Slippin into darkness: Insanity or genius?

Thinking about this new Moon-eclipse, an old song I haven’t heard in decades played in my head all afternoon. The year was 1971. War, a multi-ethnic Longbeach fusion band, was touring in London when Slippin into Darkness was conceived.

Guitarist and band frontman, Howard E. Scott, a Compton CA boy, was trying on a pair of boots that were too small. Employees at the store yanked them off so hard, it threw out his back. At the hospital, as the sedation took effect, Scott found himself slipping into darkness, peeking over the edge of reality into an altered state of consciousness.

This bizarre event inspired Scott to contemplate that borderline place between genius and insanity where creativity is often birthed, and the gifts and dangers that live in close proximity to that uneasy edge.

Slipping into Darkness you Tube

Slippin into Darkness was written for our times, too. It was released in 1971, the year Mars was last retrograde in Aquarius. The name of the band, War, evokes Martian energy; the music’s fusion of genres and the musicians’ multi-ethnicity both have a Mars in Aquarius quality. Finally, world and national news reports are currently inundated with the utterances and exploits of a man who calls himself a stable genius. The song’s warning is clear: pretty soon ya gonna pay.

Eclipse season has officially begun, my friends. The powerful energies of Pluto opposing tonight’s dark Moon prod us to appreciate where we’ve been. By remembering our past downfalls and triumphs we gain clarity about what nourishes and drives our creative impulse so that we can explore that edge with sacred awareness. I’ll see you there!

I was slippin’ into darkness
When they took my friend away
I was slippin’ into darkness
When they took my friend away

You know he loves to drink good whiskey 
While laughing at the moon

Slippin’ into darkness
Take my mind beyond the dreams
I was slippin’ into darkness, 
Take my mind beyond the dreams

Where I talk to my brother 
Who never said their name

Slippin’ into darkness, 
All my trouble so I choose
I was slippin’ into darkness,
All my trouble so I choose

I got a wife and a baby, 
Now my love hath gained its fame

Slippin’ into darkness, 
When I heard my mother say
I was slippin’ into darkness
When I heard my mother say
Hey, what’d she say
You’ve been slippin’ into darkness 

Pretty soon you gonna pay

Advertisements

POTUS on SCOTUS: a new social disease?

The POTUS announced that he would nominate the next justice of SCOTUS Monday night. Here’s the chart for that announcement and a few astro comments. 

 

The chart’s Sun in Cancer indicates the probability that a woman will be nominated or at the very least that issues surrounding motherhood will play a key role in this nomination. The Sun-Pluto opposition along the 6th-12th house axis suggests a nominee proposed by behind-the-scenes conservative forces on behalf of POTUS, in an attempt to insure that old white men have the final say in women’s reproductive health.

 

The 7th-9th house Mercury-Jupiter Rx square suggests that the public’s attitudes towards marriage-partnership-divorce are at odds with religious zealots, who are naturally keen to have their beliefs reflected in the high court. Mercury in Leo’s opposition to Mars Rx in Aquarius along the 1st-7th house axis promises public resistance to the choice of nominee, while Mars Rx’s trine to the Moon in opinionated Gemini assures that opinions shared will be loud and plentiful.

 

Does anyone else interpret the 6th-9th-2nd house Sun-Jupiter-Neptune trine as a nominee who values legal protection for the unborn and traditional concepts of motherhood?

 

Venus, planetary symbol for the younger woman, in the last degree of Leo suggests a female from the upper class. Venus trines to 12th house Saturn in Capricorn and 3rd house Uranus in Taurus promise a nominee with a cozy, if unusual, relationship with the conservative ruling party. The Uranian influence could indicate a new face from conservative ranks. Venus’ square to 4th house Moon in Gemini reflects a nominee who is not at ease, conversant, or familiar with the needs- feelings-opinions of women from the democratic/ opposition party, or for that matter with the opinions of the older sitting female Supreme Court Justices, Ginsburg and Sotomayor.

 

I’m curious to hear what you see in this chart.