| Untwisting the Zodiac Inside Astrology | by Bill Herbst In my world, astrology comes in two versions, two distinct and very separate universes. One astrology is the technical system I use, both in my own life and in sessions with clients. The other is the "popular" astrology that exists in the minds of much of the general public. These two versions are so utterly different that the chasm between them often feels impossible to bridge. In fact, the astrology of one bears almost no resemblance to the astrology of the other. Popular astrology is based entirely on the 12 signs of the zodiac. It goes no further than that. In technical astrology, however, the zodiac is only one of five major levels -- planets, signs, houses, aspects, and moving cycles. All five levels interact in extraordinarily complicated, but beautiful and subtle ways. What much of the public doesn't know is that zodiacal signs are the LEAST important of the five. Take Sun signs, for example. I hardly think about Sun signs at all. Ever. And I don't categorize people as zodiacal signs, either (as in the classic opening gambit of conversation between two people in a singles bar: "I'm a Leo, what are you?"). Quite simply, I don't consider human beings as sections of the zodiac. For instance, I don't ever participate in the "Guess My Sign" game. Despite the overriding importance in astrology of the Sun's position at a person's birth, its zodiacal sign does NOT stand out as the most important factor-combination in the birth chart. The sign placements of the Ascendant, Moon and Saturn are of nearly equal significance. But even that admission overstates the importance of signs in general. Rather than representing personal identities, sign positions -- including the Sun's -- are like the subtle colors in an impressionist painting or the spices that give a dish its aroma and flavors. They are not, however, the subject of the painting or the main ingredients of the meal. For millions of people, however, Sun signs ARE astrology. And why not? This is all the public sees in the marketplace, those little books at grocery store checkouts ("The Year Ahead for Leo," or "Love Signs for Gemini," etc.) or the Sun sign columns in daily newspapers and monthly magazines. By the way, I have nothing against reading Sun sign columns for entertainment or to provide an intuitive spark (akin to fortune cookies at Chinese restaurants). If that floats your boat, by all means go ahead. My gripe is simply this: No sane person can put much stock in the idea that "Tuesday is a good day for romance" or "Friday is ideal for closing that big business deal" for all 25 million people in this country who were born with the Sun in a certain sign. Such pronouncements are just bogus. In similar fashion, the personality profiles of Sun sign types are pushed way too far. To suggest that "Scorpios" are uniformly jealous in love or that "Pisceans" are all wishy-washy in decision-making is not accurate. A marketing device The general public and even some astrologers are unaware that Sun signs were literally INVENTED in the 1920s as a crude mass-marketing scheme, a way of capturing the interest of regular folks who knew nothing about astrology as a serious discipline. The ersatz psychology of "character traits" was gradually expanded into extensive "personality profiles" for each of the twelve signs. Although tying zodiacal types to personality was an absurdly false oversimplification, that artifice succeeded beyond the wildest dreams of the few astrologers who profited economically. Beginning with articles on astrological birth signs in the burgeoning industry of Hollywood fan magazines and soon expanding into daily Sun sign forecasts in newspapers, the business of astrology-as-entertainment was born. Ever since, certain astrologers eager for celebrity have felt no compunction at all about pandering to the public appetite for "fast food." In other words, Sun signs have precious little to do with astrology and a great deal to do with money and marketing. Please understand: It's not that I'm a snooty elitist about astrology (although no doubt some people see me in that mold). As I wrote above, I don't object to the use of astrology for fun or entertainment. I do, however, object to the notion that humanity can be divided into 12 "types" of people. The very idea of describing individuals according to one of 12 signs of the zodiac is silly and crass. And yet, these bogus generalizations are part of what we humans do. For better or worse, we human beings long for simple and straightforward truths to relieve the stress of the complex, contradictory and confusing world in which we live. One of the main reasons that popular astrology is so, well, POPULAR, is because it offers the illusion of easy answers. Unfortunately, those answers are almost always wrong. Archetypes vs. identities Collectively, we have trouble distinguishing the critical differences between mythic archetypes (which do not exist at the human realm, but more as "gods" or characters in a dream) from personal identities (which are very human). Your name is a natural identity, but your Sun sign is an archetype. The former belongs to you; the latter does not. That distinction may seem picky, but it's relevant. Confusing identities with archetypes keeps us undifferentiated -- in the womb, so to speak -- and holds us back from the spiritual maturity of authentic individuation. Early on in the spiritual journey, the archetype of our Sun sign empowers us, helping us understand our natural programming. If we cling to that zodiacal sign as a personal identity, however, we pay a grievous price later on in the failure to reconcile the simplicity and complexity of who we truly are. Now, I don't mean to be overly heavy-handed about this. The fact is that people will continue to refer to themselves as zodiacal signs. Shoot, I even catch myself doing it on rare occasions. It's a very seductive shorthand. But that doesn't mean that such labeling is accurate or an effective way of communicating. Finally, human beings are NOT phases of the zodiac. So just file away that small insight in a nook or cranny at the back of your consciousness, and the next time someone says to you, "My new boyfriend is a Scorpio," quietly remind yourself that really, in all truth, he's not. He's a person, not a sign. Bill Herbst is a Minneapolis astrologer who has done more than 10,000 sessions with clients over three decades in private practice. He is associate editor for the well-known journal The Mountain Astrologer, as well as a frequent contributor to that magazine. Go to Bill's website at www.billherbst.com for further information about his work. Copyright © 2004 by Bill Herbst. All rights reserved. |
||
|
March 2004 |
|
