Following is an actual reply to a client, I offer it here so you will know what to expect when I do an analysis for you either at one of my live events, or via the mail. This sample was of a "signature only". I usually do an analysis using a signature accompanied with other writing, but I certainly do many "signatures only".
Thank you for presenting me this sample of graphology, and
to request my analysis. Although there are similarities, all writing is as
individual as fingerprints or snowflakes; no two are identical.
Before I state my comments about this signature, please
allow me to clarify a few things in an effort to convey my thoughts as clearly
as possible, and explain my process of thought in coming to my conclusions.
A person’s handwriting is a piece of art, and surely the
uniqueness of this sample is just that. One’s handwriting leaves for us a
movement “frozen in time”. Also, writing does not reveal either male or female;
at least for certain. I will make the assumption this is a male’s signature;
and I think you used the male pronoun in our phone conversation.
One’s signature is how one want’s to be “seen” by others;
this is not necessarily the actual “private” personality of the individual, but
the personality as how one wants to be perceived “in public”. When I analyze
signatures only without a sample of
other writing, I can only speak of the signature; more of course reveals more!
As I present my “descriptive adjectives” here, please
understand that all are “neutral” and are neither positive nor negative; they
just are. I might use the word
“aggressive” and you may think that this is a bad trait, but not necessarily so,
for this is very positive in a sales person or one who must lead others. If for
example, some piece of writing shows procrastination,
this could mean that this person places spending time with others (or some
other benevolent work) over getting their own work completed. So as I present
these words to you, please keep this in mind.
Now per the process in my thinking and how I come about my
presenting to you my analysis, I first look at the “whole” of the “picture” of
the sample, and then narrow things down, going into more depth. Basically, I
tell you first what I see first; what strikes me the most, and then go from
there, looking at spacing of letters, slant of the letter, etc. (When analyzing
a paragraph for example, I don’t actually “read” the content). 
No comments:
Post a Comment