Tarot: Predictive or something far deeper

[mac22]

Originally Posted by Rosanne

Hi Mac!
Runes reader.
Crystal Ball gazer
Live Coal reader
Any Deck reader

Tarot Reader: Reader with personal style and method, Sitter, Tarot cards and often a question.
You can do it without a Question
You can do it without sitter
You can do it with whatever style and method or Cards
You cannot do it without the cards
So I imagine the most important thing is what you cannot do without.
That does not negate the importance of the other ingredients or the overall experience. 22 men in whites on a cricket pitch without the equipment of Bat, Ball and wickets are not able to play Cricket- no matter how important they view themselves or each other- they will not experience playing the game of Cricket. They can walk the walk and talk the talk- but they cannot play Cricket.

~Rosanne
In answer to the thread question. I personally can sometimes be accurate in Predictive- but I see little use in that as the main object of the exercise. If the reading is positive- it will be a pat on the back, for having got to this place- if negative you would surely expect the sitter or yourself to change the vibe- so the prediction is only a possibility if they do not change the vibe.
So for me it is about exploring the possibilities the cards present- which for me is more satisfying and seems to be more satisfying to the majority of the sitters I have read for.

Hey Roseanne -

I agree that you cannot bricks without straw.

But as an old Master Carpenter told me when I was a Rookie locksmith installing locks in a large building: " Son, it's not the number of fancy tools you have & can use that is the mark of a Master Craftsman but the number of tools that you can do without and still get the high quality of work done that is the sign of the true Master Craftsman!"

Mac22

[Elven]

Again, as soon as the archetype word was used, the question was thrown firmly into the realm of the psychological, not the predictive.

Yes, I agree, but thats not to say other aspects of the card aren't available for interpretation? - the question is projective (in time - next week) as it psychological and both aspects are relative to each other.

The other question I have is what incident then is this about in Heidis week? - possibly this may have been the most memorable incident, but is it reflecting what the cards are saying, either psychologically or predictively, is it THE incident? What else could these cards relate to about, if not the bank robbery which they are focusing on?

Cheers
Elven x

[Nevada]

I disagree that an archetype can't be predictive, though I am not sure I would trust a predictive interpretation that's detailed enough to specify a bank robbery.

I see the reading (the card, if not the class's interpretation) as predicting Heidi's ability to overcome her grief and have the presence of mind to reassure the girl, and to provide perhaps the most detailed description of the robber. That, in my opinion, was her personification of the Judgement archetype, and it was brought out by the incident. In that regard the card was both predictive and psychological.

In my readings for myself, I often find multiple layers at work, including the predictive, as well as advice, or a mirror of my own conscious/unconscious dynamics, or even just a pointer that says, "Pay attention to this."

I think when we try to pare the facets of a reading down and say that one reading is only predictive or another is only psychological, we're limiting the usefulness of Tarot unnecessarily.

The prominent question here seems to be, could someone, or should someone, have predicted the robbery. I'm not sure I see that as the purpose of the reading to begin with, though I'm sure Heidi thought it would've been nice to be able to avoid the situation entirely. But if she had avoided it, then she might not have had that archetypal experience, that wake-up to her own inner strength and ability to rise above a traumatic experience the way she did.

Nevada

[Teheuti]

I'm so glad you all are discussing this topic.

I have the utmost respect for those tarot readers who are really good at prediction. Unfortunately, all too many readers are not that great at it but think that they have to do so simply to satisfy the querents' desire for specific predictions. Too many readers fall into <i>unconsciously<i/> developing cold-reading techniques in order to satisfy their clients. I'd prefer to see readers who understand exactly what they are doing, inform their clients of precisely what they have to offer, and who train themselves to do it (whatever their method and approach) extremely well.

Originally Posted by Gavriela

I mean, if someone DID ask me (nobody ever has done, but if): Draw a card from the majors and tell me the primary archetypal energy that will be played out this week?

I probably wouldn't answer: Bank robber energy, regardless the card that turned up. So far as I know, that's not an archetype.

Actually, the Trickster/Thief is a classic archetypal figure epitomized by both Hermes and Coyote (among many others). It is most often expressed by the Magician/Montebank card in the Major Arcana.

Interesting that you don't mention the Minor Arcana cards in the spread at all. In my description I clearly said they were to give the particular, concrete circumstances through which the archetypal energy was to play out. This particular spread was meant to predict on two levels. I'm confused. Is it somehow <i>not</i> prediction to foresee what archetypal energy and issues someone will soon be dealing with?

I agree that, as someone mentioned, more cards could have given more information—only two cards to describe the circumstances are generally too few. Yet, I've seen predictive spreads where a series of individual cards are supposed to predict along a time line - one card each for past, present, future, etc.

