trickster amy costs nada yesterday, i read Jung's essay, "On the Psychology of the Trickster-Figure" and I didn't find that he had a very favorable view of tricksters, or tricksterism, or perhaps I had a negative reaction to it. Perhaps he was being very, very ambivalent about it. it was interesting and enlightening nonetheless. i know analytical psychology and astrology are different animals, but i do tend to amalgamate what I've read about these types of things, out of some sort of desire to observe a culture I seem to want to be a part of, so I know what Jung was talking about is not exactly the same as what is observed astrologically. Jung seems to have a more historical analysis, for one. and I always thought astrologers viewed the Trickster favorably, because it gives them food for thought and usually the effects do, indeed, fit into their system. yet here i am, with Gemini Rising and Mercury in Virgo, and Mars in Gemini, and i'm left with this antipathy i feel towards the Trickster. it is far greater than any kind of impression i got from it from the writings of astrologers. and it predates my reading of this Jung essay. this antipathy towards myself and others, it's very interesting, and i daresay rather counterintuitive to what i would expect of myself. i guess, it's a general attitude of why bother shaping this Trickster clay, when my alignments incline me to want to shape another, more progressive and philosophical? anyway, it must be my typical confusion rearing its head again, and i can't help but notice that i'd be far better off without so many squares (astrological and Platonic formish) to bang my head over. 100203 ... cr0wl oh the trickster. i guess that's why i became a renaissance gypsy clown. 100203 what's it to you? who go blather from