On Monday I published a horoscope for Susan Boyle, which now it seems was incorrect. The chart I used, was given to a group of astrologers at an astrology workshop in Amsterdam last Sunday. Everyone present, without conferring, identified that voice with Venus in Taurus and the aspects to it. I find this truly fascinating. How can random birth data accurately describe a current phenomena? This has something to do with the true mystical, magical nature of astrology itself.
Putting the accuracy issue of birth data aside, there can be little doubt that the planetary symbolism in the Suan Boyle horoscope I used, perfectly matched the voice, the choice of songs, and the impact of the event on Susan Boyle’s life. As an astrologer, I can do no other than stand by my symbolic interpretation of that chart. The data itself however first published in the Sunday Times, seems to have been randomly plucked out of the air. This is the text sent to me by Jonathon Cainer’s press office:
*An incorrect birthdate for Susan was published in the Sunday Times at the weekend. We checked Susan’s birthdate with the press office at Britain’s Got Talent, who assured us that the birthdate is April 1, 1961. As a further double-check, we contacted the Register of Births in Bathgate, Scotland, where Susan’s birth was registered. They have confirmed that April 1, 1961 is correct. She was born at the local hospital in Bathgate. “
However, does this mean that the previous horoscope has no value in its own right? It certainly does describe a great voice. An illustration of the magical nature of astrology seems justifiable.
In an attack on astrology published in the Humanist in 1975, and signed by 186 leading scientists, a random horoscope was used to merely illustrate horoscope construction. Why this horoscope was chosen and no other is unknown. In his thought provoking book “The Moment of Astrology: Origins in Divination”, Geoffrey Cornelius convincingly shows how “charged with significance” the symbolism in this chart is. The horoscope itself “has a public quality as a signature for the attack on astrology”. In other words: The chart brilliantly describes the attack!
Cornelius writes:” If ‘same-timeness” (in this context an accurate birth chart, editor) of heavens and an event, especially a beginning is not the real basis of astrology, then what is? An exploration of this issue will concern us in later chapters, but a broad indication of the path I am taking can be given by suggesting that we should look in the direction of significant presentation of the symbol to consciousness. Same-timeness is usually part and parcel of significance, but as the current unusual case illustrates, astrology does not finally depend on it.” page 38
Returning to Susan Boyle. There is not only a resonance between the Susan Boyle horoscope I presented and my own birth chart, but also with her real horoscope and my own. In the false chart – we share Venus, Jupiter, Neptune aspects. In the real chart – we share a cardinal T-Square, with the same planets, Sun opposite Moon square Mars. I have Sun in Capricorn, opposite Moon in Cancer, square mars in Aries.
So…. Maybe I should have first searched google for Susan Boyle’s horoscope. Fact is, I didn’t. I used the chart because when I saw it, I immediately saw a great voice symbolised. Why a randomly chosen birth date should have the ability to do this, is part of the magical true-nature of astrology.
If you are interested in the Magical Foundation of Astrology, remember that Karen Hamaker is organising a great event with international speakers on this subject in Amsterdam, in May.