It was when I was watching 'Craig Ferguson' last night that I learned of this amazingly trivial yet important thing (as one does, when watching Craig)- the Zodiac is apparently changing and adding a sign, which has thrown everything in the world of astrology into a state of total and utter chaos. Before 'Craig Ferguson' last night, I was comfortable in the knowledge that I was a Virgo. And although I don't plan my day around the stars, I usually read my horoscope and find out what they have in store for me and then promptly forget about it. Other weird thing too, though: Virgo, from all accounts, fits me best- in as much as any zodiac sign can conform to one's personality.
Imagine my horror then, to learn that I was now in fact... a Leo.
In the grand scheme of things, I really don't give a damn about astrology, but this irritated me- in fact, I'll go ahead and admit it: this kind of upset me. I mean, I don't care that the Ancient Babylonians were crap at star gazing and the wobble of the Earth's rotation has shifted the stars around- you don't just mess up somebody's morning paper like this!
Well, as it turns out, people may have freaked out a little too soon. Turns out, there's more than one zodiac in the world- and the 'new dates' of these 'new signs' correspond with this zodiac- which is eastern in nature, used mainly in India, while western astrologers follow the seemingly conventional zodiac we all know and love. In other words: nothing has apparently changed for anyone at all. Western astrology uses a zodiac that conforms to seasons and was codified by Ptolmey sometime in the 2nd Century- the sidereal zodiac actually conforms to the movement of the stars. Granted, that might make it a more 'astrologically in tune' zodiac than the western, tropical zodiac- but then again, I'm not an astrologer, so i don't know.
Either way: I'm apparently still a Virgo. That makes me happy.
No comments:
Post a Comment