Greek Orthodox Easter. Sitting around the table enjoying lamb, spanikopita, roasted root vegetables, Greek salad, and wine. Merriment and pleasure, when D - sitting to my left - turns to me with the utmost seriousness and asks

"How do you interpret retrogrades?"

OK, this is not a trivial question from an uninformed or inexperienced novice. This is a serious question from a serious source and I know there is serious thought lurking in the backstage of that question. Fortunately, I have a ready answer:

"I've pretty much abandoned all the negative connotations normally associated with retrogrades."

"Why?"

"They don't seem to be true. Also consider that the Vedics see Retrogrades as strong rather than weak. Someone is wrong, and I don't know that it's the Vedics."

It's a good question. One worth thinking more carefully about. I see the Vedic point of view on this. A planet retrograde is moving more as if it were waving its arms about drawing attention to itself. That focus suggests the effect of the planet is stronger than when it's speeding along with the rest of the herd. Yet looking back to the West, you can't dismiss the effects of Mercury retrograde. We paint those effects in a negative light but are they really negative or is that a cultural bias?

Much of what we know - or think we know - is interpreted with some sort of bias - either personal, cultural, or both. Modern astrology is rife with this sort of thing and there is a tendency to believe that the Medieval and Hellenistic astrologers were somehow immune from this - when it's very evident that they were not.

The basis of this column/blog/rant is to explore just such questions. Why do we believe what we believe about astrology? Why do we assume retrogrades are bad? Why do we assume that planets in their rulerships function like good citizens while it is a personal tragedy to have those planets in their fall or detriment? Is the 8th house really about death? The 12th house really about sacrifice and imprisonment?

We all learn astrology in the same two basic ways: on our own or from a teacher. That teacher, in turn, learned in one of the same two ways. Most of us don't question what we've learned. We apply what fits and what doesn't fit sort of gets humma-humma'd or explained away in some lame fashion. it doesn't occur to think that maybe this thing is wrong  or - more likely - more complicated than we'd like it to be.

I believe in astrology as a system and as a system, it needs to make sense in an organic way - without sidetracks and except for's to make it fit someone's cherished pet of an idea. That doesn't exempt me from having my own cherished pet ideas but they all should be examined and discussed - and if we've been wrong as hell about something for the past 20 years, then we've just been wrong.

My wife once did three separate readings for the same man using three different times (believing each time that it was the correct birthtime). Each time, she was able to make the reading make sense. Was she bending things to match what she knew about the client or is astrology that flexible? And does that matter?