveness and be kind to newbies who are taking their awkward, joyous first steps? In any human endeavor, there will be mistakes, new or old. If we are lucky, they will not have terrible consequences.

Grizabella said:

Look, we were all 6-week-wonders at one time or another, even if we turn up our noses at the new people coming along and want to make some sort of "official" schooling and testing of new people now and elect ourselves the dispensers of all knowledge and ethics with regard to Tarot---for a price, mind you. We may not have put a price on our readings back then, but we were still 6-week wonders, if we'd only admit it. I think the majority of readers today go into it with humility and good intentions. I think the era of the rip-off artist with $600 candles is on its way out the door, with the foot of the rest of us on its backside. I still maintain and always have that there's no way to certify that someone else has the ability to see, feel and hear what the cards are saying to them. No other person has the right to tell any reader that what they're getting from the cards is "acceptable" or not. If we're so worried about the client, then let's mind our own p's and q's and police our own neighborhoods to get rid of the charlatans---and let's do it for free, just out of concern for the client.

Click to expand...

Gypsyspell said:

I think it depends on the individual to be honest - I started to read for pay at 16 years ,the pay really only amounted to pocket money. I had been studying Tarot for 1 year . Sitters can choose and make their own decisions ,some would never see me at 16 prefering an older more experienced reader-one glance told anyone i was 16-Yes we do all have to start somewhere-hopefully from an honest place!

Click to expand...

Yes,....yes,...and YES!! And ultimately, it is the client who makes the decision whether or not to sit down. It is up to us to do our level best, where ever your level is at and to come from a good, honest place.

Thanks for the well thought out responses, Nisaba... I really admire your passion on this issue ... We certainly have a big difference of opinion on this subject and I appreciate the opportunity to discuss them with such honesty.... I feel you're coming from a place of great respect for what we do with a strong desire to protect the quality and perception of the intuitive arts....

nisaba said:

I don't think it really matters - it's not about finding fault. It's about delivering the best possible service, the best possible readings, to clients. Someone who's just bought their first deck and is reading a really basic how-to, few-words-to-a-card book, is, IMO, not ready yet.

Click to expand...

I look at things differently here... if we're looking to create standards for individual readers, then we must also certainly create standards for the spaces in which they perform the work... much like the chef analogy you used... a chef goes through training.... [well some do... Paula Deen, Rachel Ray, Gianna de Laurentis (huge Food Network stars) all are self taught or taught by family... ] anyway, the chef then gets employed in restaurants that have also met certain parameters... health inspections... food and liquor licensing, etc... massage thereapists go through this... hair stylists do... many acknowledged 'vocations' have to.... in the state of florida it is against the law to cut somewhere's hair for a fee without a license... in a town close to where I live, a massage therapist cannot practise their business out of their own home because of zoning ordinances and city codes... so... if an individual reader must be licensed or what have you... certainly so must the spaces in which they read also meet certain standards?? if we're drawing the parrallel I certainly think so... so will new age shops and tea rooms and healing centers be subject to spiritual code enforment agencies? this makes me wonder what type of benchmarks would be set for spaces... how would botanicas and head shops fair? or what of the 90 year old grandmother who's been reading tea leaves for 70 years and does so on her back porch for a lil extra spending money?? the whole issue of creating a vocational model here just raises so my red flags considering the work we do...

Nisaba said:

I don't think we're looking for accuracy, or even a standardised RW-only or Thoth-only set of memorised meanings. We're looking for helpfulness to the purposes of the client. If it were up to me, I would be looking at a training programme including a great many supervised readings using more than one deck or system, in which the reader demonstrates proficiency in more than "open techniques" (saying things that could evoke an emotional reaction or recognition in the vast majority of humans), being relevant and specific to the client's situation. This takes time. This can also be judged: by the standard assessment techniques of observation and third-person feedback (in this case, the clients or simulated clients). To get back to your example, your understanding of the Eight Cups may be based on a meaning associated with the look of the RW illustration, that of journeying alone by night. Someone else's might be informed by Chinese numerology, eight being the number of prosperity and happiness, and Cups still being emotional. Two entirely different feels to the card - but it is the internalised meaning that the actual reader has that will come through in their spreads.

I never suggested that it should. I *did* suggest that members of the public should have some way of finding out if the reader has any experience, or whether this will be their first-ever reading.

Click to expand...

