The kind of client you are makes the astrologer you should get
Posted by Wroskopos on April 4, 2010
When in search for astrological insight, people are in loss of where to look in order to find a “good astrologer”. Usually a friend or chance dictates the astrologer who will delineate the client’s chart. A recommendation, or an advertising in a magazine, or an article about astrology that attracted our attention will point us to an astrologer.
It is hard to find a good astrologer but how do we classify “good”? A good theoretical knowledge and years of successful field experience should do it, no? Well, not exactly.
In 20th century, psychology became the absolute hype. The absolute fashion, the “it” thing to give us the most essential answers about the only thing we ended up caring for: ourselves. Being sad was renamed to being depressed and from a natural experience it was deemed a psychological disorder. Being rationally worried was renamed to having anxiety and stress.
The predominance of psychology spread its influence in many science and arts, affecting the Art of Prediction as well. Like what happened with psychiatry, astrology didn’t escape exaggerations and the focus on personal sentiments overcame a balance between events related astrology and inner reflections in a chart. What we ended up mostly having nowadays, is the most egomaniac and emotion-centered astrology in ages. Is that bad? Not really, a product is the result of a need. Many customers crave exactly that aspect of astrology, it would be perhaps short-sighted to dismiss that.
The average modern customer of an astrologer wants to hear about one’s psychological traits and the psychological impact of an incident rather than know what the incident will be. Is rare to find a customer who asks about hard cold facts like it used to happen in the far past. Is therefore, not a surprise or a coincidence at all, that we often see astrologers having some psychology studies and degrees, or astrologers presenting themselves as “life coaches”.
Once upon a time, astrology was factual. Back then it also was a science.
Is there anything wrong about this? Wrong and right are philosophical concepts, far too complex to be analyzed here. The fact astrology took a psychological turn, can be an addition to sociological theses as an aspect of 20th century industrially progressed societies but, it doesn’t necessarily render modern astrology a “bad” thing.
It would be an oversight not realizing things happen for a reason and the emotion-centered astrology is the product of the needs humans had in the last century. Many clients needed to know how a transit or natal position would affect their inner world, their sentiments and feelings. In their search for answers in “why I feel like this?”, “why am I feeling that bad/such a loser/so depressed/so unhappy/ so angry/so without HOPE?”, psychological astrology was one of the most common *tools* we could use to get the desired answers in the search of ourselves.
How is all this connected to what kind of astrologer one should find?
There are two main kinds of good and valuable astrologers you can find, the scholar and the phychologist. Their ethics and approaches differ:
1. The traditional scholar. She is very mercurian (a dignified mercury), she studies and then studies more and likes FACTS, proofs and is direct. She is cold comparing to the following category of astrologers and prefers truth than elaborate lies. Even if that truth makes you feel bad, is still the truth and is unethical to hide it.
2. The psychologist. She is tender and seems caring and considerate and will go in depths analyzing every petty or important FEELING you may experience. Facts are too mundane for her, if a fact is detrimental it is unethical to disclose it to the client. You will get a lot of compassion and understanding and probably accurate insights of your feelings that could be of help to your pshychologist.
To give a gross example of delineation from each type, let’s accept a possible future incident “client’s beloved dog dies in a hideous car accident”. Let’s assume that both our astrologers are very good and see the incident in the chart.
The 1st type will say something like “your dog will die next month and it will be a violent death but you will overcome it”.
The 2nd type will say something like “next month you will experience intense emotions, even shock but you will overcome it”.
It doesn’t matter which prediction is the better one – we can not dismiss either as objectively bad; only subjectively. One judges that by one’s personal preconceptions. For me, who are into traditional, factual, event, “objective” astrology, to tell me how I will feel without telling me why I will experience those feelings, is blurring the picture and hiding ; it is unethical. My feelings will not create that particular event, it is the event that will determine my feelings. In short, give me the CAUSE, not the psychology please.
For someone else, the vivid cold event prediction of the 1st type, can be a most unwelcome interpretation of no use except creating unwanted and detrimenting panic.
Ideally an astrologer should mix discretion with Art and is hard to find a clear demonstration of the aforementioned 2 types; it is usually a mix. In every astrologer though, you will notice a certain disposition in the kind of readings they prefer doing and how they address them. In the modern times, you will find far more astrologers of the second kind, their mix being 30% facts- 70% emotion analysis. Kindness and understanding with all the truth and all the facts is an ideal conception – it is too tough to find the golden middle ground. Some areas are too hot to go into, death being one of those areas yet, some clients want to learn how and when they die while most hate even the mention of death.
No matter how typically good the astrologer is, what matters in the end, is how the client feels about their readings. What the client expects and wants is what sets the kind of astrologer they should get. They should find the astrologer that complies to what deep inside you are after. The judge of a reading is the client. Let’s see how two imaginary clients approach the readings.
Mary says: I got a reading from an astrologer of the 2nd type, I left the counseling with contempt. I didn’t need a self-appointed shrink, I would have gone to a real shrink if I wanted that. I wanted facts, I wanted to know about what happens in the future and all I got was generalizing about how I feel and the emotional paterns in my chart. Who cares about that – jee are there are people who are so dumb they can’t understand themselves? And what makes her think I am one of those? How insulting. What a waste of my time and money!
John says: I went to the 1st type and she was cruel and annoying. She even told me which of my parens dies first! I didn’t want that! It scared me, I just wanted to know why I feel so terrible since last year, why I am so sensitive and depressed and how to overcome this. Who cares if I buy a car next year – I want to know my true self. I will never go back, she tried to sound compassionate but she didn’t really care how I felt, was more eager to show off her expertise than to care for her customer!
If Mary and John switch astrologers, they will both get the counseling they want. They both will be happy with their astrologer. Before you reject astrology, try to get a reading from an astrologer that suits your needs and personality better.
If at the end, you do not find someone to satisfy you, then it may be time perhaps, to start learning astrology and find your own answers, the way you want them.
© 2010 All rights reserved – Με επιφύλαξη παντός νόμιμου δικαιώματος