my_starz | Recent Entries

Even before I started looking at astrology seriously, I had the idea in my head that if you looked back at previous predictions and found them to have come true, there was potentially more validity to future predictions within that system. It seemed to me that if you were actively expecting something to happen, you'd find a way to put a spin on things that would make it come true in one way or another. Somehow, it seemed to be more objective to look back and see if something had actually happened, while anticipation seemed subjective and prone to the creation of self-fulfilling prophecies. This was one of the tests I used on daily horoscopes: if I read them the day after the fact, I felt I was less prone to subject the reading to spin, and would thus have a better sense of their accuracy. For what it's worth, none ever passed the test.

As my study of astrology became more focused, I began to learn about more than just casting natal charts. One of the next techniques I discovered was called "progressions": this is the principal form of predictive astrology, in which one essentially re-casts a natal chart, advancing the date one day for each year one wishes to cover. So if one wanted to have a glimpse at the year in store for a 20-year-old, cast a chart for the birth date plus twenty days, and the relationships on the new chart would be indicative of what was in store. My astrology bookshelf, by this point, had expanded considerably, and included at least half-a-dozen ephemerides: collections of charts and tables providing a daily position of all of the luminaries, each containing ten years worth of such data.

I was travelling a fair amount during this period of my life, and had acquired the habit of carrying with me several of these collections, covering the most likely birth-years of folks I was likely to encounter. This gave me the opportunity to pick up a bit of quick cash from time to time, by doing very quick charts for the curious with money to burn. One such occasion stands out in my experience, even without the perk of any cash having changed hands, and it involved using the techniques of astrological progressions to, in effect, predict the past.

I was visiting with an out-of-state community of members of a particular Faith, which at the time I happened to share. To put what I'm about to describe in a proper context, I need to mention that becoming a member of this Faith is always an act of conscious will and deliberate choice: whether one converts from some other path, or is raised within a family already practicing, one has to formally enroll to become a member. That enrollment process is known as "declaration", and for most followers of this Faith, it is a significant and memorable event. On this particular night, there was a fairly small group gathered: I can't remember exactly how many, but at least 8 or 9, certainly no more than a dozen folks. Of these, I knew two or three of them fairly well; the rest I had just met.

As is often the case with newly-acquainted members of such communities, we'd been sharing "declaration stories": how it was we'd come into this system of beliefs from our varied original backgrounds and upbringings. And then somehow the conversation turned to astrology. I suddenly got an idea into my head, and pitched it to the group: "Tell me your birth date and I'll see if I can tell you when you declared. Here's my premise: the planet Neptune is the ruler of all things spiritual; I'll track its movements day-by-day from your birth date, and look for a strong aspect (angular relationship with some other luminary) to occur. Counting each day as a year, the number of days until such aspect should be a year in which some significant spiritual experience occurred, and I'll bet it's your declaration."

Of everyone gathered there that night, I nailed all but one of their declaration years on the first try. For the one that I missed, the first aspect to Neptune marked the year she discovered the existence of the Faith, but she hadn't formally enrolled 'til years later - at the second favorable aspect to Neptune in her progressed charts. We were all amazed -- stunned might actually be a better word for the collective reaction. There was no possible way to misinterpret what I'd done; nothing at all vague or generalized that might apply to almost anybody under some circumstances. Each prediction was for a specific individual, and clocked out against a significant event in their own individual lives. And frankly, in some ways it scared the heck out of me.

Natal charts, which provide personality outlines, rarely contain anything truly unknown. An observant person, or any mental health professional, can make reasonable assessments of someone's personality just by spending time with them; an astrological chart just shortcuts the processing time. But this was different -- if the techniques could predict the past so effectively, there was no longer any room for doubt that they could, to some extent, predict the future. And I really didn't think that the future was something I wanted to have written out for me before the fact.

To this day, I've never done another progression, and I'm still not sure I ever will.

Please feel free to discuss this in the comments -- as it's something I'm still sorting through decades after the fact, I'd appreciate your insights! Thanks, and see you again soon.

Current Mood: Still shook up

Grant Lewi's Heaven Knows What remained my primary sourcebook for quite a few years. I continued to purchase occasional astrology books from The Universe Book Club, trying to expand my knowledge of the field, but most of what I acquired was far too advanced for me. What I needed, and never found, was a systematic, step-by-step approach to learning astrology from the ground up; instead, I kept trying to fill in what I knew to be gaps in my budding practice, and overshooting my reach in the process. For example, I knew that I knew nothing about the houses, so when Dane Rudhyar's The Astrological Houses: The Spectrum of Individual Experience was offered as the monthly book club selection, I pounced on it -- only to discover on its arrival that it was all abstract and theoretical, without a word on how to calculate house placements.

