Features & Images » Horoscopes/Astrology

Horoscope

Free will astrology

by

comment

ARIES (March 21-April 19): You have a poetic license, as well as astrological permission, to be extra cute in the coming week. I mean you have a divine mandate to exceed the usual levels of being adorable and charming and delectable. Here's the potential problem with that, though: trying to be cute doesn't usually result in becoming cuter; often it leads to being smarmy and pretentious. So how can you take advantage of the cosmic imperative to be wildly, extravagantly, sublimely cute - without getting all self-conscious about it? That's your riddle of the week.

TAURUS (April 20-May 20): It would be an excellent week for you to declare war on everything that wastes your time. Well, maybe "declaring war" is not quite the right spirit to adopt; after all, we don't want you to go around constantly enraged and hostile. How about if we phrase it this way: it's prime time for you to ingeniously and relentlessly elude all activities, invitations, temptations, trains of thought, and habits that offer you nothing in return for the precious energy you give to them. Of course this is always a worthy project, but it so happens that you're likely to achieve far more progress than usual if you do it now.

GEMINI (May 21-June 20): Primatologist Jane Goodall, who lived for years among chimpanzees in Tanzania, is one of the world's top experts on the creatures. Can you guess what her favorite toy was when she was young? A stuffed monkey, of course. There were no doubt foreshadowings like that in your own childhood or adolescence, Gemini. Right? Signs of the magic you would eventually seek to ripen? Seeds of destiny that had just begun to sprout? Now would be a good time to reflect on those early hints. You'll benefit from updating your understanding of and commitment to the capacities they revealed.

CANCER (June 21-July 22): After all these years, the American presidential election of 2000 still makes me cringe. Because of the archaic laws governing the process, the candidate who "lost" the election actually got 543,895 more votes than the guy who "won." How could anyone in good conscience, even those who supported the less-popular "winner," have sanctioned such a result? It was perverse. It was pathological. It was crazy-making. I'd say the same thing if the roles had been reversed, and Gore had become president with a half-million fewer votes than Bush. You must not let something comparable to this anomaly happen in your personal life in the coming weeks, Cancerian. It is crucial that every winner be the one who deserves to be. Don't sacrifice what's right in order to serve corrupt protocol or outmoded conventions.

Add a comment