The part of this that troubles me here is where you talk about using more than one deck or system.... one of the best readers I know reads playing cards and only playing cards... her system is unlike any other than I've ever seen, read about, heard about, or whatever...

and the part about supervised readings or even simulated clients... i don't give simulated readings... if I read, I read....I don't put on a show... a reading is a very private and personal experience to me... having a panel observing and judging or checking off lil boxes to ascertain quality of work is a huge invasion and personally, an experience I wouldn't subject myself to...

Nisaba said:

I would hope that would not be compulsory, but ultimately that would not be up to me or any other individual, but up to consensus between maybe, say, a hundred and fifty to three hundred informed individuals and bodies (stakeholders)?

Click to expand...

I don't like that word... stakeholders.... makes me think of something being at stake... I guess I can understand where you might be coming from... those who have a vested interest in the quality of work... but for whatever... this comes across to me... as those people who feel their readings are really good and worth a good bit of money and are peeved at newbies who happen to charge... as if the 'really good readers' have claimed their stake and don't want anyone else to move into their territory.... I can also see where this applies when considering scam artists and their actual stake in the markey, as damaging as it is..... I can certainly understand much of this... but... for me... the best way to overcome these issues is by doing quality work... outshining those who do poor work and sticking to a personal set of ethics and morals.....and also offering something of substance... there's a place for everybody.... and though I really hate to say it... and this come from personal experience.... for some people... those scam artists work and are exactly what they needed... and as much as it pains me to say it... as much as I detest that type of work... as much I hate that it exists... I have seen several people scammed that got wonderful healing and insight out of the whole mess... I can't understand it, but it worked for them...

Nisaba said:

Exactly, and it is exactly those people who need help to be able to tell teh frauds from people who have actually put in at least a little time and attendion in developing their skills. Approved assessment techniques in the Vocational Education and Training system don't only include written exams - that thinking went out with the dinosaurs. How do you assess a trainee chef on paper? You don't - you gop into kitchens and watch them cook, watch tehm cope with pressure, watch them develop new recipes, taste everything they produce. It's called "observation", an authorised assessment method, and "third person feedback" when you ask the chef's customer or the reader's querent, also an authorised assessment method. It's right through the occupational training system, and should be. That is exactly whart I'm urging we should bring into play, to make sure clients *do* get at least competent readers every time, instead of wasting their money to find out who not to go to next time.

Click to expand...

In my opinion, it is the client's responsibility to research and choose a good reader... if they waste their money on a scam artist or new reader or poor reader or whatever... well... that's their fault... harsh as that may sound... I refuse to take any of that responsibilty on myself and have learned that a bit of healthy detachment and not taking this personally have greatly helped me here.... why must we readers take responsibility for the general public's choices in whom they choose to see and pay money to? the only thing that comes to mind is if it intrudes upon our business and I would worry that some sort of standardized vocation would leave us open to attack within the system itself... I've seen competing dayspas attack one another through their licensing agencies, making phone calls and telling falsehoods that result in investigations and suspensions of service while the investigations take place.... would we readers be open to such an attack if a fellow reader didn't like our style or felt we didn't stick to the benchmark as much as we should?? the whole idea just opens a big ol can of worms for me and I find it very uncomfortable....

Nisaba said:

Exactly, and currently under the legislation, the assessment tools exist to judge that. My only problem is that currently Tarot readers are not deemed a "vocation" or an "occupation" and currently there is no process to certify and qualify them as having performed to a benchmark standard before they sit down with a client, who often are very vulnerable people.

Click to expand...

In the US you can be a tarot reader by profession... I was for two full years and filed my taxes listing myself as a reader... I had several 1099s (independant contractor forms) and also claimed funds I'd earned from reading and was basically self employed...

I really want to emphasize that I understand where you're coming from here Nisaba... I agree that our clients, at times can be very vulnerable people... I have compassion for them certainly... I would certainly prefer to see quality readers across the board... but I just can't see there being a benchmark standard... I feel that the burden of responsibility cannot be placed on readers, but must be placed on the public... yes it irritates me to no end that scam artists are out there making heaps of money preying on the vulnerable... yes I know there are tons of readers out there charging for their services that really shouldn't be reading at all... I understand how in many ways this can damage and misrepresent the type of work we do and give tarot reading an interesting association... but... I also know.... that many of us do wonderful work... that's it our best defense against all those who don't do good work.... to shine in our own way... after all.... who's to say that those scam artists couldn't learn to work the system... the one I know is a good enough reader to find the weak spots and exploit them as best she can... she could pass those benchmarks... she could probably impress the stakeholders... she'd do just what she's good at... and then have the credentials to back her up all the more....

thanks for this discussion... it really is very interesting to me... and again... I really admire you in many ways here... I respect where you coming from and your desire to create some positive change... I obviously just don't see things the way that you do... but that's okay too... hopefully this whole discussion can open up some ideas on ways we can better our 'industry' and really raise the quality of our work and the perception thereof!