I've conducted a lot of prediction experiments over the years and realize that a true, scientific experiment requires a lot of structure and controls that I'm not sufficiently trained to do perfectly. Some of my experiments have been more rigorous and less ambiguous than others (see my "Tarot and Emotions Research Project" that was reported on the ATA). However, my main intent here was to encourage my students to explore what works and doesn't work for them personally and to get as much feedback as possible to help refine their techniques.

For me the dynamic between prediction and insight is an exciting one that I'll continue to explore. As a predictive reader I have moments of absolute clarity and sometimes even months when that faculty is working very strongly. But, despite pretty extensive training, I'm not "on" all the time, so I focus my readings on what I know I can consistently deliver extremely well and where I personally most value the kind of results. Of course, it is my responsibility to make sure that clients understand beforehand what I am offering.

[Teheuti]

Gavriela - is there some place on the forum or elsewhere where you talk about what it takes to do consistently accurate predictive readings? This is something I'd be interested in.

Mary

[Splungeman]

Originally Posted by mac22

Hey Roseanne -

I agree that you cannot bricks without straw.

But as an old Master Carpenter told me when I was a Rookie locksmith installing locks in a large building: " Son, it's not the number of fancy tools you have & can use that is the mark of a Master Craftsman but the number of tools that you can do without and still get the high quality of work done that is the sign of the true Master Craftsman!"

Mac22

Great story. I agree. I think it perfectly illustrates the idea we're throwing about here. Like being a Master Craftsman, the skill behind the tool is the important thing.

It reminds me of something my stepdad can do that astounds me. He can look at siding on a house and tell if the house beneath is rotting out, even though there appears to be no observable difference between an area that isn't, and an area that is. He told me after years and years he just kind of knows, and has no explanation.

[Teheuti]

Originally Posted by Rosanne

I personally can sometimes be accurate in Predictive- but I see little use in that as the main object of the exercise. If the reading is positive- it will be a pat on the back, for having got to this place- if negative you would surely expect the sitter or yourself to change the vibe- so the prediction is only a possibility if they do not change the vibe.
So for me it is about exploring the possibilities the cards present- which for me is more satisfying and seems to be more satisfying to the majority of the sitters I have read for.

This tends to be my personal take, too.

Occasionally a prediction is needed so I try to keep tabs on a good predictive reader or two that I can recommend to someone who needs that.

My ex-brother-in-law had a boat stolen in Miami (long story-no insurance, etc.). He went to a psychic fair with a picture of the boat in an envelope and went around to each psychic asking if they knew what was in the envelope. He then had a reading from the person who saw it accurately. She told him the boat had been taken by some heavy-duty criminals into the Everglades, and that if he went after it he wouldn't come back alive. So, he let go of trying to find it. I think he did a darn good job of going about getting the kind of advice he needed. [He's the type who would have gone after the boat with his own guns.]

[mac22]

Originally Posted by Splungeman

Great story. I agree. I think it perfectly illustrates the idea we're throwing about here. Like being a Master Craftsman, the skill behind the tool is the important thing.

It reminds me of something my stepdad can do that astounds me. He can look at siding on a house and tell if the house beneath is rotting out, even though there appears to be no observable difference between an area that isn't, and an area that is. He told me after years and years he just kind of knows, and has no explanation.

Thx

Your example points exactly at the skill of the Master Craftsman!

Mac22

[mac22]

Originally Posted by Teheuti

Gavriela - is there some place on the forum or elsewhere where you talk about what it takes to do consistently accurate predictive readings? This is something I'd be interested in.

Mary

Me too!

Mac22

[Syrah]

Originally Posted by zannamarie

From what I can tell in the article, Heidi wasn't robbed so there'd be no reason for the cards to predict a bank robbery. She was frightened and traumatized, but there could have been many events which produced a similar response given she was in a greiving state.

I think her original prediction was correct. She did go through an awakening related to the death of her father and his financial affairs (she most likely would not have been in the bank had he been alive).

I agree with zannamarie. And I'm also going to suggest something that comes from a different perspective.

One of the things I've gotten from many of Thirteen's posts is that sometimes the cards are screaming something at you, regardless of what you've asked them. So even though the exercise in Mary's class that day was to "predict" the following week, it's possible Heidi's cards had something else in mind. Perhaps the lessons Heidi learned from the robbery were ones she was meant to learn, and so perhaps the cards were directing her to the bank that day.

The reality is that cards and readers can predict, and they can be psychological tools, and they can be other things. But the combination may not be exactly what we want, exactly when we want or ask for it.