There was one book from this period, though, that had quite an impact on me at the time, but again without containing anything on the how-to of chart casting or interpretation: Jess Stearn's A Time for Astrology. Mr. Stearn was a best-selling author at the time, having written a very successful book on the life of Edgar Cayce, a then highly-publicized psychic; this latest book was set out to examine the possible validity of Astrology. Actually, according to the author, he'd intended to debunk astrology as fraudulent and misleading, but over the course of his researching the book became persuaded of its legitimacy. Veering from its originally intended course, the book became instead a chronicle of discovery, relating incident after incident that brought the author from skepticism to acceptance.

After several decades, and with over a dozen moves spanning 3 states behind me, it's been a long time since I last saw that book; somewhere along the line we went our separate ways. But as with Heaven Knows What before it, one brief section has remained quite fresh in my memory though the intervening years. In an early attempt to dismiss a particular astrologer as a fraud, Mr. Stearn provided this individual with the birthplace and time of someone he knew to be already deceased, and asked for a quick assessment of what the oncoming year would look like for this person (or persons: some part of my memory insists the data was for a pair of identical twins). After working with the data for a short while, the astrologer replied to the effect of "This is a waste of my time; this person died during childhood, in some manner associated with water." And indeed, according to Mr. Stearn, the natal data was for someone who had drowned before reaching their teens.

I'm not sure I would find the book having as much of an impact on me today as it did all those years ago; the author has been routinely dismissed as being over-accepting, and not displaying a sense of impartiality or critical thinking in many of his works. But at the time, given my personal astonishment at the accuracy of my early charts (such as they were), having a well-known author publish an entire book which supported my new belief was all the validation I needed to carry on -- it's in print now, so it must be true! Fortunately, I wasn't that naive about every book I read at the time: while Chariots of the Gods raised some interesting questions, each of its sequels wandered further and further from the realm of the rational, and I was able to dismiss Invisible Residents: The Reality of Underwater UFOs as balderdash and hogwash from the get-go!

That's all for today, folks! Next time around, I'll describe my first (and pretty much only) steps into the world of predictive astrology.

Current Mood: contemplative

"Astrology is valid for the same reason multiplication tables are valid: it works." -- Grant Lewi

I don't remember exactly why I started looking into astrology, but I clearly remember how I did it. I was a member of The Science Fiction Book Club, and a flyer included in one of their mailings was a solicitation to join something called The Universe Book Club. Same deal as any other book/record (or CD)/movie club that's ever existed -- get several items for an insanely low price when you join, on the condition that you buy several more within a certain time frame at 'regular price'. But this one had a unique range of offerings: books on the supernatural, metaphysical, and what would generically be referred to as "the occult". This included astrology.

My father was a fairly talented amateur stage magician, and I'd picked up that hobby from him. As an adjunct to that practice, I became interested in some of the fields the tricksters were able to imitate -- psychic abilities, hypnosis, and even "real magick". So I selected my several books, and joined The Universe Book Club -- and for reasons I really can't recall, one of the titles I got in that initial shipment was Heaven Knows What by Grant Lewi.

As far as 'how-to' astrology books are concerned (although I didn't realize this until years later), Heaven Knows What is extremely simple to use, and rather limited in scope. It starts off with the 144 possible combinations of Sun and Moon placement, and from there deals only with the planetary aspects -- the angular relationships of the luminaries I mentioned in an earlier post. But don't misunderstand me when I refer to it as limited -- in spite of all that's not included (signs for the planets, ascendants, houses), the results produced within those limits amazed me!

I used myself as the subject of the first chart I cast, and was astonished as to how closely the text matched up my own understanding of my personality. Phrases like "sticks to their guns, even when out of ammo" suited me to a "T" - so much so that I can recall that bit even now, decades after the book left my hands. Doing charts for my siblings produced similar on-target results -- there was *far* more accuracy here than in anything any of us had seen in the sun-sign summaries, which had been the limit of our previous exposure to astrology.

I was hooked. Lewi's other major title, Astrology for the Millions was quickly added to my collection, but that one wasn't able to hold my interests anywhere near as well as the first -- of course, your mileage may vary. If I recall correctly, the latter book was much more technical in nature, and at that time, I was spoiled by the 'easy-to-use' aspects of the first. But the door had opened, and I had set off along a path I'm still following (with varying degrees of diligence) to this day.

I'm curious: what was your first step into serious astrology? A book, a teacher, having a chart cast? Please share that experience in the comments.

More another time.

Current Mood: reminiscent

...to present this special announcement.

30 ivory fragments found in a Croatian cave have been assembled into what may be the oldest known astrological artifact. Read the article here:

http://news.discovery.com/history/astrology-board-found-120117.html

Thanks to

ysabetwordsmith for the link.

We now resume our regularly scheduled blogging.

