Monday, April 3, 2006 | Into the Season
Dear Diary,
It's been a really weird series of days since the Mercury station and the solar eclipse. What a combination. These kinds of events really 'stir the pot' and keep a definite edge of not taking too much for granted. Does anyone else have the feeling they just walked through a car wash? Now is a good time to reckon what is different in your life now, as compared to about one or two months ago.
The 3/29 Cluster seems to have come and gone without a lot of excitement in the world. However, sometimes it takes weeks or months for eclipses to show their true nature, particularly where events 'in the world' are concerned. The cluster included Pluto stationing retrograde on the Galactic Core; the progressed Moon in the Cheney/Bush inaugural chart reaching opposition to Pluto in that chart; and the total solar eclipse, along with much other astrology surrounding it.
We would do well to ask ourselves what would constitute news. After the past five years, it seems like nothing would even count. And has it really been five years? Yes it has, loosely calculated: five years of nonstop, well, pick your word.
Amidst all the discussion of the role that people, that is, individuals who hold no official positions of power, will play, I can discern two possibilities. One is a kind of mass uprising that shakes those on the top of the pyramid to wake up. But given how insulated it is up there, and given the tendency of human beings to get lost in the sauce of their own existence, I'm glad that's just one of two possibilities that I see at the moment.
The other is that a small number of aware people will carry something into the future that might not otherwise get there. That something might be an idea, it might be information and experience, it might be their own genetic material, it may be a feeling, it may be their children, and it might be something that they create and leave behind that others take forward.
Writing this, I recognize that I have been thinking in a purely linear way: on the assumption that there will be some factor that intervenes in the historical process, in a visible sequence of events. Yet it's rarely that way. I recognize that it often looks that way at the end of a sequence of events -- something "happens." But we rarely consider how it happened, or how long ago the process was begun.
e
|
|