AUTHOR’S NOTE: The threat of a “bad” outcome card showing up in a reading is one of the most challenging scenarios facing professional tarot readers and their clients. Experienced diviners are normally able to take this unpleasant development in stride, but for the rest it generates an anxious moment of dread. In my own coaching work I’ve decided that from now on I’m going to treat all such dissonant cards as “motivators” and, with that in mind, as constructive opportunities to change course even though there may be more “stick” than “carrot” to the incentive.

I’ll never forget the time a sitter began our session with “Don’t tell me anything bad!” accompanied by a nervous giggle. She was clearly trying to make light of what was a pressing concern for her, but I didn’t flinch. I advised her that “bad” was relative and not necessarily prescriptive; its impact depended on her understanding of its more objective implications, which I would attempt to elucidate for her if it came to that (fortunately it didn’t).

While I don’t buy into the conventional wisdom that “there are no bad cards” (depending on the context of the question, there certainly can be less-auspicious ones), the appearance of a relative “stinker” as the concluding statement in a reading is seldom irredeemable. The rest of the cards feeding the outcome must be considered as input that can moderate the “last word” in the matter. For example, if the spread as a whole is blissfully positive but the final card is a bummer, the reader must determine why such a false note cropped up in an otherwise optimistic outlook. This is where an even-handed approach and a profound awareness of the multiple layers of meaning in every card can save the day!

I might draw parallels between the outlier and any reversed cards in the layout as evidence of something that may have been overlooked along the way. The same can be true for contributing cards that seem excessively positive for the circumstances, such as the Sun conveying an unrealistic sense of “affirmation overload” that creates an unreasonably hopeful perspective when all other indications are more sobering. In that regard, a daunting outcome card could be seen as a necessary corrective that offsets such “toxic positivism.” With this in mind, it is possible to arrive at an assessment of the conclusion that allows for adjustment of the querent’s response in line with the additional information.

Just as there are no entirely “bad” cards, there are no unquestionably “good” ones, and shades of gray may be the dominant theme in a reading. Every card has its virtues and vices, so it becomes a matter of weighing one against the other and settling on a rational verdict that gives each its due while still supporting a nominal “winner.” This permits a balanced reckoning of the pros-and-cons present in almost every reading of more than three cards. As I see it, there’s no reason to settle for a “hung jury” in any forecast, just as there is no justification for automatically expecting the best or worst out of it based on one data point. The diviner’s art is one of comparative analysis across the whole spread that yields a defensible judgment.