Current Mood: intrigued

This will be the final 'background' piece on the components of a detailed natal chart. Unlike the earlier posts, I'm not even going to try and provide you with the number of variations this step will add to the mix -- in all honesty, I'm not even sure I know *how* to calculate the possible combinations and permutations that this essay will introduce!

And for the grammarians among you, that is the correct preposition in the title: this is not "Aspects of Astrology", but indeed a presentation on what are known as planetary aspects in the study of astrology. 'Planetary aspects' is a term that covers the angular relationships between the luminaries (sun, moon, and planets) in a chart; the most relevant are named as follows:

Conjunctions - 0 degrees separation
Sextiles - 60 degrees separation
Squares - 90 degrees separation
Trines - 120 degrees separation
Oppositions - 180 degrees separation

Of these aspects, conjunctions, trines, and sextiles are most often complementary; squares and oppostions usually tend to represent difficulties or challenges -- although that can vary dramatically in the case of some specific parings. Also note that most astrologers will allow some variance in defining the aspects, typically ranging from +/- 5 to +/- 10 degrees, identifying these variances as "orbits": thus, with a 5 degree orbit, any angle between 85 and 95 degrees would be interpreted as a square; with a 10 degree orbit, 110 - 130 degrees would constitute a trine.

Just in case it isn't obvious, not every placement within a chart will necessarily form a significant aspect. It is also possible for aspects to stack -- a 3-way or more-way conjunction, or 2 (or more) conjunct bodies forming meaningful aspects with (possibly several) others. The more aspects present in a chart, the more detail will be available for interpretation, any and all of which will help fine-tune a reading beyond the scope of sun sign, planetary placement, and the astrological houses, each of which will be present to the same degree in every chart.

There are, of course, many more details to chart construction and interpretation than I have presented in these short essays: I haven't touched on the concept of planetary rulers, and barely alluded to degree positions of the luminaries within the signs, as examples. But I hope I've presented enough to give you a sense of the amazing detail a natal chart contains, and how that detail presents something far more unique than the simple "He's a Capricorn, she's a Cancer" version of astrology that most folks are familiar with.

When I come back again, I'll be starting a set on personal experiences -- what course my investigations of astrology took, and what experiences I had that led me to an acceptance of astrology as something far more meaningful and accurate than any 'Daily Horoscope' would have ever caused me to suspect.

BTW: it occurs to me to mention that some writers on this topic use the term "luminaries" to mean only the sun and moon, distinguishing those from the planets. I prefer, and will continue to use the word to mean all celestial bodies that have relevant placement within the framework of the zodiac on a natal chart.

See you again soon; keep those comments coming!

Current Mood: busy

At the end of my last post, I pointed out that there were 61,917,364,224 (nearly 62 billion, or for the mathematically inclined, 12 to the 10th power) possible ways for the sun, moon, and major planets (called luminaries in astrology) to be distributed throughout the dozen zodiac signs in creating natal charts. Today, I'm going to kick that up by another power of 12 (12 to the 11th power: 12*12*12*12*12*12*12*12*12*12*12), causing the total number of possible charts to increase to 743,008,370,688. That's over 743 billion unique arrangements -- far more than enough to demonstrate that each person who ever lived, or will live, is reflected in the Universe by a pattern of stars and luminaries completely unique to their individual nature.

While it takes an entire year for the Earth's revolution around the sun to cause each of the twelve signs of the zodiac to 'frame' the sun, creating what we know as the sun signs, the rotation of the Earth on its own axis only takes 24 hours, so a different zodiac sign (whether actually visible at that time of day or not) appears on the eastern horizon every two hours. The zodiac sign that is on that horizon at the time and place of your birth is called your rising sign, or ascendant. This is a key factor in a natal chart, for multiple reasons.

The more obvious characteristic of the rising sign is that it is, in effect, the doorway to our personality: its traits are the ones others most readily see in us, often more clearly than we are able to see them ourselves. Along with our sun sign, and to a lesser (and more hidden) extent the position of the moon, the rising sign establishes the foundation of our character.

Less obvious to those around us, but even more crucial to astrologers in interpreting a natal chart, the rising sign sets the starting point from which the twelve astrological houses are calculated, those houses being:

personality

material values

communication

origins

pleasure and creativity

daily routine

intimate relationships

material losses

spirituality/philosophy

career

friends and acquaintances

'beyond the personal'

Once again, we have a field of twelve parts through which the luminaries are distributed, adding variety and divergence far beyond that given by their static placement within the zodiac alone.

In the words of all-too-many late-night infomercials -- but there's more! There's still yet another entire set of variables that can be read from someone's natal chart, and I'll go into those in my next post. Thanks for coming along for the ride!

