Now that the readers studio has had a couple days to sink in, I wanted to reflect on the main things I took away from it.

• I got to hang out with a lot of great people, many of whom were named Carolyn. If you are at the readers studio and can’t recall the name of the person who just walked up, play the odds and say “Hi, Carolyn!”
• Two of the three presenters focused on using tarot for an ongoing exploration of important and complex issues. For instance, Kevin spoke of grading yourself on your ability to give the client a message they can take to heart–the seeds of deep and lasting changes. Meanwhile, I often use tarot to choose between bleu cheese and ranch dressing. Ok, that’s an exaggeration, but clearly I am not fully exploiting the therapeutic potential tarot has for me. I think the issue is that I’d have to be brave enough to ask the hard questions before I can even try to get the deep answers. And, while I know I have such questions, I am generally too confused or too scared to formulate them. Welcome to the crazy shallow world of the Gemini with Gemini rising.

• Related to the last item… it’s good for my ego if I intuit a great answer for the querent, but it can be more powerful to intuit great follow-up questions to ask them instead. This is the main thing I took from James’ session. After all, the goal is to meaningfully help the client, rather than merely to impress them with my divinatory skill. Leading someone to connect the dots in their own mind may be the quickest path to the personal transformation they are after. I know this was not James’ main point about the importance of questions, but it’s where I went with it upon further reflection. Something to think about, anyway.
• None of the presenters seemed keen on divination of future events. Interesting, because I definitely am interested in that type of reading.
• I missed both the breakfast roundtables, if they even really happened. You know, I believe in divination and magickal acts of will, but I’m still skeptical about this 7:30 in the morning. Sounds pretty far-fetched to me. People swear they’ve seen it, but still…
• Though my confidence is growing, I am still most comfortable doing readings for myself in the privacy of my home. To really improve quickly, I need to force myself to do more readings for other people. Not easy for the introvert, but necessary. Seeing all these seasoned readers in action has helped me see that. To close the gap between me and them, I need more experience doing public readings, plain and simple.
• Next time, I should bring food with me. Then I will have more money for readings and other goods.

I felt embarrassed to meet Mary Greer and Rachel Pollack without having had the chance to read their major books. And, I really made no secret about it. To me, it seems like if I am going to a conference for serious tarot folk, then it’s almost disrespectful not to have read the big names. I know it’s all in my head–it’s my issue and not theirs. But that’s what makes it important to me!

At least I knew in advance what they looked like, so I didn’t have a conversation like this:

Me: Hi there, I’m Richard.

Super Famous Author: Hi, nice to meet you.

Me: So, do you do this professionally?

Super Famous Author: Actually, I’m a super-famous author.

Me: gluurghh *impales himself on nearest sharp object*

So anyway, I’m happy to say that I got over my issues on the last day, just in time to speak to both of them a little at lunch. And of course they were both great to talk to. And, I am pretty sure I can read faster than they can write, so next year this will not be an issue at all.

But before that, I took lots of pictures of them at a distance. Rachel was easy to catch in frame, since she usually sat at a table between me and the stage. So, I could take a picture of the presenter and get her photo in the process. Mary was a bit more elusive, but I got several pictures over the course of the conference. In this one, I think she noticed I had my phone pointed at her. Oops! Every stalker’s nightmare…

Every time he got near the stage, there was applause and people chanted his name. I think he was really touched by the reception he got.

…causing Rachel to spin around to grab her notebook in a blur of action. Whatever he said grabbed her attention!

…at the start of the last day.

People greet and hug as Ruth Ann looks victorious.

This was my favorite part of the readers studio. Carolyn Guss of www.tarotmuse.com gave a presentation all about the Seven of Cups. It was engaging, and funny, and informative. I made sure I gushed about it to Ruth Ann and Wald later, because I want to see more from her if at all possible.

What a horribly out-of-focus picture. Sorry, but that was the best I could do with my iphone.

[edit: Ok, well how about this picture, instead. It was taken by Beth Owl's Daughter. You can tell by the way it's in focus, and zoomed in appropriately....

]

Sound was a real issue during the whole conference, but we got by.

Here we have Rachel Pollack asking a question. Too bad the camera chose to focus on the audience rather than the presenters. Oh well!

Incidentally, I liked her question quite a bit… it’s something that’s been on my mind lately. Just because something has four parts, that doesn’t necessarily mean it maps well to the four tarot suits (or at least not the RWS minors anyway). For instance I think it’s interesting to ponder the differences between Yetzirah and Ruach, and whether they both really map to the swords cards in a way that’s usefully congruent with the symbolism and imagery on the cards. Also, I’ve seen the four worlds mapped to the tree of life, but I’ve also seen four overlapping worlds mapped to overlapping trees of life. I think the second way seems clearer and more “right.” Then again, I’ve also seen a viewpoint that says that all of the minors are contained in each major, for a total of 22 x 56 = 1232 shades of meaning in the minors. And perhaps each major is contained in each of the four worlds, leading to 4 x 22 x 56 = 4928 shades of meaning in the cards. I don’t know enough to have a firm opinion on all these things. Yet. But it’s certainly not as simple as mapping any four things you want (food groups, for instance) to the suits and it automatically being useful.