hunter said:
Technically, you're not a professional unless you are representing Tarot as a job skill for which you receive remuneration.
Were the gypsies "professionals"? Are modern day, transient, card readers professionals?
If you use the term to denote a degree of mastery in the subject, there is no way to definitively answer if gypsies (Romany?) were professional readers. It it commonly understood money was exchanged for the service (that old cliche about cross my palm with silver, etc.) so by that definition, gypsies were professionals.
How do you definte transient readers? I'm not sure if you're referring to someone who practices without a set place of business, out of their home... or...?
What makes a reader NOT a professional? Are there things that would DISQUALIFY someone from being a professional?
Staying with the definition of money exchange, one definition would be those who read without remuneration. This would not reflect on their accuracy or ability though.
"Disqualify" implies a personal judgment is being made, as there are no set rules or regulations which qualify or disqualify a professional reader. Speaking subjectively, I would say the intent to use Tarot reading as a means to scam money (ie pretending to read, but relying on cold reading tactics), willfully misleading a client ("You're under a curse, give me more money and we'll try to remove it") or in any other way that might be considered harmful and deceitful is wrong.
Do certain illnesses/disabilities/quirks enhance card reading abilities or disqualify a reader from being a professional?
I would have to know what illness, disability or quirk was being referred to. A blind Tarot reader may read wonderfully, a deaf reader may have wonderful communication skills via text and deliver stunning readings.... Hard to answer without specifics.
Do you think the term "professional" is morphing? If so, do you think that is good or bad?
I think it can be used in a more colloquial sense to denote mastery of a subject, like Tarot. I don't consider that a good or bad thing in itself. Just a synonymous thing.
Are there readers that make "true" professionals look bad? What is the impact of that?
Those who misrepresent Tarot by using it to bilk money or in any way harm others make the the rest of us in the profession look bad. It is the one bad apple dynamic. People assume because this person used reading as a way to scam others, everyone doing Tarot is doing it to scam others. It is by nature a profession which I think everyone should approach with a degree of skepticism, as a result.
Do you tend to judge a professional by their customer base, reading environment, or their fee scale?
I want to say no, but yes. Those charging extraordinary fees (John Edward, Sylvia Browne) have customer bases and fee scales that the average reader will never experience. As a result, there are a lot of expectations put on those people. Whether each lives up to those expectations is debatable.
...What precipitated this line of questions? Have you been thinking on the nature of the professional Tarot reader of late?
