I have sometimes come across a situation when a reading given to a client although incredibly accurate, factually correct and well interpreted just doesn’t hit the mark. Sometimes it’s the way the reading is framed that’s off, other times it could be that the relationship between the reader and client just doesn’t vibe. I had a chance to experience this very dynamic from the other side i.e the side of being a client recently when I had a one-card reading. I had this reading in relation to a traumatic event and wanted to know what lesson I could take forward from those happenings. Sure enough I soon received my reading. The card that appeared in the reading seemed spot on in relation to the question and I felt gratified, supported and pleased to see it there. The interpretation of the card too seemed like it covered all the important points and facets of the situation. All well and so far great. But I still felt left out in the cold a bit and like I wasn’t being given the information in the best possible way. I believe however that despite facts being correct; tone and the way a reading is framed makes a huge difference to how it reads. The tone in the reading I received struck me as quite matter of fact and I felt very unsupported through the words with respect to the message of this card. As a client the reading both hit the mark (information wise) and didn’t (tone wise) and for a few days afterwards I felt unsure of how exactly I felt about this entire episode.
In my view, there are two schools of thought with respect to this issue. Some readers would say that it is totally the client’s responsibility to see read words as they do and find from it the meaning that they receive. This puts the responsibility firmly on the querent’s shoulders. This way of approaching readings posits that individuals have ultimate responsibility to approach any reading they receive in any way they want.
In another school of thought the reader takes ultimate care to present their work in a way that will cause minimum hurt, offence and pain to the querent. Here perhaps the reader’s agency on what is best for the querent comes into play more and the reader takes decisions on how best to frame her work and what sentiment she wants to convey to the querent.
So where am I on all this? Is one better than the other, or should one borrow from both in one’s own readings. I’m taking the middle path (that seems to be my standard position these days on issues). In my readings I endeavour to frame things in a kind and compassionate way (life’s hard as it is and I don’t feel it’s my job to give my clients a huge dose of bitter medicine). However on the other hand I also let my querent take things in the way they want. I know clearly how I intend them and what I mean and with this pure intention I set my words out in the world knowing that the client will take from it whatever they need to and whatever they feel able to. That way I’m walking the middle path in my readings, trying to deliver truthful words compassionately.