We are now in the last days of the Sun in Virgo. We’re also in the last days of Mercury retrograde in Virgo. The Sun about to enter a new sign, and Mercury stationing direct, represent beginnings. Yet we have some endings to move through before we get there.
Mercury has been retrograde in Virgo since Aug. 30. This has taken us through a series of eclipses, the sign change of Jupiter, and many other events. Those are all behind us, and soon Mercury retrograde will be as well.
Model posing on redwood root. Photo by Eric Francis.
We are not there yet, however. Mercury stations direct Thursday at about 1:30 am EDT (overnight Wednesday to Thursday through most of our readership areas).
The days clustering around the station direct can be the most intense or intriguing. As take-off and landing are the most critical times of a flight, the days surrounding Mercury changing directions are the time to pay attention.
This retrograde, by my observation, has been rife with misunderstandings. That’s easy enough to appreciate with the retrograde being in Virgo, though you have a moment to correct some of those errors in thought and communication before the retrograde ends. Mercury direct also has the benefit of the information coming out, and the challenge of potential turbulence. Be aware of both and make sure you put any information you receive to appropriate use.
Then, about nine hours later, the Sun ingresses Libra. This begins a new season and a new hemisphere of the solar year. Equinox is a time of reflection, of seeing and feeling your life and its various relationships in proportion, and of contemplating the way forward.
In these times, we tend to thrust toward the future with little (if any) consideration of what that might mean. And lately, it seems there is a habit of forming opinions without considering any other possibilities than what one thinks is right. There are other ways to look at yourself, and at the world.
The last time Mercury stationed direct in Virgo within 24 hours of the Libra Equinox was September, 1937.
Oh dear, Len, that sounds so ominous. If history repeats itself it means we’re just two years away from World War III (here in the UK, anyway!).
The house I live in was built in 1937 and when central heating was installed a few years ago, the workmen found a copy of the Daily Mail under the floorboards. It was dated May 1937 and on the front page was an article entitled: THERE WILL BE NO WAR – OFFICIAL.
Always look on the bright side of life …
Geoff:
History is not destined to repeat. It does tend to rhyme, however. The only times history ever comes close to repeating is when people either choose to either remain ignorant of or fail to remember history. We can choose manifest a brighter side when equipped with conscious awareness of history’s lessons.
Besides, “The Hobbit” was published in September 1937. That’s not so very ominous at all.
The rhymes they are a-changin’.
was it a Hobbit or a Dwarf said “certainty of death, small chance of success; what are we waiting for?”
As humans, do we need to aspire in order to grow? Or should some of us stop trying so hard to be “great”, and just enjoy our lives as the salt of the earth people we are? Then, once we learn how to enjoy life, and how to live without clinging to the idea that we need to accomplish something extraordinary or even be of “great” “service” to the world, we can finally know what it means to live. Can we even be of service if we have minimal satisfaction with “serving”? Are we then just aggressively “working” toward something; all the while creating tension within & around ourselves? If so, what does that mean? Who says that’s how we’re supposed to live our lives? These are questions I’m asking myself during this retrograde.
On a personal level these questions translate to; why do I do theatre if I don’t enjoy it? If I only enjoy about 15% of the process, which is the actual “acting” part, sans all the other stuff that goes with “creating” theatre. Why should I pay a school tens of thousands of dollars to bust my ass for their productions? Is it so I can get a piece of paper that will “open doors I don’t even know about yet” or because I might someday “regret it”, to quote a dear mentor whom I spoke with the night before last. He had some encouraging, beautiful things to say. But I’m skeptical. He said I need to fall in love with myself again. That is one great piece advice I needed. Now the question is whether I would be loving myself more to stick school out, or withdraw and be free of my old self concept as an actor for awhile & see what else life has to offer. This is my Mercury rx question.
I’m curious, Michael: when you say you only enjoy “about 15% of the process, which is the actual ‘acting’ part,” do you mean the “acting” that finally happens when you’re giving a performance? Or do you also include in the word “acting” the acting that happens all along the rehearsal process and in discovering the character, etc?
I love your comments on PW, Michael – and recognize something of myself in your restless, questioning spirit. Those questions you ask, and your search, are the sand and grit in the oyster that makes the pearl. “O God, I could be bounded in a nutshell and count myself a king of infinite space, were it not that I have bad dreams.”Not that I think you’re anything like the poor, tormented Hamlet – but any excuse to quote that marvellous line….
And good luck, by the way!
*or because I might someday “regret” it if I don’t
Hi Amanda, I would include acting during rehearsal in the 15%, and I should note I’m referring to a “devised theatre” process, where we create the piece as an ensemble along with the director. Though I have to say the process is only in theory a horizontal creation model as opposed to a “traditional” top down model. Experience has shown me that choices lay ultimately in the hands of the director anyhow, so what’s the difference? I think a lot of lip service is paid these days to “horizontal” structural models that “reduce” hierarchy, i.e. “student centered” school environments, and “devised theatre”.
The devised process requires more work, and it’s work I don’t really enjoy doing. In the traditional process actual acting is more than 15% of the total process, if you get a sizeable chunk of stage time. That used to work for me. I felt like I was the star, holding things together, and I could argue I was in fact. However, in the acting world everyone is replaceable. It just doesn’t suit me anymore. It’s not about a process, school, directors, actors, or percentages of time spent acting. It all comes back to whether I’m enjoying myself. Does it give equally as it takes? Is the rush of acting worth the work? Decisions, decisions, decisions.
Thanks, Michael! I appreciate the extra context. For sure, the “devised” model is not to everyone’s taste.
“The rush of acting…”
“I felt like I was the star, holding things together…”
These strike me as key clues of some sort, in terms of why you gravitated toward acting, and why you’re chafing at it now. I suspect you’ll figure it all out, in terms of what you seek for yourself, and what you want to offer to the world, and so on. Best of luck!
Thanks, Amanda, I appreciate your support.