Current Mood: playful

For all of the things we humans have in common, no two of us are ever exactly alike. From the microscopic subtleties of our DNA, on through our fingerprints, and extending past the merely physical into and beyond personality and beliefs, we are each a one-of-a-kind facet of creation. The combination of nature and nurture produces individuals, not clones, and anything that attempts to define or describe us has to take that individuality into account if it's going to stand a chance of being an accurate picture.

No two of us are born at exactly the same place, exactly the same time -- even identical twins are separated by an interval ranging from mere moments to possibly hours. And in relationship to the rest of the Universe, we are in constant motion: our earth both rotating on its axis & revolving in orbit around the sun, and our entire solar system spinning within the galaxy. And the astrologically relevant portions of these systems are in constant motion related to us, as well: each planet changes position in our skies as it moves in its own endless cycle of revolution.

Given this ever-changing kaleidoscope of planets and stars, a little bit of thought should make it clear that at the time of our birth, the relative positions of our birthplace and time to the stars and planets is utterly unique: never before, and never again, will the Universe be arranged in quite that manner. This singular arrangement, all our own and never anyone else's, is what makes up an astrological natal chart.

The twelve signs of the zodiac comprise a frame, or background, against which we track the movement of the planets, as well as the shifting positions of the sun and the moon. Most folks are familiar with where the sun falls in their chart -- this is the 'sun sign', the best known portion of the practice of astrology. If that's all that mattered, astrology would, unfortunately, be nothing more than that which I've dismissed in an earlier post: a division of humanity into 12 sets of identical clones. But with the addition of each new celestial body to one's chart, that number is multiplied by twelve: combine the sun's position with that of the moon, and we're up to 144 variations; factor in Mars, and it grows to 1,748; Venus increases that to 20,736; do that six more times and the number becomes (pardon the pun) astronomical: 61,917,364,224 (that's just short of 62 billion)!

And while that may seem like a lot of unique astrological snapshots, there is far more variation in natal charts than just a static awareness of which sign each planet appears in: it takes time for a celestial body to move across the sky's framework from one sign into another, and just *where* within each sign a planet is placed has an impact on a person's chart, as well. But that's *still* not all that goes into making each of our natal charts uniquely our own!

But that is enough for today's entry, methinks. I'll be back soon to continue setting up the context for future discussions and history, by providing more details on the components of a well-constructed natal chart! Watch for it!

Current Mood: productive

...and quite frankly, I don't either -- if by "horoscope stuff" you're talking about those little snippets, based on your sun sign, that purport to tell you what kind of day you're going to have. We've all seen them on assorted websites, in newspapers (remember newspapers?), and at the checkout counters in supermarkets -- and there isn't a one of them that's worth the pixels or the ink that was used to display them, IMO.

The very thought that the entire human race is composed of only 12 sets of personality-clones, not even differentiated by reproductive equipment, is absurd on the face of it. Even allowing for the possibility that all folks born under a given sun sign may share certain basic characteristics, there is still no rational justification for expecting that all Virgos are going to meet a tall, dark stranger on Tuesday, or that Thursday is a great day for investing if you're a Capricorn (but not a good day if you're born under any other sign).

None of the above is meant to imply that astrology can't be a useful tool, or even that getting glimpses into what a specific individual's future may hold is beyond its scope. But predictive astrology is a very advanced practice, and far more is required than a quick answer to "What's your sign?" in order to provide meaningful results. All aspects of astrology - personality assessment, compatibility with others, foreseeing what may be in store - begin in the same place: a natal chart. I'll be back another time to talk about that cornerstone of astrological practice.

(PS: Feel free to post comments, even if you disagree with any of my opinions -- but please refrain from name-calling, blatant disrespect, or other generally disruptive behavior. The spark of truth arises from the clash of differing opinions, but let's remain civil, okay?)

Current Mood: calm

Welcome to My Starz! This will be a place where I will be posting various thoughts on astrology, and encouraging you to respond to those thoughts. The content here will be closely tied to a still-under-development website, on which will appear (among other things) natal charts and the interpretation thereof for an assortment of Famous Folks: politicians past and present, performers in various media, historical figures, and anyone else of interest for whom I can find the relevant data for chart construction.

Somewhere in the near future, these sites will also begin to host crowdfunding events which will make it possible for you to acquire your own, unique natal chart -- an astrological chart based on the time and place you were born, along with multiple pages explaining how the positions of the planets potentially affects the shape and style of your personality. Options will be offered for those who have time and effort to contribute as well as for those who have cash to spend, so that everyone can be included in the fun.

Come back soon, and often! I'll be starting things off with several short essays sharing my experiences with astrology, and the opinions I've formed of the practice based on those experiences. Your comments are encouraged and are quite welcome, but please keep in mind that your words, no matter how well thought-out and expressed, aren't likely to change my mind on some crucial issues -- let's agree from the start that our mileages may vary, and that nobody's words will outweigh someone else's first-hand experience (at least in most cases).

See you soon!