Kobarot
This is a multi-faceted thought.
1. We are all familiar with the concept of "cold reading," yes? If not, give the wiki a brief look-over here.
We, as readers, are often encouraged to interact with our clients. The kinds of reading where we just zip off a bunch of keywords for the given card in the given spot (with or without a health dollop of intuition, as suits your style) are generally agreed upon as "bad." Rather, it is considered good to look at the card, talk about it, and then ask the sitter what they think about that meaning. Or to have the sitter be the first to chronicle their reaction to the card, and then go from there. Or anything else that involves the sitter.
Then essentially, the difference between a cold reading and a good tarot session seems so slight. How do you draw the line? Can you?
2. Related to this, do you consider a Tarot reading to be A) the reader drawing cards specific to the sitter and conveying information that is to be filtered by the sitter or B) the reader drawing cards specific to the reader, and filtering the appropriate information to then convey to the sitter? Or both? Or neither?
3. To draw those two questions to a broader level, what is the role of the reader in a Tarot reading? A mirror to reflect things the sitter already knew? A gifted supplier of knowledge unknowable to the reader? A sort of Schrödinger's Cat that changes at each instant during the reading, depending on feedback? Just another person who happens to enjoy throwing their cards, the results of which are nothing more than a product of chance?
1. We are all familiar with the concept of "cold reading," yes? If not, give the wiki a brief look-over here.
We, as readers, are often encouraged to interact with our clients. The kinds of reading where we just zip off a bunch of keywords for the given card in the given spot (with or without a health dollop of intuition, as suits your style) are generally agreed upon as "bad." Rather, it is considered good to look at the card, talk about it, and then ask the sitter what they think about that meaning. Or to have the sitter be the first to chronicle their reaction to the card, and then go from there. Or anything else that involves the sitter.
Then essentially, the difference between a cold reading and a good tarot session seems so slight. How do you draw the line? Can you?
2. Related to this, do you consider a Tarot reading to be A) the reader drawing cards specific to the sitter and conveying information that is to be filtered by the sitter or B) the reader drawing cards specific to the reader, and filtering the appropriate information to then convey to the sitter? Or both? Or neither?
3. To draw those two questions to a broader level, what is the role of the reader in a Tarot reading? A mirror to reflect things the sitter already knew? A gifted supplier of knowledge unknowable to the reader? A sort of Schrödinger's Cat that changes at each instant during the reading, depending on feedback? Just another person who happens to enjoy throwing their cards, the results of which are nothing more than a product of chance?