Jonathan Cainer once said in an interview that writing horoscope columns in a newspaper was like playing a little toy piano, compared to the real thing. When I read that, I wrote to him and said, well, it seems to me more like you're playing excellent short sonatas on the same instrument everyone else uses.

Saying things in 100 words (the usual length of a weekly or daily Sun sign horoscope entry, at least in my neighborhood) is good discipline. Astrologers who take issue with newspaper astrology can go write a good long book and see who reads it. However, one difference between the usual horoscopes I write and what you've got here is the length. The other is that when I write in short format, it's an exercise in first thought, best thought. These are little essays, and the ideas have developed, and are still developing. When in doubt, I've used the 'first=best' guideline.

Analogies between music and astrology work well. The dots of music on the sheet and the glyphs on the astrological chart are both subject to interpretation, but of the two, the chart gets a lot more latitude. It also works out that astrology reaches deeper into our psychology, since we usually come to astrology seeking reassurance or inquiring about a specific personal issue. If a 'general' reading (such as in the New York Post) gets right to the theme, it's pleasantly shocking, confirming and can potentially have a lot of impact.

However -- reading and interpreting charts, horoscope column style, is speculative, intuitive, and potentially manipulative. There is a lot of room for projection; it may all be projection. Any honest writer (versed in relatively modern psychological advances) will tell you that. The technicalities get you so far; then you have to take a good guess and let it go. The outcome is usually a matter of the writer's intent as much as her skill, and ultimately, where the reader and writer of a horoscope meet is in the dimension of intention: of spreading good vibes and making life a little better.

The chart can, I feel, be used as a means of seeing that ever-necessary other way of looking at things. There are many possible interpretations for any aspect or chart. This much is obvious. What you get is what the astrologer sees, and that's subjective: it's based on values as much as anything else. Under the best circumstances, we use the chart to see fair opportunities and to solve problems before they happen. A good horoscope columnist presents the most compassionate, balanced and insightful viewpoint on the aspects he or she sees, and offers it as a proposal.

Astrology depicts no problem without a solution. So if some astrologer just dumps an issue on you, or promises you a lousy day, they're not earning their salt.

In the horoscopes below, I've taken the personal growth approach, calling the themes as best I see them. Please, take it or leave it. In the end, astrology is some hybrid of philosophy and poetry, not science. As you're reading, fish around for your own interpretation (you will, I know). Astrology is allowed to be water under the bridge, and it's allowed to be evocative rather than literal. Thank God for miracles.

I've worked as well as possible both to include technical detail with these writeups, and to flesh out the metaphors from the astrology. I'll be adding more as time goes on, so please check back. I'll also be updating the notes below the charts in the chart section.

As for the audio portion, that's me doing contemperaneous rambling on the charts, usually without any notes. The recordings were my first attempt to put ideas to the charts; the articles and sign writeups came later.

With that, I say onward, and thanks for playing.