AA Conference 2012, Wyboston Lakes, Cambridge UK.

This was my first Conference since 2008 and it's a quite different experience speaking to being just a punter. I gave two talks, one on Saturday, one on Sunday, which gives you a lot to think about beforehand, in-between and afterwards. 

Seeing a group of astrologers all together makes it clear that our art is a study for mature people. There are very few aspiring astrologers in their twenties or even thirties. The rise of academic studies may change this demographic, but still, astrology seems to be a perspective that people find after a certain amount of life experience.

I attended talks by Ben Dykes, Kim Farnell, Sonal Sachdeva, Frank Clifford, and Geoffrey Cornelius. There is a general movement towards academia in astrology, looking at divination from an historical and sociological angle. Between the Sophia Trust in the UK and Kepler College in the US, we have a new generation of very erudite astrologers, who are leading us back to the future. The humanistic approach of the 70s and 80s that held sway when I came into astrology is giving way slowly to a more rigorous traditional model. Hopefully, the two attitudes can be integrated.

On this theme, I conducted an interview with the Medieval astrology specialist Ben Dykes. Dr Dykes is engaged in translating Latin and Arabic astrology texts, as well as being a consultant, teacher, and practicing occultist. He offered a perspective on astrology's place in religious and mystical thinking, and gave his views as to where it is heading today. Most of the arguments in modern astrology, whether internal or with skeptics, have been thrashed out over the centuries, by authorities for whom astrology was an integral part of their worldview. In many respects this is a reassuring thought. Whether ancient philosophy is your thing, an understanding of astrology's history steadies the judgement. I recommend Ben Dykes's work to anyone interested in a fuller understanding of traditional astrology and Western esoteric thought.

My own Jupiter talk 'Great Benefic or Great Pretender?' was inspired by people's differing experiences of the Planet of Good Luck. Some people claim Jupiter is overrated, or even a malefic in disguise. The reasoning goes that if it expands whatever it hits, then Jupiter also expands bad luck, which to me is a rather perverse way of thinking. This is the same logic that argues all lottery winners are bound to be miserable.

Still, I presented charts of a number of Jupiterian individuals, some of whom have lead happy and successful lives, others not so much. Some people's Jupiters have difficulty in keeping the faith and trusting in providence, while others take the insouciant attitude too far. Success and happiness are not necessarily the same thing, and this made for an interesting discussion. 

I also presented on Astrology and Healing, looking at remedial measures in the Western and Vedic horoscopes. We have a rich tradition of herbs, gemstones and talismans in the West, but their use seems to have fallen into disrepute. Still, without them, can our astrology handle the implications of what it predicts, other than saying 'best of luck to you'?