from Cosmic Confidential. Access to the 2010 annual edition of Planet Waves is free to all readers through Monday night at midnight, California time. For access please go to this link. –efc
Dear Friend and Reader:
Let’s start with a reminder: astrology is a form of divination. It is not a science and it is an odd sort of art; it’s the kind of art we expect life to imitate. As a writer of fiction and nonfiction, I assure you that it finds its home somewhere in between the two. I am using the charts — many of which are published here — as the outline of a story. This is the interpretive part. We all agree that the chart is there. Astrologers don’t all agree what belongs in a chart; I use a lot of current discoveries. The story charts tell is up to the storyteller.
That would be me in this case, but then you respond to that, and tell yourself another story based on what I offer. I have done my best to leave my margin notes in the articles; that is, to tell you what aspect I’m interpreting. My opinion is designed to cast the issues in a way that is helpful. I try to state problems in a way that lends itself to solutions. But with astrology, we are all making up stories.
Beware you’re doing this. Pay attention to the narratives you tell yourself about your astrology, and what they are based on. In my method of reading charts and telling stories, I take the role of creative problem-solver and inventor. Knowing something about what people go through, and how people in my society (which I consider to include the North America, the U.K. and Western Europe, all places I have lived) think, I design ideas that get us around the usual psychological pitfalls, and offer alternative ways to view our lives.
When I predict, I try to be archetypally predictive, explaining the basic conditions and presenting options. I don’t say, “You will get a great new job,” but rather, “This is a good time to make some changes in the work that you do, and move toward what you want. This is a good time to rethink your notion of what a career is.”
This is going to be an unusual year; it’s already shaping up as one. The astrology stands out in part because we are in the midst of so many slow-moving planets changing signs around the same time. Within a two-year span between 2009 and 2011, Jupiter, Saturn, Chiron, Uranus, Neptune and Pluto will all be making sign changes. That is quite a cluster.
For those of you who follow transits a bit, this presents a completely different reality than the long-familiar Uranus in Pisces, Neptune in Aquarius, Pluto in Sagittarius setup. These are all nervous placements. Two of them are in mutable signs and one is in Aquarius, where the energy can stay nervous and seem to go nowhere fast, forever. Uranus is heading for Aries and Pluto is well into Capricorn, and these transits have turned the energy up high. The Uranus-Pluto square of 2012-2015 is already crackling, and we will have our first full taste in early June when Jupiter and Uranus form a brief conjunction on the Aries Point.
Writing the horoscopes this year was a daunting task. It’s never really easy; yet I don’t ever remember it being more challenging (I am sure this was exaggerated by Mercury retrograde during much of the work). I feel like I had to relearn astrology from the beginning. There are so many new factors to consider, in the midst of which we have Mars retrograde in Leo. In many ways I have depended on the movement of Mars more than the other transits, because I think that it gets to the heart of the matter, which is determining what we want.
I am using this as an alternative concept to ‘intentions’, which is a concept so ambiguous and wrought with controversy that I have trouble explaining it. I am suggesting we use the word desire, which is simple enough for a kid to understand, and quite useful for an adult to understand. If we pause to ask ourselves what we want, we would be a lot better off. You could not have a better symbol of this than Mars retrograde in Leo. This aspect falls in a different house for each of the signs, and therefore it tells a different story.
The Mars event coincides with a conjunction soon to take place in the first degree of Aries, which rings with the same theme: the focusing of desire, and in the case of the Aries Point and Uranus, the desire of a very large group of some kind. Large, like a population.
While I was working out the Leo interpretation, I recognized this subject from the Abraham-Hicks material, which I love but have long resisted because it seems to defy logic. Or rather, it defies one kind of logic (that of a limited world where we believe nearly everything is impossible) and introduces another: metaphysics based on desire. Astrology concurs that Mars and Aries are the keys that fire up the initiative of our cosmos, at least on this level.
For each of the signs, I have done my best to factor in or directly interpret Mars retrograde in Leo, Pluto in Capricorn, the Chiron-Neptune conjunction in Aquarius, and the Jupiter-Uranus conjunction in Aries. When possible, I have tried to synthesize these transits into a unique interpretation for the point of view for each sign.
In addition to the main interpretation, each sign includes three additional pages: excerpts from the prior three annual editions; samples of interviews conducted with readers from the given sign; and a page of resources: in most cases, the chart for the Sun entering that sign, the short version of the annual, and any out-takes I had left over after writing the interpretation.
At the bottom of each page is a comment area where you are welcome to leave your questions, comments and requests for clarification, which I will do my best to answer. I am curious to see how these interpretations work for you. Please let me know.
The Abraham Hicks’ paradigm kind of disturbs me too. Not only does it defy logic but it contains within it the very American worn out message (hidden, of course) that when we don’t get what we desire, we haven’t been “clear” enough or “positive” enough or “open” enough to that reality. This “blame the victim” bullshit drives me crazy because it completely (and conveniently) forgets several factors: your karmic lessons, other people’s karmic lessons, and the fact that sometimes denied desire causes us to grow far better than fulfilled desire. It is imbalanced to say that the universe wants to grant us every desire; even the Hopi Elders would tell you that. So while the Abraham-Hicks paradigm is useful, it can be very damaging as well.
I like to think of it this way, if I desire something (or someone) and my intentions (or desire) are clear and I have allowed myself to have that desire…if it is not forthcoming I remind myself that perhaps it is not in my karmic lesson to have it. It is not because I don’t deserve it or because I wasn’t open enough. Maybe being without it teaches me patience, compassion, or delayed gratification (this last is one of the things that separates children from adults or should). Maybe not having it is what I am supposed to deal with in my process of living and growing. It is all a process (thanks, Rachell for that) and everyone “does their process” in ways they need to.
So having desire that is clear and allowing ourselves to own it and have it doesn’t mean we will or even should get it. It means we are being honest about what we want and then living with that want openly instead of pretending we don’t really want it or that we don’t deserve it.
A perfect example of this paradox is the way women have been taught to suppress their sexual drives and desires. We have lust like men but we think we have to hide it and “let” the man discover it or uncover it for us. By doing this, we lie to ourselves and give away our power. If we admit to ourselves that we experience pure lust, and that sometimes we just want to fulfill that desire, we can operate from an honest position, having the power to ask for and get that desire met. We may not get it met all the time but when we do, we can be responsible enough to know that we chose that and we cannot blame anyone else (the men especially) for our wanting.
When we are honest about our sexual desires, we stop transferring these onto men and we stop villifying men for their desires. I have seen that men respond to that kind of honesty in women by having a lot less rage and violence, less controlling, less jealousy.
So Abraham-Hicks is partly right; we do need to admit to our desires and wants and actively be open to having them and be willing to love ourselves for wanting them but I would add that we need to be mindful of the fact that the universe may not always grant these; it is not your fault, it is not because you are undeserving, maybe it is about what is good for you at this time in your life process.