Joey

Grizabella said:

I still maintain and always have that there's no way to certify that someone else has the ability to see, feel and hear what the cards are saying to them. No other person has the right to tell any reader that what they're getting from the cards is "acceptable" or not.

Click to expand...

you don't think that if a person goes through a process of having recommended reading (such as this very forum as well as the more respected Tarot writers), plus has to do, say, a couple of dozen readings for a veriety of different personality-types, all of whom provide feedback at to whether the reading was useful to them or not, you still can't judge a competent reader from an incompetent reader and certify on that basis?

Grizabella said:

If we're so worried about the client, then let's mind our own p's and q's and police our own neighborhoods to get rid of the charlatans---and let's do it for free, just out of concern for the client.

Click to expand...

So, if you have no way of telling who can and can't read, how will you be able to tell who the charlatans are? you can't possibly call anybody a charlatan if you can't possibly call anyone a competent reader, and that's what you just said.

Joermit said:

I look at things differently here... if we're looking to create standards for individual readers, then we must also certainly create standards for the spaces in which they perform the work... certainly so must the spaces in which they read also meet certain standards??

Click to expand...

Insofar as any commercial activity (even selling your own knitted socks at home to neighbours) should, by law, be carried out in a space that is not physically dangerous to your customers, I suppose ...

Joermit said:

if we're drawing the parrallel I certainly think so... so will new age shops and tea rooms and healing centers be subject to spiritual code enforment agencies?

Click to expand...

I really don't know what you're getting at, here. All such places of business would have to conform to OH&S standards, or they'd be closed down. Likewise, if you carry out any kind of home-based business at all, from manicures to doing other people's tax or typing their letters, if you don't provide a safe environment under OH&S standards for your clients and they get injured, your arse could be sued off.

Do you think Tarot readers should be exempted from the very basic requirement that ALL members of ALL occupations have to make their customers safe? Why? Are we so tied to having the freedom to injure people? I really don't get what you mean here.

Joermit said:

this makes me wonder what type of benchmarks would be set for spaces...

Click to expand...

Basic OH&S safety requirements (like, no dangling live wires, no falling bits of walls etc) would be nice. Do you have anything else in mind?

Joermit said:

how would botanicas and head shops fair?

Click to expand...

Do they comply with basic OH&S safety requirements? If they are in business at all in any industry they should.

Joermit said:

or what of the 90 year old grandmother who's been reading tea leaves for 70 years and does so on her back porch for a lil extra spending money??

Click to expand...

Will someone run a great likelihood of being injured on her back porch? If not, where's the problem? If so, does she have the $10,000,000 public liability insurance to cover herself if they sue her, or is she a very, very *rich"* grandmother (who'd like to adopt me)??

Joermit said:

the whole issue of creating a vocational model here just raises so my red flags considering the work we do...

Click to expand...

I won't even address thne rest of your post - it's all along the same lines.

I think you're getting unnecessarily upset. You raise silly questions. A fortnight ago we all agreed that we should limit the activities of charlatans ripping their clients off, but the moment I THEORETICALLY propose a model for doing just that you all suddenly jump on me as if I'm threatening YOU!

Are we, or are we not, agreed that good readers provide a valuable service?

Are we, or are we not all agreed, that in our own minds it is possible, somehow, to tell the good readers from the bad readers and rip-off merchants? If we can't, why aren't we all rip-off merchants (or why haven't we all hung up our hats and given away our cards)? An d if we can tell the difference between a good reader and a fraud, why can't an assessor, who after all, would be one of us?

Do we, or do we not, agree that it's not always possible just from a person's face of dress, for a client to tell if they are going to be competent before they start, or try and scare us into giving them "all our evil jewels and money that has ruined our lives" for their own profit?

It would be nice if some kind of universally recognised certification existed where a client would know before they handed over their money and sat down, that this person has undergone a very basic assessment process and that he or she is unlikely to rip you off and might actually know a thing or two about cards, might have given a valid and worthwhile reading or two in the past. Wouldn't it? And I say two words along that line, and I'm suddenly made to feel like a demon.

I AM NOT ATTACKING ANYONE!